It would seem there is a new red flag in dirty politics: if you get an Official Information Act (OIA) request back in double-quick time, there's something suspicious going on.
Twice, the OIA has been linked to dirty politics. Whale Oil blogger Cameron Slater got a response to an OIA request to Judith Collins in 37 minutes. He also got information, via the OIA, from the intelligence agency SIS in four days.
Organisations are entitled to take 20 working days and media are often blocked. When it comes to the SIS, conventional media would be lucky to get anything at all. It is, in fact, well known among media that either an unusually speedy or unusually co-operative OIA response has some hidden meaning.
The Official Information Act is a terrific tool, and I applaud the day it was generated more than 30 years ago, because it is fair and reasonable the public are able to view the workings and operations of government departments. Those departments - and their ministers - become more accountable.
It is also fair and reasonable that organisations can decline on the basis of national security, or because the information will stuff up a commercially sensitive process.
The time some can take is also fair; some departments get a heavy workload of requests.
I can recall an OIA request of mine to a government department on a land sale that was being blocked by another government agency.
The department was so frustrated with being blocked that it provided me with every piece of correspondence on the matter - it amounted to a hefty parcel.
They doubtless hoped the newspaper would embarrass the agency, and we did our best to do so. It was a great example of one of the basic axioms of journalism - when someone gives you information, what is their motivation?
It is appropriate the Chief Ombudsman is going to launch an investigation into how the OIA is being used, citing too many layers of approval before information is signed off.
The OIA system does need a clean-up. There's nothing wrong with the act - it's just how departments are executing it.
The public is entitled to the information. So are the media. I don't mind if there are reasons behind information being released - but I'm not blind to it either.