I was looking for something this morning on the Reserve Bank website and was surprised to find a very long list of Official Information Act responses this year. When I counted, there were 50 for year to date, and it is only mid-October.
Here is the number of responses the Bank has on the website for each year since they started publishing.
I’m pretty sure it isn’t a consistent series. Back in the earlier years, they seem to have only published the odd high-profile release (eg papers on South Canterbury Finance, or a joint one with The Treasury on the earthquakes). They will, almost certainly have had more requests than were recorded here (even abstracting from the technical point that any request for information from a public agency – be it ever so small a statistical query – is covered by the Official Information Act).
My interest is mainly in the years from 2015. As it happens, I left the Bank in early 2015 and lodged a number of requests that year, perhaps a third of those shown. I’ve remained a moderately active user of the Act – which is what it is there for – in requesting information from the Bank and the Board. But the sharp increase in the number of responses shown in the last couple of years has nothing directly to do with me.
I’m still a bit sceptical as to whether there is really a consistent series. I know that some of the responses I’ve had from the Bank have been published on the website and some not (ones to the Board seem to have been less likely to be published). And this specific response – to a National Party request asking for the number of requests the Bank had handled in a particular quarter – confirms, by implication, that they are not publishing all the responses. But a minimum of 50 requests over the course of this year to date is many more than the Bank was facing just a few years ago.
For such a powerful agency, making controversial policy and organisational changes, and subject to a review of its legislation, it doesn’t seem an unduly large number. A few years ago, the Bank got very upset about the (then) rising number of OIA requests (this was 2015/16) suggesting that they were facing unreasonable burdens, threatening to charge etc etc. As I pointed out at the time, there was no evidence they were facing as large a burden as (say) The Treasury – which has 87 responses published so far this year – and I hope it has been something of a salutary lesson for them that the number of requests has only increased over the last few years.
The Reserve Bank Board may choose to do no serious scrutiny, to do little about holding successive Governors to account, but Parliament long ago provided for citizen scrutiny, through the (much abused and avoided) mechanisms of the OIA. It is good to see people using those provisions.
Better still, of course, would be if the Board and the Minister of Finance were adequately doing their job, holding the Governor and the Bank to account on process, substance, and conduct.