Nine Education Ministry insiders back claims staff were told not to put things in writing to avoid the OIA

Nine people with inside knowledge of the Education Ministry have backed claims that managers routinely told staff not to write down sensitive information in case it came out under the Official Information Act. Several of them also say an Australian consultancy did far more of the work on the new draft curriculums than the ministry has said.

They come from different parts of the ministry and contacted RNZ in the week before it published its report. According to RNZ, some work in the curriculum centre, the subject of a negative workplace-culture report published shortly before RNZ's report. Others said a culture of secrecy and avoiding written records was common in other parts of the organisation.

RNZ reported that three of them have confirmed they will make protected disclosures to the Chief Ombudsman, and others said they were likely to. A 10th person, former ministry staffer Claire Coleman, told RNZ she had already offered to take part in the investigation. Coleman has been a strong critic of the government's curriculum rewrite. She told RNZ she hoped the investigation might lead to a wider inquiry into the curriculum rewrite.

"Verbal instructions were given for changes that were controversial and come directly from the minister's office," one insider told RNZ.

The Ombudsman's investigation began with a leaked video. It showed a principal seconded to the ministry to lead work on the secondary school curriculum telling staff not to put feedback from the Education Minister's office in writing. Te Ao Māori News reported on 23 September a whistleblower's claim that this was not an isolated incident. 1News reported further claims on 24 September and the Ombudsman's inquiry on 25 September. The person who supplied the video told RNZ they heard similar requests almost once a month.

Chief Ombudsman John Allen told RNZ he had formally notified the ministry of the investigation. He said he would look at "whether the ministry's curriculum centre staff have either deliberately failed to make records or have been told not to do so".

The investigation's scope is narrow. Allen said it would focus on administrative conduct and on whether the ministry met its obligations under the Official Information Act and the Public Records Act. It will not consider any advice or decisions on the curriculum itself. What it can test is whether the paper trail behind those decisions exists. If instructions from the minister's office were given only by word of mouth, there is nothing for a parent, teacher or journalist to request under the OIA.

The ministry's position has shifted. It first said it was looking into whether there was a wider problem. It then told RNZ it had dropped plans for an internal inquiry because of the Ombudsman's investigation. It said the comments in the video did not meet its expectations, but it would not comment on the claims made by the nine.

Several of the insiders told RNZ that Learning First, a Melbourne consultancy, had a major hand in the draft curriculums, and that some ministry staff were flown to Melbourne to work with it. One said Learning First rewrote the primary school maths curriculum in full. Another told RNZ that staff were told not to say or imply the ministry wasn't the author.

Not all of them go as far. One insider said Learning First provided a lot of content for some curriculums but not others, and that ministry staff rewrote much of it.

Learning First chief executive Ben Jensen denied the allegations. He told RNZ the claim that the company wrote most of the content for several drafts was "completely false". He said Learning First did not write the revised maths curriculum and that the ministry rejected much of its feedback.

The ministry told RNZ it was responsible for all final content and decisions. It said Learning First helped identify relevant international curriculum content, and that the curriculum itself was written by the ministry.