The DomPost today reported that Steven Joyce has said he is unable to release a Cabinet paper that sanctioned the Government’s $1.35 billion ultrafast broadband investment initiative as some of the information it contains may be misconstrued to indicate bias on the part of the Government.
What a load of rubbish. The law states quite clearly here and here the grounds on which a Cabinet paper can be with-held. Being misconstrued by journalists, the public (or the Opposition) isn’t one of them.
The DomPost article said:
It is understood the Cabinet paper includes some information provided by Telecom about the viability of the flagship government initiative.
The Dominion Post requested the paper in September. The Office of the Ombudsmen is investigating whether to order its release.
Labour is also seeking this information. We say it’s a lame excuse from Joyce and ask what he’s trying to with-hold? Who does he think will misconstrue it? And shouldn’t a Cabinet paper be robust enough to withstand public scrutiny?
More evidence of the lack of transparency from this government, particularly around the $1.5 billion broadband scheme. It’s tax payers’ money Steven.
Agreed.
Complain to the Ombudsman, I requested some documents from Joyce’s office under the OIA which should be very simple to retrieve and got an extension letter and still haven’t received the docs almost 40 days later…
He seems to treat the OIA with disdain and as you say it’s our documents and our money…
Maybe the problem is that some of the information in the documents could be correctly construed as indicating bias?
Jeremy, next step they will tell you that you canhave the papers but it will cost you.
“Commercial sensitivity”, methinks?
As a taxpayer I think it’s my right to construe information about how my goverment spends my money however I like!
government. oops.
So, that would be Steven Joyce breaking the law then?
Helen said “You can’t trust them”
“Commercial sensitivity”, methinks?
Nope DeepRed, Joyce didn’t argue that, and he could have. Under the Official Information Act 1982 No 156 (as at 23 March 2010), Public Act
2) b) ii), Joyce can turn down an OIA if it “would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information…”
My feeling is Joyce just doesn’t want to show the process he went through because he is worried how it will stand up to public scrutiny. What other meaning is there to Joyce’s statement “Whereas this information was only requested of potential partners as illustrations for my Cabinet colleagues, there is a significant risk that its release may (incorrectly) indicate favouritism towards some potential partners.” ?
Come on Joyce, if your process is robust enough, it can be made public.
My requests have all about projected transport projects, there is no commercial sensitivity and no excuse for the delay… I think he delays and denies as much as he possibly can instinctively…
*all BEEN about
Clare what you are forgetting is that when Mr Joyce says “some of the information it contains may be misconstrued to indicate bias on the part of the Government” what he is really saying is “I must… brush… off…. ”
Can’t remember anything in the OIA about “brushing off”, must check the interpretation act.