ASB – Optimising rural land use could add tens of billions to New Zealand economy, new report shows

Source: ASB

  • Improving productivity by 10% through land use change could deliver $10 billion in value to the economy.
  • Mixed revenue streams from diversifying farm systems key to driving value in future.
  • Innovation from finance sector vital in supporting land use transition.
  • ASB to launch research-backed land transition programme.

A new report from ASB and Lincoln University shows how smarter, more diverse land use could unlock billions in value for farmers and the wider economy, transforming the future of food and fibre by rethinking how we use our most valuable asset – our land.

The Future Use of Land and How to Fund It, a collaboration between ASB and Lincoln University’s Centre of Excellence in Transformative Agribusiness, outlines how land use optimisation across the food and fibre sector could significantly boost the country’s GDP, while also delivering social and environmental benefits. (ref. https://www.asb.co.nz/documents/business-banking/the-future-use-of-land-and-how-to-fund-it-report.html )

Developed with input from leaders across the primary sector, including dairy, horticulture, sheep and beef, agritech, finance and government, the report explores four possible futures for New Zealand. Each scenario focuses on a single factor that will impact the food and fibre sector, for example greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions targets, or the government’s goal to double export values, and pushes them to the extreme, demonstrating the pressing need for change.

The research sets out seven transformational pathways, such as diversifying farm systems to introduce mixed revenue streams, increasing horticultural production, and unlocking underutilised Māori land. It demonstrates how better land use, paired with innovative funding, can unlock sustainable value across rural New Zealand.

Researchers have also developed a land transition model, providing land-use insights on a regional level. Agri-consultants can use the model to help inform potential paths forward for farmers.

“The food and fibre sector has always been a key driver of our economy, yet many producers operate on slim margins. We speak with farmers every week who are deeply committed to their land and legacy but grapple with viability, as they’re not getting the returns to operate sustainably into the future,” says ASB’s General Manager Rural Banking, Aidan Gent.

“This research brings together the insights and tools to help landowners make informed decisions for future prosperity.”

Rural land use transformation needed at scale

Alan Renwick of Lincoln University says optimising land use by just 10% could add $10 billion in value to the economy if it’s done in the right way, and this, or even more could be achieved in the next 5-7 years.

“The challenge facing the food and fibre sector is how to meet economic, environmental and social goals simultaneously. This requires practical, future-focused solutions – like integrating horticulture into traditional pastoral systems, developing on-farm processing to capture more value locally, or growing Māori agribusinesses around high-value niche products like manuka honey or native botanicals,” he says.

“We know these innovations are happening in pockets across Aotearoa – some stand out examples are included in our report as case studies – but we need to see this kind of transformation at scale.”

ASB launches New Zealand-first land use optimisation programme

Taking the research findings to the farm, ASB is launching Every Hectare Matters, a unique programme to support farmers to diversify and future-proof their businesses. This will begin with a small group of farmers, before being extended widely early next year.

The programme will pair participants with independent agri-consultants, who will use the new land transition model to help guide farmers through diversification and implementation scenarios, with wrap around support and tailored funding from ASB to bring their new business model to life.

ASB’s response to land optimisation was inspired in part by ASB customer High Peak Station in Canterbury, a once-traditional sheep and beef farm that has evolved into a diversified, family-run operation spanning tourism, honey, hunting and livestock. While their journey hasn’t been without challenges, the High Peak experience demonstrates what’s possible when landowners take a multigenerational view of land use.

Aidan Gent says: “This is about working alongside farmers ready to explore new opportunities – enabling change across generations, and helping farms stay in families. We’re not just backing farmers with capital. We’re backing them with insights, partnerships and the long-term thinking that makes meaningful transformation possible.”

ASB rural customers who would like to learn more about the land optimisation programme should contact their ASB Rural Manager.

