OIAs are working, Enforcement Funding, Cost-Recovery, and Clawback

This here shows us how they are being very cagegy about answering our questions , they are starting to ask for time extensions , which can directly be seen as what we are asking is serious, they know they cannot fob us off. Say nothing is used against them.  

Dear Mr Martin,

Thank you for your email.

I do not accept that the original requests were improperly framed. Each sought existing Treasury-held documents concerning funding, appropriation scope, cost-recovery, clawback, and fiscal oversight—matters plainly within Treasury’s statutory functions and ordinary record-keeping.

Nonetheless, and without prejudice to my position, I am prepared to refine the requests pursuant to section 13 of the Official Information Act 1982, for the purpose of reasonable assistance and to avoid unnecessary manual collation. This refinement is not a concession that section 18(f) would otherwise apply.

The refined request is confined to identifiable classes of existing Treasury documents and does not seek raw data extraction.

Refined Scope (Requests 1–9)

Timeframe

Documents created or held between 1 July 2018 and 31 January 2026.

Document Classes

Existing Treasury documents only, including:

Briefings, aide-memoires, internal memoranda, and advice

Vote and appropriation guidance

Cabinet papers and Treasury input into Cabinet material

Treasury circulars, policy frameworks, or accounting instructions

Inter-agency correspondence at a policy or fiscal-oversight level

The request expressly excludes:

Operational decision-making by enforcement agencies

Case-specific files

Personal information

Privileged legal advice

Subject Matter

A. Enforcement Funding, Cost-Recovery, and Clawback

Treasury documents describing or governing:

Accounting treatment of enforcement-derived revenue (including fines, penalties, costs, and recoveries);

Any clawback, offsetting, netting, or cost-recovery mechanisms applied to Votes or baselines;

Whether enforcement activity is assumed, forecast, or reconciled in Budget processes.

B. Votes and Appropriations

Treasury-held documents relating to:

Votes under which enforcement or prosecution activity is funded (including Justice, Police, Revenue, Primary Industries, and Local Government);

Treasury guidance on appropriation scope, proportionality, and lawful purpose in enforcement funding;

Treasury oversight where enforcement proceedings are discontinued, stayed, or found defective.

C. Inter-Agency Fiscal Oversight

Treasury policy-level communications with the Ministry of Justice, Inland Revenue, Police, Ministry for Primary Industries, and the local government sector addressing:

Fiscal treatment of enforcement costs and recoveries;

Allocation of fiscal risk where enforcement fails or is disputed;

Reliance on assumptions supplied by other agencies.

D. Deterrence and Enforcement Economics

Treasury documents considering:

Deterrence effectiveness of penalties or enforcement outcomes;

Risks where misconduct remains economically rational;

Fiscal or systemic risk arising from repeat enforcement or repeat misconduct.

E. Elections and Housing (Rotorua)

Treasury documents limited to funding, clawback, or fiscal-risk considerations relating to:

Local election administration; and

Pensioner housing transfers or redevelopment,

excluding operational election records or council-held material.

Statutory Position

This refinement is provided under section 13 and does not restart the statutory timeframe unless Treasury elects to treat it as a new request under section 15(1AA).

If Treasury maintains that any refined limb remains too broad, please identify the specific limb, explain why the relevant documents cannot reasonably be located, and propose a further refinement in accordance with section 13, rather than relying on section 18(f).

I now expect Treasury to identify and process responsive documents within the refined scope.

Yours sincerely,

Anne

InLandsAirWater Counsel – Private Trust

Subject: Refinement under s 13 Official Information Act 1982

 

Dear Bradley,

Thank you for your email.

I do not accept that the original requests were improperly framed. Each request sought existing documents held by Treasury relating to funding, appropriation scope, cost-recovery, clawback, and fiscal oversight — all matters squarely within Treasury’s core functions and record-keeping obligations.

However, in the interests of constructive engagement and pursuant to section 13 of the Official Information Act 1982 (the duty to provide reasonable assistance), I am willing to refine the requests without prejudice and without conceding that section 18(f) would otherwise apply.

 

To avoid unnecessary manual collation, please treat the following as a refinement focused on existing Treasury documents, briefings, guidance, and Cabinet material, rather than raw data extraction.

 

Refined Scope (Applicable to Requests 1–9)

 

 Timeframe

Please limit the search to documents created or held between  

1 July 2018 and 31 January 2026.

 

Document Types

This refinement seeks existing documents only, including:

– Treasury briefings, aide-memoires, internal memoranda, and advice;

– Vote and appropriation guidance documents;

– Cabinet papers and Treasury contributions to Cabinet material;

– Treasury circulars, policy frameworks, or accounting instructions;

– Inter-agency correspondence at a policy or fiscal-oversight level.

