I guess MoE didn’t provide aggregated data because they don’t actually have it… otherwise they’re just weaselling out.
Note that the letter refers to a request for “the National Standards data returns from every school”, not for aggregated data.
Also note that this is “one part of the request” and there is no information in the letter about the Ministry’s response to the rest of the request.
Where to buy fresh produce in the northern suburbs, now that Molesworth Fruit Supply is a tile shop and the nice little fruit shop in Crofton Downs mall is being shut down to extend the supermarket?
There's Moore Wilson's in Porirua, but it's a bit of aways.
I love papers past!!
Coming soon: more Auckland papers, and a range of smaller titles listed here.
Jackie: I think Bigamy must have been our National Crime, in the early colonial days. (Later, I guess, it was the misappropriation of land. Now?)
Papers Past can of course give you guidance on Vine Culture for Wine Making in New Zealand, with excellent advice on the varieties of grape.
But watch out for the Vine Louse.
I am someone with a better appreciation of the probity required of a public servant than whichever Nat. Lib. or Archives staff member/s shamefully leaked the cabinet paper proposing the merger with DIA.
As a point of clarification, the SSC investigation found that:
2.1 In the circumstances, I find that it is likely that the information used in the article came from more than one source.
2.2 While it cannot be entirely discounted, it is more likely that the information was provided in a general way, rather than from the journalists having a copy of the Cabinet paper itself. If the journalists had possession of the Cabinet paper, the article could have been expected to have been more accurate than it was.
2.4 While during the inquiry there were a number of illustrations of carelessness in the way information was treated, I did not find that any one of these was the cause of the deliberate unauthorised disclosure. However, they illustrate how a lack of care can provide an opportunity for someone to gain information which they could disclose to a third party.
However, they also found:
5.2 The evidence points to one of the sources for the journalists being either someone in the National Library, or someone being told something by someone in the National Library, who then passed this information on.
The National Library was specifically mentioned in this way. ArchivesNZ was not.
Sorry, I meant within NatLib. We're a diverse bunch. But as noted we have a working group looking at collections and metadata access policies.
I'm wary of speculating too much further while our thinking is still being formed
Isn't that how ideas are teased out?
Maybe "speculating" is the wrong word. In the case of access & rights, I am interpreting other people's arguments for you, and I don't want to mis-interpret them.
I'm happy to send a follow up on this topic in a few months when our collective understanding is a bit better.
I love Papers Past!
Who doesn't? We're always finding amazing stuff in there (or noticing other people finding amazing stuff). We even had our own meme: Lobsterotica.
I'm not a historian, librarian, or media type, but I've been staring at these pages for years now. The recurring themes that I think are the most interesting and unexpected include the gruesome descriptions of violence (and not just against penguins), the prominence of local and classified advertising (it was front-page material), the high quality of the world news, and the advertisements for what we consider hard drugs.
The best stories we hear are from users who learn something about a family member or ancestor. No matter how terrible the story -- theft, adultery, suicide, murder -- it turns an distant and historical figure into a real person who they can relate to.
Also, people tend to think of their ancestors as old people, as old as they are when they die. But you're more likely to get into the Court News when you're young.
I've commented on this in a more general sense here.
I'm not sure I have much to add. The changes I referred to are still underway, and as public servants we now have to make sure the new organisational structures work for the National Library and the wider DIA.
the kind of exclusive access that comes with Nat Library endorsement
A career in libraries may not be as glamorous as you imagine.
Thanks, Gordon. I'd be interested in hearing more about the logic behind restricting access to digital taonga rather than encouraging it. What cultural base is the policy drawing on?
Ooh that's a tough one. There's a whole body of research about why cultural instituions might choose to restrict access to collection items.
First, it depends what you mean by access. I'm going to assume you mean online access, and refer specifically restrictions on reproduction and re-use.
My feeling from the discussions thus far are that we the National Library have a couple of key concerns. One is our donors. All collecting organisations take donor obligations and expectations extraordinary seriously, so as to enhance the reputation of the organisation and encourage future donations. (Nobody wants this.) A second is that we're obliged by the Act to treat documents "in a manner consistent with their status as documentary heritage and taonga", which can be interpreted to mean that they ought not to be made available in such a way that they can be treated disrespectfully, particularly if they're pictures of living people, ancestors, or symbols. That's potentially a real showstopper for online access to many items. A third is that the ownership of the Turnbull collections is complex. (I don't understand it fully, but the Crown owns them and ATL manages them on the Crown's behalf, and there are limits to what we can do to the Crown's property. Also, the implications for management accounting are mindbending.) And then there's all the other issues noted above, which make us want to increase or restrict access.
I'd also, as an enrolled Kai Tahu, be extremely interested in knowing who the gate keepers are...
All our decisions are guided by the Access policy, but (as noted above) it needs a refresh. The Access policy is a fundamental document for the Library, and will have to be signed off all the way to the top, so I would say that ultimate responsibility will lie with Bill.
There's probably a whole other post in this topic, but I'm wary of speculating too much further while our thinking is still being formed.