NZ Engine

Source:

A recent data breach provided an example of how it is sometimes possible to catch a breach as it is happening and avert potential harm.

An email was sent to the wrong person in the sender’s address list. We have probably all done this at least once. If you are quick, you can sometimes recall the email, deleting it from the recipient’s system before they have opened it. In this case, the recipient had already opened the email.

The incident was resolved by a staff member making the effort to visit the recipient who happily showed them how the email had been deleted and gave assurance that it had not been copied or forwarded. Knowing the recipient through their relationship with the company gave confidence they could be trusted. The data had not got away. This was a good catch.

This degree of co-operation does happen sometimes, so with a friendly recipient it may be worth making the effort to arrange a visit. A visit gives that extra bit of confidence about how the email has been dealt with, and gives an opportunity to thank the person directly for their cooperation.

Here are three steps you can take to help keep emails from getting loose:

Set a delay rule

A good step to take is to set a delay on outgoing emails. This means you will have a little time (you can decide how long) between finishing the email, and it actually leaving your system. [For Microsoft Outlook users, go to: “File”, then “Info”, and” Manage Rules and Alerts”]

Practise recalling an email

Your email system probably has a function to delete emails from the recipient’s system if they have not already been read. This might work within your organisation, but will not help with emails going out of your organisation. Practise using that function once or twice with test emails so that it is easy to do without panic when you suddenly realise you want to recall an email that was just sent. [For Microsoft Outlook, open the message, open the “File” tab, under “Info” is “Resend or Recall”.]

Be nice to people

The story also indicates the value of treating people with respect in your organisation’s dealing with them. If the recipient of the email had had bad experiences with the organisation, they would have been much more reluctant to co-operate.

Further tips for managing emails were described in this earlier blog post.

We regularly get data breach notifications and this year we will be sharing the lessons learned from these more regularly. If you want to know more about data breaches, please check out our data safety toolkit.

Image credit: Stop sign by ndemello (via Creative Commons)

email, data, breach

Back

Source:

We live in an age where agencies collect and hold a lot of information about us. When we then request access to that information, this places demands on the time and resources of agencies to meet their obligations under the Privacy Act. Agencies sometimes feel a bit overwhelmed when responding to requests for personal information –  especially where a high volume of information is held.

Here are our top tips for getting sorted and avoiding problems down the road:

1. Can you get the requester to narrow the scope of their request?

While individuals are entitled to access all personal information held by an agency, we often find that requestors have a specific issue in mind when they make a request for personal information.  A phone call to the requestor can sometimes clarify what it is they are after.

For example, an elderly man requested all of his health information from his GP. These records dated back some 20 years and included hard copy material archived off site. A phone call from the GP to the man established that he wanted information relating to an issue with his hip. There was no need for the GP to trawl through 20 years worth of records to satisfy his request, once both parties had agreed on the amended parameters of the request. 

2. Don’t duplicate information

The Privacy Act entitles individuals to access their personal information held by an agency. But where an agency holds this information in multiple and duplicate forms, it is not required to provide the same information over and over again.

For example, we recently dealt with a case where an agency sought to withhold emails because they were subject to legal professional privilege.  The agency supplied hard copies of each email to the requestor, with the contents blanked out. Rather than supply one copy of the email trail, which included all of the correspondence, the agency supplied every single copy of each email, which included all of the correspondence that came before it. This added up to dozens of pages, with all of the content redacted. This gave the impression to the requestor that far more information was being withheld than was actually the case (because much of the blanked out material was simply duplicated information).  

We also advise agencies that, rather than providing completely blanked out documents, they can simply tell requesters that some information is being withheld under the Privacy Act, and give the specific grounds (for example, advising a requester that “some information has been withheld from you under 29(1)(a) of the Privacy Act”).

3. Think carefully about whether information should actually be withheld

In our experience, human nature means that as soon as someone sees that information has been redacted, (or is advised that some information has been withheld) they automatically assume it is far more interesting than it is! Most of the withheld information we review is quite benign. In fact, we have reviewed some documents in which pages numbers have been redacted – the result of some over enthusiastic redaction. Keep in mind that requestors always have the right to complain to our office and have any redacted or withheld information reviewed. Getting the redactions right in the first place can save you a lot of time down the line, in terms of engagement with our office, or as subject to proceedings in the Human Rights Review Tribunal.

4.  Make sure you redact information properly

We have seen redactions made with vivid pen, in which the information can be read when held up to the light. Use of redaction tools such as Adobe PDF is a good idea, however, be aware that in some cases, if the file is sent electronically, cutting and pasting the withheld information into a different document will reveal the contents of the redacted section!

5.  Think about plain English explanations for why information is withheld

If you use a withholding section often, it can be useful to prepare some clear wording that explains in a straight forward way why you believe the information needs to be withheld. The minimum you need to provide to a requester is the section of the Privacy Act you are relying on and, if the requestor asks for it, you will also need to provide the grounds in support of the section used. Providing a reasonable explanation up front can save you time.  