The Future Use of Land and How to Fund It report is available to read here: https://www.asb.co.nz/documents/business-banking/the-future-use-of-land-and-how-to-fund-it-report.html

Energy sector releases blueprint for NZ’s energy strategy – BusinessNZ

Source: BusinessNZ

New Zealand’s energy sector has rallied around a secure and affordable vision for a sustainable energy future, and is calling on Government to adopt its perspective as part of their eventual energy strategy.
The paper provides an overview of the energy sector today, addressing challenges related to security, investment, and infrastructure, and includes a vision statement with strategic priorities and actions for the energy transition.
BEC Executive Director Tina Schirr says the vision outlined is one which can support a high-growth, productive economy while delivering better outcomes for all New Zealanders.
“A well-designed and effectively implemented national energy strategy can drive economic growth and productivity. Sustained regulatory uncertainty and sovereign risk have muted investment in new flexible electricity generation, storage, and gas – its an issue that needs urgent attention.
“We’re urging Government to develop of a clear plan of action to address long-term gas constraints. Upcoming work on fuel security offers a chance to broaden the scope and build a robust, future-proof energy strategy.”
The group also calls for the removal of regulatory barriers to enable consumer-led innovation and ensure all New Zealanders can equitably participate in the energy transition.
“New Zealand is uniquely positioned to lead by harnessing our abundant natural resources, maintaining a consumer-first focus via competitive forces, and enabling innovation across all fuels and technologies.”
The paper advocates for transparent, evidence-based progress tracking to ensure accountability and keep the transition on course.
“Our collective vision is clear: We’re seeking a modern energy system that delivers for people, business and the planet. We’re ready to partner with government to make this vision a reality.”

Advocacy – More Government Double Standards on Palestine and it Greenlights Escalating Genocide – PSNA

Source: Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa
The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa is accusing Foreign Minister, Winston
Peters, of blatant double standards and giving it the green-light for its escalating
attacks on Gaza.
PSNA Co-Chair, Maher Nazzal says Peters publicly deplored the shooting of two Israeli Embassy staff in Washington last week, yet he kept silent on the killing of nine Palestinian children of the Al Najjar family in Khan Younis in a single Israeli airstrike just two days later.
Late last week, Peters expressed his sympathy to the Israeli government, tweeting on behalf of the New Zealand government ‘Our thoughts are with their loved ones’.
Nazzal says months go by in Gaza without a word of objection from Peters that
Israel is still starving the whole population in Gaza and carpet bombing them.
“Just over a week ago, top genocide scholars from around the world were
unanimous in assessing Israel’s actions amount to genocide.”
“Mr Peters’ sympathies are, at least, consistent. He has sided with Israel from day one to the present.”
“I suspect Peters is letting his prejudices run amok as his term in office runs out,”
Nazzal says.“Surely many, if not most, government MPs will be sickened by his sympathy towards representatives of the Israeli government, and mostly silence on the deaths of innocent Palestinians.”
Nazzal says PSNA reiterates its call for New Zealand to impose wide-ranging and immediate sanctions on Israel.
“Israel has been happy to ignore the half-heated and pro-forma posturing by western governments over the past 19 months. Tel Aviv will interpret Peters’ tweet as a subtle but clear diplomatic signal that its ok by Winston Peters that it can escalate its carnage in Gaza.”
Maher Nazzal
Co-Chair
Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa

Water Quality – National direction changes expected to advance dangerous ACT ideology at expense of the health of NZers and environment

Source: Choose Clean Water – Tom Kay

Government changes to national direction relating to the country’s resource management, expected to be announced this week, will advance ACT Party extreme ideologies at the expense of the health of the public and our environment, say freshwater campaigners.

Campaign group Choose Clean Water says a close reading of the Coalition Government’s cabinet paper on resource management reform provides a strong indication of what will be in the Government’s national direction announcement, and shows the National-led Government is adopting the extreme and incoherent views of ACT in their approach to environmental policy.

“The changes to national direction signalled in the cabinet paper cover more than freshwater policy but what’s proposed for freshwater is indicative of what’s coming across the board.

“The Coalition Government is making sure commercial interests can trump the public’s interests, and that supposed private property rights can trump the rights of everyone else in our communities to a safe, healthy environment to live in,” says spokesperson for the group, Tom Kay.

Choose Clean Water says the cabinet paper’s prioritising of ‘the enjoyment of private property rights’ in public policy is straight out of an extreme libertarian ideology and becomes incoherent and dangerous when applied to communities’ needs and the natural environment.

As the cabinet paper emphasises, the Coalition Government intends to ‘replace the RMA with resource management laws premised on the enjoyment of property rights as a guiding principle’.

It goes on to say, ‘land use effects that are borne solely by the party undertaking the activity would not be controlled’.

“The cabinet paper ignores reality. Prioritising ownership as it exists right now ignores the fact that property changes hands over time—so one landowner’s actions will affect a future property owner or community.

“The reality is that most land use activities will have an impact on the rest of the community and wider society, even those that may be confined within a property boundary.

“That’s why we have rules about what people can and can’t do, so that the needs of everyone—including future generations—can be managed and communities aren’t harmed by one person’s poor decision making.”

Additionally, Choose Clean Water says any national direction announcement that highlights ‘environmental limits’ should be met with skepticism.

It appears as though the Government has already agreed to take away existing essential environmental limits for freshwater.

The cabinet paper states, ‘Limits to protect human health would be set nationally, whereas limits to protect the natural environment would be set by regional councils, who may incorporate sub-regional perspectives (such as catchment groups)’.

“We have existing protections for rivers and lakes in the form of national bottom lines (environmental limits). The National Party introduced these in 2014 and they’ve been refined since.

“But the cabinet paper proposes to remove these existing bottom lines and throw this decision-making back to regional councils again. This means communities will be vulnerable to more pollution of their rivers, lakes and drinking water, such as from another predicted ‘dairy boom’ in Canterbury.”

“It’s dangerous to disconnect human and environmental health, and unrealistic to imagine you can protect people’s health without protecting the waterways they swim in, fish and collect food from, and rely on for their drinking water.”

Kay also says the group can also see the influence of commercial interests over public policy, such as allowing catchment groups to set limits as another way of weakening or removing limits.

“It just opens them up to industry capture, where agribusiness exerts massive influence to set weak standards that work for them. Catchment groups are currently largely dominated by these interests and aren’t set up to allow for what downstream communities might want or need to protect their health and livelihoods.”

“This is only a small example of what’s in the cabinet paper and there is more to be alarmed about in the Coalition Government’s proposals for our environmental policies. ACT’s dangerous ideology should not be the basis of our resource management system, and National Party leaders must push back on them.”

Notes:

For ease of understanding, we have included below key issues and associated questions that must be addressed by the Government. We have also included a list of quotes from the cabinet paper in question that demonstrate the Coalition Government’s adoption of ACT’s language and ideas.

ACT’s influence: Why is a National-led Government adopting such an extreme position like removing environmental limits from central government policy when the National Party brought such bottom lines in in the first place? (For example, with regard to the NPS for Freshwater Management, which included bottom lines in National’s 2014 and 2017 versions of the policy).

ACT’s influence: Should the public have to pay private property owners for regulations that might be necessary to protect public interests as the cabinet paper suggests? What is an example of an ‘unjustified restriction’ (i.e. “allowing affected landowners to seek recourse where it is found that unjustified restrictions are placed on them”)?

Property rights: Is the ‘enjoyment of private property rights’ a responsible or realistic principle to base a country’s environmental and resource management on given that what people do on their property impacts the wider community?

More pollution: Will removing environmental bottom lines from central government policy allow for more pollution to go into New Zealanders’ freshwater?

Commercial influence over government policy: How much have representatives from our most polluting industries, like intensive dairying, been involved in developing the Coalition Government’s changes to freshwater policy?

Māori concepts and interests: Why are māori concepts and interests, such as Te Mana o te Wai and tangata whenua involvement in decision-making, being attacked when they were supported by previous National-led Governments? (For example, with regard to the NPS for Freshwater Management, National’s 2011, 2014, and 2017 versions of the policy all included provisions directing tangata whenua involvement in decision-making).

From the Cabinet paper:

“replace the RMA with resource management laws premised on the enjoyment of property rights as a guiding principle.”

“Change is needed to ensure the resource management system better enables growth and development and better respects private property rights within the framework of a market economy, while also improving environmental outcomes.”  

“Despite its original intent, application of the RMA has increasingly treated land use as a privilege rather than a right.”

“Turning this around requires changing the culture of “no” that has seeped into bureaucratic decision making in New Zealand…This culture has been worsened by a planning system that fails to effectively take into account the basic requirements a modern country requires to thrive: economic growth, property rights, and the rule of law.”

“A narrower scope: the new system will have a narrower scope of effects being managed, based on the concepts of externalities. This will provide greater protection of, and ability to use property as its owners see fit. It will set a higher bar for regulatory restrictions on property.”

“A single combined plan per region will be required that is succinct, respects property rights, and includes a long-term strategic spatial plan to simplify and streamline the system.”

“The new system will put development beyond question, so long as that development occurs within environmental limits.”

“The new system will be based on ‘externalities’, meaning land use effects that are borne solely by the party undertaking the activity would not be controlled.”

“The responsible minister would be required to prescribe limits nationally or set default methods for limits to be developed at the regional level, or both. Limits to protect human health would be set nationally, whereas limits to protect the natural environment would be set by regional councils, who may incorporate sub-regional perspectives (such as catchment groups).”

“This approach would be supported by stronger checks and balances on the use of regulatory powers through: … protection against regulatory takings: subject to further detailed design advice, the legislation will include protection against regulatory takings, allowing affected landowners to seek recourse where it is found that unjustified restrictions are placed on them”

A final note

The Government has already significantly weakened policy protecting freshwater, including by:

  • preventing Regional Councils from following the existing National Policy Statement requirement to prioritise freshwater health in consent decisions, 
  • removing additional protections for wetlands from coal mining, 
  • weakening standards for intensive winter grazing,
  • pausing the roll-out of freshwater farm plan, 
  • preventing Regional Councils from progressing the freshwater plan changes they had developed over the past four years with their communities, 
  • and making it possible for the Minister to change national direction with limited consultation.

Man arrested and charged, vehicle impounded after gathering of anti-social road users, Hamilton

Source: New Zealand Police

Attributable to Inspector Jeff Penno, Waikato Road Policing Manager

Police have arrested and charged a 20-year-old man following a large gathering of anti-social road users in Hamilton.

At around 11pm on Saturday 24 May, Police were called to Airport Road where approximately 300 cars were said to be congregating, with around 20 cars performing skids on the road. The group dispersed when Police arrived.

Over the course of the night, Police received multiple reports of other large groups of anti-social road users at other locations around the city and outlying areas.

In one of these instances, a man was struck by a car doing burnouts on Horotiu Bridge Road at around 12.45am. The driver of the vehicle immediately fled the scene, without stopping to provide assistance to the injured man. The man was transported to Waikato Hospital in a serious condition.

While no arrests were made at the time, Police have sourced and reviewed relevant CCTV and online footage, and will continue to identify and locate anyone we can identify committing offences.

The 20-year-old man has been remanded on bail and is due to reappear in Hamilton District Court on Friday 30 May, charged with operating a vehicle in a manner to cause sustained loss of traction causing injury, and failing to stop to ascertain injury.

The vehicle used to conduct anti-social road user behaviour was impounded for 28 days, and was issued a non-operation order, ordering the vehicle off the road.

A significant investigation is underway into the incidents that unfolded and Police expect to impound more vehicles, and lay further charges to individuals identified committing offences at the time.

If you have any information that could assist our enquiries, please contact Police via 105 and reference Operation Shadow.

ENDS

Issued by Police Media Centre

Deep secrets revealed – corals filmed in New Zealand’s hidden depths

Source: NZ Department of Conservation

Date:  27 May 2025

The remotely operated vehicle (ROV) used to obtain the footage has captured breathtaking images of deep-sea coral communities hundreds of metres beneath the ocean’s surface – offering a rare glimpse into a mysterious and rarely explored world.  

The footage, filmed during a joint German–New Zealand expedition aboard the German research vessel RV Sonne, shows an incredible variety of life thriving in the cold, dark depths of the ocean.   

Scientists on board, including DOC Senior Science Advisor Lyndsey Holland, were able to explore ocean areas around New Zealand that had never been surveyed in such detail at depths up to a kilometre deep, revealing coral species previously unknown to occur in some areas, and potentially several new species.  

“This was an amazing opportunity to use cutting-edge technology to observe areas of the seafloor that are rarely accessible, including seamounts, the depths of Fiordland, offshore areas of Rakiura and the Chatham Rise. We still don’t fully understand what’s down there,” says Lyndsey.   

“The high-resolution footage shows these beautiful, fragile coral gardens – including in areas we didn’t know had corals. The footage is mesmerising to watch and reminds us how important and fragile these ecosystems are.” 

“Corals are legally protected in New Zealand, so a better understanding of which corals are where can help us focus efforts to protect them. It’s also a valuable resource for future research,” says Lyndsey. 

DOC and research partners, including NIWA, are continuing to analyse the footage and data collected during the voyage, with follow-up research already underway

View the deep-sea highlights video 

Contact

For media enquiries contact:

Email: media@doc.govt.nz

Energy Events – ENERGISED CROWD PLUGS IN AT ELECTRIFY QUEENSTOWN 2025

Source: Electrify Queenstown

Queenstown, New Zealand (26 May 2025) – More than 200 attendees have gathered at Skyline Queenstown, as Electrify Queenstown 2025 launches today. The three-day programme helps businesses and households explore practical ways to reduce energy bills, electrify, and decarbonise.

Within a week of tickets going live the opening day event was fully subscribed, highlighting strong community interest in electrification and innovation across the Queenstown Lakes District.

Industry leaders and global experts will take the stage, including keynote speaker Dr Saul Griffith, inventor, internationally acclaimed author of “Electrify”, and chief scientist at multiple organisations working on climate action and clean energy research.

Commenting on the importance of the event, Dr Griffith said: “With the U.S taking a sabbatical from climate action, the world needs climate leadership.

“New Zealand and Australia — two countries where electrification has crossed the economic tipping point — have a generational opportunity to deliver community-led electrification that will pave the way for the world to follow on effective climate action.  

“What better place than Queenstown to showcase the benefits of an electrified future,” Dr Griffith said.

Powered by principal sponsor, Aurora Energy for a second year, Electrify Queenstown brings together entrepreneurs, policymakers, innovators and business leaders to share opportunities to create a more resilient and sustainable future.

Mat Woods, Chief Executive of Destination Queenstown and Lake Wānaka Tourism, says the region is proud to host such a future focused event.

“Electrify Queenstown will showcase leading electric innovations and practical solutions to empower both households and businesses to take steps toward a more energy-efficient, low-emissions future, often with significant cost savings.

“Whether you’re exploring electric transport, improving energy use at home, or finding ways to cut business operating costs, there will be something for everyone,” Mat said.

The momentum continues Tuesday 27 May, with over 300 people expected at the Queenstown Event Centre for an exhibition and tradeshow. The expo is free to attend, with more than 40 exhibitors across solar energy, home heating, cooking and insulation, EV’s and charging facilities, and banks offering low-interest green loans. Attendees have the chance to test-drive seven of the latest electric vehicles, explore electric boats and e-bikes, and experience virtual reality transport technology.

Electrify Queenstown will wrap up on Wednesday 28 May with an electric experience from Queenstown Marina to Forest Lodge Orchard at Mt Pisa. Queenstown Marina is home to New Zealand’s first publicly accessible electric boat charging infrastructure, while Forest Lodge is the world’s first 100% electric cherry orchard. Guests will be taken on a behind-the-scenes tour of this pioneering farm.

Electrify Queenstown supports the region’s ambition for regenerative tourism by 2030, underpinned by the keystone project to achieve a carbon zero visitor economy.

Register to join Electrify Queenstown: electrifyqueenstown.co.nz.

Tuesday 27 May: Electrification in Action, Queenstown Events Centre (free entry)
Wednesday 28 May: Electric Experiences, Queenstown Marina to Forest Lodge Orchard.

Weather News – Wet week ahead with a brief midweek break – MetService

Source: MetService

Covering period of Monday 26th – Thursday 29th May – Wet week ahead with a brief midweek break.

•    Rain for North Island today (Monday)
•    Settled weather spreading from the south today and Tuesday
•    More rain arrives on Wednesday
•    Frosty nights for the South Island, warmer for North Island

Rain that started in the South Island over the past weekend is continuing its northward trajectory today (Monday). This rain may be heavy at times.

MetService meteorologist Oscar Shiviti says, “A rain bearing front moved up the South Island on Sunday and Monday morning, bringing heavy rain and notable accumulations in places”.

Here are some rain accumulations for the 12 hours from 11pm Sunday evening to 11am Monday morning:
o    Paradise Peak: 173.6mm
o    Arthurs Pass: 119mm
o    Westport: 76.8mm
o    Nelson Creek: 45.8mm
o    Hokitika: 42mm
o    Nelson Airport: 40.8mm

Strong winds were also recorded within the past 12 hours, with gusts of:
o    113km/h at Mount Kaukau (7am)
o    107km/h at Remutaka Summit (3am)

The North Island will see a band of rain move over today; the risk of severe weather accompanies the rain, with heavier falls expected in places.

Shiviti warns, “Severe Weather Watches are in place for the North Island, with emphasis on the risk of heavier bursts of rainfall within the thunderstorm watch area extending from Northland, through Auckland and down to Taranaki. We advise people to check the MetService website for more information”.

As the rain moves north today, there is a clearance in the weather in the South Island, and sunnier skies expected. This settled weather should spread to the North Island by Tuesday, though showers may still occur in the west.

Shiviti continues, “We expect a disruption to the settled weather on Wednesday when another band of rain hits western parts of the country as a front arrives”. This rain event carries with it potentially severe weather; and brings a change in weather for the country to cloudier, wetter and windier for the rest of the work week and going into the weekend.

MetService warns that repeated heavy rain events may have impacts to some places in the west of both islands, and therefore we urge people to keep up to date with MetService forecasts and any safety advice from local authorities.

For the rest of the week some places in the South Island will have frosty nights, while overnight temperatures in the North Island will not be as cold.

Police appealing for information following arrest after Nelson house fire

Source: New Zealand Police

Attributable to Detective Sergeant Ian Langridge

A 47-year-old man is before the courts following a house fire in Nelson, and are appealing for information from the public.

At around 9.50pm, on Wednesday 21 May, Police were called to Konini Street after a report of a house fire.

One person received serious injuries and were transported to hospital.

Police are now appealing for the public’s help to identify two witnesses who were travelling in a vehicle on the night of the incident.

It is believed they stopped and picked up an occupant of the Konini Street address some time that night.

Police also urge residents in the Konini Street and Vanguard Street areas to contact us if they have located any unfamiliar items on their property.

The 47-year-old man has been remanded in custody and is due to reappear in Nelson District Court on 16 June, facing multiple charges including arson and wounding with intent to injure.

If you have any information that can assist Police in our investigation, please contact us online at 105.police.govt.nz, clicking “Update Report” or by calling 105.

Please use the reference number 250522/0382.

Information can also be provided anonymously through Crime Stoppers on 0800 555 111.

ENDS

Issued by Police Media Centre

Sharing personal information about children and young people

Source: Privacy Commissioner

This guidance aims to help agencies respond appropriately to requests for personal information about children and young people.  The guidance covers:

  • Information Privacy Principle 6 (IPP 6) of the Privacy Act 2020.
  • Who can make an IPP 6 request for information about a child or young person.
  • Requests made by parents, legal guardians or other caregivers, including:
    • when a parent, legal guardian or caregiver is acting as a representative of the child or young person.
    • whether the Privacy Act 2020 or the Official Information Act 1982 applies
    • what other laws may apply.
  • Requests made by a Lawyer for the Child.
  • Responsibilities of an agency before giving access to personal information.
  • Requests made by other agencies.
  • Applying the guidance in practice- some examples.

Information Privacy Principle (IPP) 6 

The Privacy Act applies to any individual regardless of age.  A child or young person has the same privacy rights as an adult but sometimes needs the assistance of another person to exercise those rights. 

One of those rights is a person’s right to ask for information about themselves, set out in IPP 6. 

An agency must respond to the requester within 20 working days and usually has to provide the information, unless one of the refusal grounds applies. 

Read more general information about responding to IPP 6 requests.

Information covered in this guidance

Download a copy of this guidance (opens to PDF, 333 KB).

Who can make an IPP 6 request about children and young people?

An IPP 6 request may be made by the child or young person themselves or their representative. A representative is a person who is lawfully acting on the child or young person’s behalf.

Information requests from parents, legal guardians or caregivers

The Privacy Act does not provide an automatic right of access by a parent, legal guardian, or caregiver to their child’s personal information. 
Assessing and processing a request from a parent, legal guardian or caregiver is a two-step process:

  1. Determine whether the parent, legal guardian or caregiver is a representative.
  2. If yes, then determine whether any of the refusal grounds apply. 

In most cases, a parent or legal guardian can be considered a representative, particularly where the child is too young or otherwise not able to act on their own behalf. Where a caregiver is making the request, determining whether they are a representative may not be so clear cut as they won’t have the same legal status as a parent or legal guardian. 

