After 15 years of agreement, is it time to act? A TINZ expert forum takes on OIA reform.
New Zealand has spent nearly 15 years agreeing on what is wrong with the Official Information Act (OIA). The question at Transparency International New Zealand's (TINZ) expert forum on 23 September 2026 was why nothing has changed in the law, and what reforms might finally break the deadlock.
The forum was chaired by TINZ Director and former Chief Ombudsman Sir Peter Boshier. It brought together people from media, academia, NGOs, government agencies and the Law Commission, both in the room and online. MinterEllison kindly hosted the forum venue.
TINZ Deputy Chair Debbie Gee opened by summarising TINZ's Green Paper, a "review of reviews" that draws on work from the Law Commission’s report in 2012 through to recent cost modelling. Its core finding is that the Act's design is sound. It presumes information will be released, decides each request on its merits, and is overseen by the Ombudsman. But practice has drifted from what the law intended.
The Act is now 44 years old and has not been changed in 14 years. Request volumes have increased sizeably since 2016, and system costs are real.
Delay is the central failure
Delay was widely seen as the Act's biggest failure. Forum panellist and highly respected journalist Richard Harman said the 20-day limit makes the Act of little immediate use to the media: "20 days is when you get the letter telling you they're going for an extension." Sia Aston of the Department of Conservation gave the agency's view. DOC's requests have risen from 553 to 893 a year over a decade and are up another 40% this year. Around two-thirds are complex.
Possible options for change that were suggested include a statutory triage where urgent and time-critical requests come first. Some agreed with that but others argued the Act is deliberately "requester-blind". They warned that triage could deepen a two-speed system that already favours journalists and lawyers.
Panellist Professor Dean Knight of Victoria University of Wellington asked whether a single 20-day limit still suits an age of inbox-wide digital searches.
Culture starts at the top
Everyone agreed culture matters, and there were opinions about which culture matters most and causes most damage. Does an evasive minister produce an evasive agency? Dean Knight suggested rewriting the "no surprises" principle in the Cabinet Manual because it creates perverse incentives. Sia Aston said most OIA staff are earnest and detail-focused. In her view, delay more often reflects over-complication and genuine legal risk than deliberate obstruction.
Sir Peter called the lack of consequences for breaching the Act "lamentable": "a telling off by the Ombudsman is about as good as it gets." Participants had differing views on sanctions. Some feared they would punish junior staff acting under pressure from above, and this would lead to even more "vanilla" record-keeping. Others pressed for real consequences when agencies act in bad faith.
Not just an OIA problem
Decades of under-investment in information systems have left records in unmarked boxes and email archives described as unsearchable. Several participants said the Public Records Act is integral to any fix, pointing out that it has never produced a prosecution. Others said the wider transparency system is weakening in places, with planned changes to regulatory impact statements, and select committee scrutiny reduced to grandstanding.
The one thing for reform
One participant challenged the panel to name a single reform that is politically feasible, has real impact, is simple to draft and is easy for the public to understand. Otherwise, they warned, "we're just going to be here in five years' time." Four main answers were:
- Proactive disclosure, so officials and ministers see that openness does not make "the sky fall".
- Statutory triage, plus good-faith legal protection for proactive releases.
- Tools for agencies to push back on repeat and very broad requests, including AI-generated ones, with high thresholds and oversight.
- A fast track for urgent requests, "but just keep working on the culture."
Proactive release and some form of prioritisation came up most often, each with a caveat. Proactive release must not become an excuse to stall requests ("it will be published soon"), and triage must not entrench unfairness between requesters.
What's next
Sir Peter said reform is possible and there is now a platform to influence it, pointing to a paper recently proactively released by the Ministry of Justice.
TINZ has published a summary of the forum, a white paper with recommendations is in the works.
Read the Green Paper: Reforming the Official Information Act 1982
