On Monday 1 October 2012 it was 50 years since the establishment of the Ombudsman in New Zealand. That’s when the original Parliamentary Commissioner (Ombudsman) Act 1962 came into effect, and the Office of the Ombudsman opened its doors. New Zealand was the fourth country in the world to adopt the Ombudsman model and the first English speaking country to do so.
We’re celebrating reaching the 50 year mark with a “Good Governance Week”, running from Monday 1 October – Friday 5 October 2012. The purpose of Good Governance Week is to highlight the need for good governance practices across the state sector, as well as to celebrate and raise public awareness of the role of the Ombudsman in improving state sector administrative practices. There’ll be a programme of events across the week, including:
-
Monday 1 October – we’re releasing a guide on good decision making
-
Tuesday 2 October – we’re releasing a guide on effective complaint handling
-
Wednesday 3 October - we’re releasing a guide aimed at employees who want to report serious wrongdoing in or by their organisation (otherwise known as “blowing the whistle”)
-
Thursday 4 October – we’re releasing our first online videos, explaining the various roles of the Ombudsman in New Zealand sign language
-
Friday 5 October – we’re releasing a full practice manual and a short guide on managing unreasonable complainant conduct, which was developed in conjunction with our Australian Ombudsman colleagues.
The new publications will be available on the publications and resources page of our website: www.ombudsman.parliament.nz. Enquiries about Good Governance Week can be made to bridget.hewson@ombudsman.parliament.nz.
We released our Annual Report for 2011/12 last week. You can read it on our website www.ombudsman.parliament.nz – check out the “at a glance” section to get a snapshot of what we’ve been doing this past year.
The numbers are pretty clear; we received 10,636 complaints and other contacts in 2011/12, an increase of 22 per cent on the previous year. Ombudsmen Act complaints and other contacts increased by 19 per cent from the previous year. Official information complaints increased by 24.5 per cent on 2010/11 numbers, and were the highest number since 2000/01.
The increased workload has regrettably impacted on our performance in terms of timeliness in dealing with the complaints and other contacts we receive. While we’ve introduced measures to try and streamline our complaints handling process, the fact is we’re currently receiving more complaints than we’re able to resolve and close.
One thing we don’t want is for this to put off potential complainants with legitimate concerns who’ve attempted but been unable to resolve the problem themselves. In 2012/13 we’ll be looking for opportunities to resolve complaints as early as possible, and relying on agencies’ willingness to take an open and constructive approach to our enquiries about complaints received.
On September 6 2012, Chief Ombudsman Dame Beverley Wakem was made a Dame Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit at an investiture ceremony at Parliament. Dame Beverley received this honour for her services to the state as part of the Queen’s Birthday and Diamond Jubilee Honours 2012.
6 November 2012
On 6 November 2012 the Deputy Ombudsman will be delivering a presentation at the Local Government Committee Advisors’ Conference in Wellington on how well the local government sector is managing and processing LGOIMA requests. For more information about the conference visit www.solgm.org.nz.
The Ombudsman has joined facebook (“Ombudsman NZ”). We’ll use it to provide regular updates on current issues and what’s going on in the office, and to relay interesting news stories. We’re also building up our timeline, with interesting facts, photos, videos and recordings going back over the last 50 years. Feel free to like us and post your thoughts in response, but please don’t use it to lodge your complaints. We’re trying to make our complaints processes more efficient by streamlining the various modes of intake, using one postal address (PO Box 10152 Wellington 6143), one email address (info@ombudsman.parliament.nz), and the online complaint form available on our website (www.ombudsman.parliament.nz). Also, facebook may not be the best place to air what are often personal circumstances and issues. If we receive a complaint via facebook we’ll refer it to our intake and assessment team who’ll contact the complainant directly. At the same time we’ll remove the post from public view.
We’ll be hosting the 10th World Conference of the International Ombudsman Institute (IOI) in Wellington from 14 – 16 November 2012. The IOI World Conference is a forum for Ombudsmen, or their equivalent, from around the world to meet to share their experience and expertise. The theme of the conference is Speaking Truth to power – the role of the Ombudsman in the 21st century. Topics include:
-
Delivering more with less in times of austerity
-
Protecting the vulnerable when government agencies are reducing services
-
Holding leaders to account and the Ombudsman’s role in preventing corruption and misconduct
-
Strategies for dealing with displaced communities as a result of natural disasters
-
Clever technology and techniques for reaching communities
-
Challenges for the Ombudsman protecting prisoners’ human rights
-
Introducing and embedding ‘freedom of information’ in a state
-
Innovative projects for upskilling agencies and improving administrative conduct and decision making
-
Securing resources in times of austerity – proving that the Ombudsman is a worthwhile investment
-
Maintaining relevance and credibility in the 21st century world
-
Ethics in Ombudsmanship.
Visit the conference website for details of the programme: www.confer.co.nz/wcioi
One of our goals is to improve public awareness of the Ombudsman’s role. We recently conducted our first public awareness survey through UMR Research. It was good to see that 69% of the respondents had heard of the Ombudsman, although it’s clear we still have some work to do building awareness of the Ombudsman’s role among young people. The “word cloud” below shows the most common words people used to describe what they think the Ombudsman does.
We’ve updated the FAQs on our website to include some of the more curly questions we receive from agencies about the OI legislation, including:
-
I can’t meet the extended deadline for response. Can I extend again?
-
Can I still transfer a request for official information if I’m outside the 10 working days specified in section 14 of the OIA (section 12 LGOIMA)?
-
I’ve received a request by email outside business hours. When does the working day count start?
-
Do I have to make the decision on a request and release the information at the same time?
-
I’m in the process of consulting the requester. How does this affect the timeframe requirements?
-
The requester has asked for an urgent response. How does this affect the timeframe requirements?
-
I’ve received a request from fyi.org.nz. How do I know the requester is eligible?
Do you have a curly question about the official information legislation? We might be able to answer it, and include it in our FAQs too. Email us your question at info@ombudsman.parliament.nz.
We released a new case note this week on an investigation concerning a request for public submissions. These kinds of requests are pretty common, and most agencies are good about making it clear from the start of a public consultation exercise that any submissions received will be subject to the OIA and available on request unless, for instance, the submitter opts out of their identifying details being made available. The case in question illustrates that communicating this message has become more complicated as the various channels of public engagement have diversified (e.g. online and print questionnaires, facebook, twitter, email, written submissions, postcards and public meetings).
The ground for withholding the submissions in this case was section 9(2)(f)(iv) of the OIA, which applies where withholding is necessary to maintain the constitutional convention protecting the confidentiality of advice tendered by Ministers and officials. There is actually a line of cases that hadn’t previously been noted where Ombudsmen rejected this as a reason for withholding public submissions. Public submissions are not advice tendered by Ministers and officials, and their release cannot reasonably be expected to inhibit the subsequent development and consideration of policy advice related to the issue under consultation. The case was resolved once the agency considered the Chief Ombudsman’s provisional opinion and agreed to release the submissions. You can read the case note on the ‘publications and resources’ page of our website: www.ombudsman.parliament.nz.
We’ve also released a case note on a series of cases concerning the withholding of cost estimates from Scope of Works documents prepared by EQC in respect of earthquake damaged properties. The Scope of Works details the repair strategy in respect of a property.
EQC withheld the estimated costs involved in carrying out the repairs in cases where agreements had not yet been reached with contractors to do the work. It relied on section 9(2)(j) of the OIA, which provides a reason for withholding to enable an agency to carry on negotiations, without prejudice or disadvantage. The Chief Ombudsman accepted that there were good grounds for withholding in this instance. If details of EQC’s estimates were known, its negotiating position could be disadvantaged by contractors pitching their quotes close to the estimates, when their quotes may otherwise have been lower. The Chief Ombudsman acknowledged the public interest in homeowners being in a position to challenge decisions which affect them. EQC provided additional details to homeowners who hadn’t already received that information to enable them to determine the range of damage identified by EQC’s assessment, and the intended method of repair. However, the Chief Ombudsman concluded that the public interest in disclosure of the cost estimates did not outweigh the interest in EQC being able to negotiate repair costs in a fiscally sound manner, especially when considering that public money is involved.
You can read the case note on the ‘publications and resources’ page of our website: www.ombudsman.parliament.nz.
|
|
