We sympathise with Judge Boshier who dealt with the fallout from avoidable and frustrating experiences journalists and others have had with this organisation since it was established nearly three years ago.
In his reflections about his last nine years as the watchdog for compliance with the Official Information Act, and the release of investigations into seven agencies’ behaviour under that law, Judge Boshier singled out HNZ for special mention.
He found on a number of occasions it was not following the letter and spirit of the law.
"For a relatively new agency, Health NZ is generating an increasing number of complaints, mostly about the time it takes to make a decision, or its refusal to release parts or all of the requested information."
He saw concerning examples of the agency extending time for responding to OIA requests to accommodate its notification process to the minister which sometimes took up to eight days when there were no lawful grounds for this.
It also appeared this notification process "operates as a proxy approval process, with the agency seeking confirmation from the Minister’s Office before sending OIA responses to requesters".
This was unreasonable.
A case note highlighted the difficulty getting regional information from HNZ. It involved a researcher refused school dental data from several districts, information which had previously been available through the relevant district health boards, but which HNZ said would take 200 hours to compile.
Judge Boshier acknowledged the pressures HNZ faced and continued to face as a new agency.
But as he pointed out, when an agency amalgamates or grows, it should ensure its OIA function remains fit for purpose and is scaled appropriately, so its legal obligations could be met as core business.
HNZ advised, following the amalgamation of the DHBs, regional capacity to process OIA requests had largely disappeared. The unwieldy system being used could be a time-consuming process, often generating hundreds of emails.
With the back-room-staff-cutting bonanza of the coalition government, we wonder whether OIA compliance is seen as a front-line function.
It is difficult to see how, with the best of intentions, given staff reductions, HNZ will be able to adequately address the various concerns before it reports back to the ombudsman in a few months’ time.
Judge Boshier points out while New Zealand performs well on the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, it has slipped from first to fourth in this measure. Concerted efforts were needed to bolster our transparency systems.
He also raised the question of poor commitment to record-keeping in some agencies, contrary to the Public Records Act, and was critical of public servants being pressured to avoid creating records to avoid the OIA.
Despite the concerns he has had with HNZ and other agencies, and indeed a small number of people making vexatious, frivolous or too large requests, Judge Boshier believes the real issues are not with the law.
Rather, they centred on culture — "and that involves trust, behaviour and leadership. Bad behaviour undermines the OIA".
The attitude needed to change.
That may well be true, but if there is a call for better compliance with the law from our political leaders, or even the new public service commissioner, we cannot hear it.
Nobody in the government publicly chastised Associate Health Minister Casey Costello for her office’s appalling behaviour over the documents relating to the smoke-free legislation repeal.
This month, Health Minister Simeon Brown, making announcements about changes to the bowel screening programme, did not release relevant advice documents at the time of the announcement, waiting another eight days, even though he referred to the advice in interviews.
Judge Boshier has suggested stiffer penalties may be needed for government agencies that persistently delay the release of official information.
That would be welcome, but we cannot sense any political appetite for it.