This request does not seek:

– Operational decision-making by enforcement agencies;

– Case-file material;

– Personal information;

– Legal advice subject to privilege.

 Refined Subject Matter

 A. Enforcement Funding, Cost Recovery, and Clawback

Please provide Treasury documents that describe, analyse, or govern:

1. The treatment of enforcement-derived revenue (fines, penalties, costs, recoveries) for Crown accounting purposes;

2. Any clawback, offset, netting, or cost-recovery mechanisms applied against Votes or baseline funding;

3. Whether enforcement activity is assumed, forecast, or reconciled in Budget processes.

(Originally Requests 3, 5, 6)

 

 B. Votes and Appropriations

Please identify Treasury-held documents relating to:

1. Votes under which enforcement or prosecution activity is funded (including Votes Justice, Police, Revenue, Primary Industries, Local Government);

2. Any Treasury guidance on appropriation scope, proportionality, or lawful purpose in enforcement funding;

3. Treasury oversight where enforcement proceedings are discontinued, stayed, or found defective.

(Originally Requests 4, 6, 8, 9)

 C. Inter-Agency Fiscal Oversight

Please provide Treasury policy-level communications with:

– Ministry of Justice  

– Inland Revenue  

– Police  

– Ministry for Primary Industries  

– Local authorities (at a sector level, not individual cases)

 

that address:

1. Fiscal treatment of enforcement costs and recoveries;

2. Allocation of fiscal risk where enforcement fails or is disputed;

3. Reliance on assumptions supplied by other agencies.

 

(Originally Requests 1, 4, 6, 9)

 D. Deterrence, Market Integrity, and Enforcement Economics

Please provide any Treasury documents that consider:

1. Whether penalties or enforcement outcomes function as an effective deterrent;

2. Risks of enforcement regimes where misconduct remains economically rational;

3. Fiscal or systemic risk arising from repeat enforcement or repeat misconduct.

(Originally Request 2)

E. Elections and Housing (Rotorua)

Please limit this aspect to:

1. Treasury documents concerning funding, clawback, or fiscal risk linked to:

   – Local election administration; and

   – Pensioner housing transfers or redevelopment;

2. Excluding operational election records or council-held materials.

(Originally Request 7)

Statutory Position

– This refinement is provided under section 13 and does not restart the statutory timeframe unless Treasury elects to treat it as a new request under section 15(1AA).

– If Treasury considers any refined limb still too broad, please:

  – identify the specific limb,

  – explain why existing documents cannot reasonably be located, and

  – propose a further refinement as required by section 13 rather than relying on section 18(f).

 

I am happy to engage further if needed, but I expect Treasury to now identify and release responsive documents within the refined scope.

Tracy Lynch  

Attorney  

InLandsAirWater Counsel – Private Trust

On Feb 5, 2026 at 2:09 PM, <Ministerial Services Inbox [TSY]> wrote:

Dear Tracy

Thank you for your requests under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA). The Treasury received a total of 11 requests from you on 3 February and 4 February 2026. Where the requests were made in close proximity and relate to similar topics we have classed them as one request for reasons of administrative efficiency. However, where the topic is clearly distinct from the others, we have classed them as individual requests. A response to the requests will be provided in accordance with the OIA.

 The request for information (provided below) is very broad in scope and likely to be refused under section 18(f) of the OIA, as substantial manual collation would be required to provide the information requested.

 As such, I would like to suggest refining your request, so we are able to make the proper considerations on the information you are seeking. I have quoted your requests below, for you to consider as part of your refinement, should you choose to do so. The Treasury suggests that you choose a specific topic and request existing materials that may relate to this topic. Currently, the request is wide ranging and relates to a great deal of subjects. We are happy to work with you on rescoping your request.

 Please note that once you have amended or clarified your request, under section 15(1AA) of the OIA, the Treasury may treat your amended or clarified request as a new request that replaces the original request. This may lead to a new start of the statutory response period.

I look forward to hearing from you regarding the refinement of your request.

 If you would like to make a new request and include more specificity on the kind of information being requested, then Treasury will consider that request and provide a response accordingly.

 The Treasury may publish the response to your OIA request. When you are provided with a response to this request, you will be informed about whether the response to your OIA request will be published. If the Treasury does publish the response to your OIA request, personal information, including your name and contact details, will be removed. This publication process does not apply to extension letters or transfers.

 Kind regards,

 Bradley Martin | Te Tai Ōhanga The Treasury 

Ministerial Advisory Service