The circumstances will be different for each request, so it is important that an agency considers each request on a case-by-case basis before deciding whether the parent, legal guardian or caregiver is acting as a representative of the child or young person. 

Step 1: When is a parent, legal guardian or caregiver a representative?

For the purposes of IPP 6, a parent, legal guardian or caregiver may be considered representative of the child where:

  • the child is too young or otherwise not able to act on their own behalf, or
  • an older child or young person has authorised them to make the request on their behalf. 

Before determining that a parent, legal guardian or caregiver is a representative, agencies should consider:

  • The age and maturity of the child and whether they are capable of understanding and exercising their rights under the Privacy Act.
  • Any court orders relating to parental access or responsibility (e.g. protection orders, custody and guardianship orders).
  • Whether, based on what is known to the agency, it is (or isn’t) likely to be in the best interests of the child or young person for the parent, legal guardian or caregiver requesting the information to be able to exercise their child’s Privacy Act rights on their behalf. 

Where there is a family breakdown of some sort such as family harm, a custody or guardianship dispute or where the child is or has experienced abuse, the best interests of the child or young person should be a primary consideration. When determining whether it is in the best interests of the child or young person agencies should consider:

  • the interests of the parent, legal guardian, caregiver and the child or young person are no longer the same or are in conflict, and/or disclosing the information to the parent/legal guardian would go against the child’s interests.
  • whether there are reasonable grounds for believing the child or young person does not or would not wish the information to be disclosed.

If any of the factors above exist, an agency may determine that a parent, guardian or caregiver is not acting as representative of the child or young person and the request does not fall under the Privacy Act. 

Where a parent, guardian or caregiver is not a representative you can consider the request under the Official Information Act (see table below).  

Non-custodial parents

A non-custodial parent is the parent who doesn’t live with their child most of the time. Non-custodial parents with guardianship rights still have legal rights and responsibilities, ensuring they can maintain a relationship with their child.  A non-custodial parent has guardianship rights if they meet the test in section 17 of the Care of Children Act 2004 (or are otherwise appointed by the Court). 

A non-custodial parent with guardianship rights can exercise their child’s privacy rights in the same way the custodial parent can, taking the wishes of the child into account if expressed or known (for older children or young people). 

Where an agency receives an information request from a non-custodial parent with guardianship rights, it should follow the same process for managing a request from a custodial parent or other legal guardian.

Step 2: Decision to release or refuse the request

A representative does not have automatic access to a child or young person’s personal information. An agency still needs to consider whether any of the refusal grounds apply in the circumstances. 

In situations where parents are separated, agencies do not need the consent of the other parent (either custodial or non-custodial) to disclose information about the child or young person. However, agencies should consider whether the child or young person’s personal information also reveals personal information about the other parent (e.g., the other parent’s home address or contact details where there is a protection order in place). 

Read more general information about refusal grounds: Office of the Privacy Commissioner | Principle 6 – Access to personal information

When a request for information should be managed as an Official Information Act request

The Official Information Act (OIA) enables an individual to make a request for ‘official information’ (certain information held by public sector agencies). Official information can include personal information about other people, including children and young people. 

Where the person requesting the information isn’t the child or young person or a representative, the request should be considered under the OIA. 

The following table can help you determine which Act may apply depending on the specific circumstances of the request:

Individual making request Purpose of request Applicable Act

Child/young person – capable of making their own request.

Their own personal information 

Privacy Act

Parent/legal guardian/caregiver of child/young person who is too young or not capable of exercising their rights.

(Parent/legal guardian/caregiver probably a representative)

Personal information about the child or young person

Privacy Act, unless there are circumstances which suggest the Parent/Legal Guardian/caregiver is not acting on their behalf or in their best interests, then the request should be processed under the OIA

Parent/legal guardian/caregiver of older child or young person capable of making their own request with the older child/young person’s authorisation to make the request on their behalf.

(Parent/legal guardian/caregiver probably a representative)

Personal information about the older child or young person 

Privacy Act, unless there are circumstances which suggest the Parent/Legal Guardian/caregiver is not acting on their behalf or in their best interests, then the request should be processed under the OIA

Parent/legal guardian/caregiver of older child capable of making their own request where the older child/young person has made it clear they do not authorise the requestor to make the request on their behalf.(Parent/legal guardian/caregiver is not a representative) Personal information about the older child or young person Part 2 OIA/LGOIMA. 

All other cases where a parent/legal guardian/caregiver of child/young person is determined not to be a representative. Personal information about the child or young person

Part 2 OIA/LGOIMA.
Subject to eligibility requirements in the OIA (s 12(1)), but not the LGOIMA

Other laws that may apply

Agencies should also consider whether any other laws may apply to requests made by parents, legal guardians or caregivers and proactive disclosures of children and young person’s information. These laws include:

  • The Health Act 1956 and the Health Information Privacy Code (HIPC) regulate access to “health information” held by a “health agency”. Under the HIPC, parents or guardians of children under 16 years are legally defined as their ‘representatives’, whose access requests are treated as though made by the child themselves. 
    As with any information privacy request, these requests may be refused in certain circumstances (Rule 11(4) HIPC). 
  • Section 103 of the Education and Training Act 2020 says that principals should tell parents about matters affecting their child’s progress through school or relationships with others. 
  • Under IPP 11 of the Privacy Act 2020, an agency may disclose personal information to a third party if it believes there are reasonable grounds that one of the exceptions in IPP 11 applies. 

For example, this could be when the child or young person authorises the disclosure (IPP11(1)(c)) or where disclosure to parents is one of (or is directly related to) the purposes for which an agency obtained the information (IPP11(1)(a)). 

However, unlike IPP 6 and the OIA, IPP 11 does not give a right to access or request information. IPP 11 gives an agency discretion to disclose personal information where that agency considers it is necessary to do so (rather than legally being required to respond to a request for the information). Whether an exception applies will depend on the circumstances.

Information requests from Lawyer for the Child

A Lawyer for the Child is a specialist lawyer appointed by the Family Court to represent the interests of the child or young person in Family Court proceedings involving custody or guardianship disputes, or situations of family harm.

To fulfil their responsibilities, the Lawyer for the Child often needs information about the child or young person held by agencies such as a school or healthcare provider. When making a request for information, the Lawyer for the Child will be acting as a representative for the child or young person.

The Lawyer for the Child should provide evidence of their appointment and brief from the Family Court. (A Lawyer for the Child is appointed by Court Minute and receives their brief by letter from the Court.) If it not clear whether the requestor is acting as the Lawyer for the Child, you should ask them to provide evidence of their appointment before you provide access to any personal information.

Responsibilities of an agency before giving access to personal information

Providing access to personal information to an unauthorised person can cause serious harm to an individual and be a form of notifiable privacy breach – where the personal information is about children and young people the harm can be long lasting and significant.

When providing access to personal information under IPP 6, the agency must (Section 57 of the Privacy Act 2020): 

  • be satisfied of the identity of the requestor (e.g. the child or young person or the representative)
  • not provide access to the information if the agency has reasonable grounds to believe that the request is being made under the threat of physical or mental harm (coercion)
  • ensure that the information intended for the requestor (or their representative) is provided to the right person.

You may need to request additional information from the requestor to satisfy these requirements of the Privacy Act. 

Confirming a requestor’s identity

Where additional information is required to confirm a requestor’s identity the agency should inform the requestor what information is required and why. Agencies must also ensure that any identification documentation requested is securely destroyed once confirmation of the requestor’s identity has been made. 

Where a decision has been made to grant access to personal information, agencies should confirm with the requestor (or their representative) the method in which they would like to receive the information and double check email, or postal addresses are correct.

Read more about how you can confirm someone’s identity.

Information requests from other agencies

Where a request for information about a child or young person is made by another agency other laws may apply. These include:

  • Section 66C of the Oranga Tamariki Act permits Child Welfare and Protection Agencies to request and share information about children and young people for specified purposes. 
  • Section 20 of the Family Violence Act permits Family Violence Agencies to request and share information about individuals who have been subject to family harm for specified purposes.
  • Any law that requires the information to be provided to the requestor e.g. section 66 Oranga Tamariki Act, section 11 Social Security Act, section 17 Tax Administration Act.

Where requests for information are made under one of these laws an agency cannot refuse the request under one of the IPP 11 refusal grounds (or a withholding ground under the OIA). An agency should assess the request and decide whether to share the requested information in line with the law under which the request was made. 

Examples

See examples of how this guidance is applied in practice.

Download a copy of this guidance (opens to PDF, 333 KB).