6.  Good communication prevents complaints

Make it your practice to give good information to requestors about what’s happening with their request, and tell them when they can expect to hear from you. They won’t need to engage with us if you are engaging with them.  

7.  Keep an eye on the clock!

Agencies have timeframes they must meet under the Privacy Act when responding to requests.  Make sure you are familiar with these. We don’t want you to respond to a request with the best of intentions, and end up being caught foul of the Privacy Act because your response was a day late. We have a handy calculator on our website to assist.  Familiarise yourself with Part 5 of the Act – we’re told it makes great bedtime reading.

Don’t be afraid to ask for advice. Our AskUs tool on our website contains information and our enquiries line can offer general advice.

Image credit: Information centre sign (Malaysia) via Wikipedia

IPP6 – access

Back

Source: Secondary teachers question rationale for changes to relationship education guidelines

Infrastructure

Progress with flood resilience

Following the severe weather in Auckland in early 2023, almost $2 billion worth of investment is being made by council and government for Auckland’s storm recovery and resilience.

Council is creating more blue-green networks of waterways (blue) and parks (green) in suitable locations to help make our communities safer and achieve other infrastructure, environment and community benefits.

In April, council approved funding to progress options to develop a blue-green solution for Wairau Valley. In addition, the official groundbreaking and blessing of two Māngere flood resilience (blue-green) projects occurred.

These projects will replace a key bridge and lift New Zealand’s largest sewerage pipe to significantly reduce flood risk for hundreds of homes surrounding the Te Ararata Stream and Harania Creek.

Our community

Safety teams expanded

The council’s Community Safety Team wardens has been expanded with eight additional staff giving regional support in town centres across Tāmaki Makaurau. This is a mobile resource that provides proactive patrols addressing safety and anti-social issues.

Food waste collections thrive

Aucklanders have diverted around 18,471 tonnes of food waste from landfill, since July 2024. Transforming food scraps into clean energy and liquid fertiliser helps move Auckland towards its goal of Zero Waste by 2040. Read more about this initiative: Turbo-charging tomatoes with Auckland’s food scraps – OurAuckland

More Aucklanders took a dip…

Over the summer, Aucklanders took nearly 2.4 million dives into council pools. That’s the most swimmers using our pools during the summer months (January-March) for several years.

… and more read library books!

Auckland Council libraries clocked nearly 2 million visits in the three months January-March. That’s the most since before Covid-19. 

Library visits topped 2 million in the first three months of 2025.

What we’re focusing on next

We’re in the final stages of confirming our Annual Plan 2025/2026.

In March, we completed consultation on the proposed plan, which focused on delivering the second year of the Long-term Plan 2024-2034 and included an opportunity to feedback on the funding of events and destination marketing, and the priorities of local boards.

We heard from 13,000 Aucklanders who provided feedback. In June, the Governing Body will meet to adopt the plan ahead of the financial year starting 1 July.

Auckland Council is working hard to keep your rates affordable, provide good value, build a stronger and more resilient city, and invest wisely to support Auckland’s growth. 

Source:

Te Pāti Māori spokesperson for Broadcasting, Tākuta Ferris, and MP for Tāmaki Makaurau, Takutai Tarsh Kemp, are demanding the Government significantly increase its investment in Whakaata Māori in Budget 2025.

The call comes following the release of the network’s 2025 Social Value Report at an event today, attended by MP Kemp, highlighting more than $114 million in measured impact across Aotearoa.

“Whakaata Māori is not just a broadcaster — it is a cornerstone of cultural survival, education, and national identity,” said Tākuta Ferris.

“This latest report proves what our people have known all along: kaupapa Māori media changes lives, strengthens whānau, and brings te reo Māori into the hearts of homes across the motu.”

The report, independently developed by Social Ventures Australia, affirms that Whakaata Māori’s work is delivering more than double its operating budget in social value — from improved reo Māori use to stronger cultural identity and cross-cultural understanding.

“With 78% of Māori viewers feeling more connected to their identity and 69% of parents saying their tamariki are speaking more reo and practising tikanga at home, this Government must now future-proof these outcomes with targeted investment,” says Takutai Tarsh Kemp.

Ferris and Kemp are calling on the Government to urgently prioritise a meaningful funding boost for Whakaata Māori in Budget 2025, following 17 years without an increase to the network’s baseline operational funding.

“For too long, successive Governments – and especially this one – have paid lip service to te reo Māori and Māori development, while refusing to back it with resources,” said Kemp.

“The network has not received a baseline funding increase since 2008. The numbers presented today speak for themselves – Whakaata Māori delivers where it matters most: to the people. Budget 2025 must reflect that,” concluded Ferris.

Source: