Table of Contents
Summarised by Centrist
Political scientist Bryce Edwards argues the government’s closed-door review of the Official Information Act is a warning sign that transparency law is being reviewed “in the dark”, with “no press release”, “no public consultation” and “no statement of intent”.
“Most readers will immediately grasp the irony,” he writes.
Ministers cite a 394% jump in OIA requests, but Edwards says the figure should not be taken “at face value”. He argues much of the rise is a counting artefact, with agencies logging more routine enquiries as formal OIA requests, such as insurance queries about traffic accidents and speed camera image requests from drivers disputing fines.
He also says some of the genuine increase comes from people using the law to fight increasingly adversarial government agencies, which is “exactly how the OIA is supposed to work”.
He says the OIA itself is “fundamentally sound”, but has been hollowed out by “strategic delays, political interference, preferential treatment, and the quiet erosion of record-keeping”.
Edwards says AI could improve OIA compliance, but also be used to “industrialise obstruction” if it simply speeds up redactions.
He notes Chris Finlayson saying it was “beyond debate” that the OIA needed reform and backing personal liability for ministers and department heads who block requests.
His bottom line is that the OIA could now be weakened using a “manufactured cost narrative”. In an election year, he says, that fight matters because “it’s not their information. It’s ours.”
