The Government is refusing to confirm whether taxpayer money will be forked out to pay for damages after Kiri Allan’s car crash on Sunday night, citing privacy.
The Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) also declined to comment on whether insurance would cover the costs, given the former justice minister was over the legal breath alcohol limit at the time of the crash.
Insurance companies including AA, State, Tower, and AMI state on their websites that damage for incidents won’t be covered under the policy if the driver is under the influence of alcohol or over the legal breath or blood alcohol limit.
Allan this week announced she was surrendering her portfolios and would not be standing in this year’s election after the incident on the weekend.
She was arrested on Sunday evening following a crash between her ministerial vehicle and another car on Evans Bay Parade in Roseneath, Wellington.
A statement from police, which did not name Allan, said a person had been charged with careless use of a motor vehicle and refusing to accompany a police officer.
She was also issued an infringement notice for having excess breath alcohol between 250 and 400mcg.
The resident said he peered out the window after hearing a bang.
“It was a good thump. I mean, it pushed the ute forward about three metres,” he said.
“The car was perpendicular to the road, and kind of blocked one lane, and it was kind of over the centre line from the other side, so it was a bit of a traffic hazard.”
A photo taken in the aftermath shows Allan’s vehicle on an angle, in the middle of the road, with the headlights pointing in the direction of the ute she had just crashed into.
The ute had damage to a rear right panel and a flattened tyre.
The New Zealand Herald asked the DIA whether insurance would cover the cost of the crash, given Allan was over the drink-driving limit at the time, whether the Government would foot the bill for the damage to both vehicles, and what the estimated cost would be.
A DIA spokeswoman said in a statement they did not release specific information on vehicles driven by ministers “to protect the privacy of individuals.
“Any person entitled to the use of a self-drive vehicle must comply with the department’s safe driving policy. They must also comply with all relevant legislation, including the Land Transport Act 1998.”
When the Herald asked how information about the use of taxpayer money for a crash could breach privacy, the spokeswoman reiterated the earlier statement and invoked section 9(2)(a) of the Official Information Act.
The legislation allows Government departments to withhold official information from the public if it is necessary to “protect the privacy of natural persons”.
According to a guide to privacy by the Ombudsman, the release of official information may affect the privacy of individuals where it would reveal their personal information or intrude in some way on their privacy, including by affecting their dignity or mental or emotional well-being, damaging their reputation, or by exposing them to unwanted contact or attention.
Section 9(2)(a) is also subject to the public interest test, meaning agencies should consider whether the public interest overrides the interests of privacy.
Public interest considerations should include how agencies spend public money, the Ombudsman said.
According to Parliamentary written questions, there were 22 incidents involving ministerial self-drive vehicles between 2020 and 2022 inclusive. A minister was driving the vehicle in 20 of those incidents, and the driver was found to be at fault in 15 of them.
In those cases, the Government paid $1000 for the insurance excess, to a total of $15,000.
