Simeon Brown being investigated by Ombudsman for failing to disclose meeting
An AI-generated image of a bespectacled man examining a pile of documents with a magnifying glass.
As reported by Local Aotearoa back in August, as part of my investigation into how discussions around local government reorganisation in Wellington were progressing, it was revealed that Local Government Minister Simeon Brown had failed to disclose in an Official Information Act (OIA) response his attendance at at mayoral forum in March where the topic of amalgamation was discussed.
The only reason I found out that Brown had attended that forum was because I had also put in a similar request using the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA) to see what discussions had been taking place at the council level. Councils, to their credit, provided detailed responses about the various meetings that had taken place, good notes of what had been discussed, and enough correspondence to piece together a useful picture of how things were progressing.
Following that story, I complained to both Brown’s office and the Ombudsman regarding the omission for the simple reason that had I just been relying on Brown’s response, I would have missed a critical meeting on the topic. It was at that meeting, according to notes from councils, that Simeon Brown and Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop:
outlined to councils that the Local Government Commission could investigate a proposal under the Local Government Act,
indicated that the Government could introduce bespoke legislation to reorganisation the region,
to have bespoke legislation, councils would need to have the support of their communities,
the government would not legislate against the will of the community, and
the government would need agreement in writing from the mayors indicating they had support for this proposal within their community.
Responses from various councils suggest the discussion then shifted on to Local Water Done Well, Regional Deals, and other issues such as a 10-year National Land Transport Plan and Electronic Road User Charging.
When Simeon Brown’s office replied, they stated that their notes “indicate it is possible that the discussion at the Mayoral Forum covered amalgamation very briefly then the Minister’s conversation diverted to joint water services deliver.”
As you can see, there is quite a substantial difference between what councils recorded being discussed around amalgamation - where the discussion covered multiple pathways, issues, and the government’s position, and what Brown’s office recalls was discussed.
Between this and the failure of Brown’s office to disclose the meeting in the first place, it raises significant questions around the accuracy and quality of record keeping in the minister’s office that need to be addressed in order to ensure Simeon Brown is complying with the transparency requirements of the OIA.
When you submit a request for official information, you’re relying in good faith on the minister, agency, or council to respond accurately with all relevant information. That Brown’s office made not one, but two substantive omissions in their handling of my request is deeply concerning. While it should be a relatively open and shut case, with the Ombudsman likely to issue a simple missive to Brown to improve record keeping in his office, it’s important that minister’s are held to account in correctly meeting their obligations under legislation.
