Core Paper Records Project

Summary of Client Responses (Discussion Paper November 1999)

This is a summary of key issues raised following the release of a discussion document on 15 October 1999. The discussion document was made available to LINZ client groups in branch office towns, by post and at meetings, and to others who had previously registered their interest in being part of the discussion process. It contained two questions about access to information and descriptions of three different storage options for comment.

There were 133 submissions received in response to the discussion paper. Not all submissions were provided on the form supplied by LINZ, and many submitters included additional written notes or comments that did not directly correspond with the questions in the discussion document. Nevertheless, the information provided in the submissions was carefully reviewed and the issues raised - regardless of format - were incorporated into this analysis.

By far, most of the submissions (26%) came from the Nelson region. Southland provided the next largest number of submissions (14%), but they were just over half as many as were received from Nelson. The fewest submissions were received from Otago, Canterbury and South Auckland, at 2% each.

The most represented groups were surveyors (24%) and genealogists/historians (28%). Lawyers were the next largest group of submitters (13%).

Timeliness of Access

The first part of the survey questionnaire asked people to identify how quickly they would require access to each of nine different types of paper records: mortgages, encumbrances, etc; non live documents; deeds; field books; traverse sheets; old block sheets; road legality sheets; abstract books; roll plans.

The types of paper records requiring most urgent access (24 hours or less) by the greatest number of respondents were: mortgages and encumbrances (88% of respondents), non live documents (76%), deeds (75%) and old block sheets (71%).

Access Options

The first part of the survey questionnaire also asked people to identify what sort of access they would require for each of the nine different types of paper records.

For each of the nine types of paper records, more than 42% of respondents indicated that they would need to come in to view or take notes from the records. This was the favoured option by far for each type of record. The next most favoured option was to come in and photocopy the record. The least favoured option was to get someone else to access the record, with responses ranging from 4% to 14% depending on the type of record. Respondents who do not currently have a LINZ office nearby significantly prefer to have the information sent out to them.

Options for Comment

The second part of the survey questionnaire asked people to comment on three possible options about the storage and management of records

These options ranged from regional/national centralisation (Option One) to diverse locations (Option Three) for the storage or records.

Although many respondents provided comments about the storage and management of records, few (44 out of 133, or 33%) specifically commented on their support or rejection of any of the three options. Of these, Option Three was the preferred choice, followed by Option One, then lastly Option Two. However, respondents who do not currently have a LINZ office nearby significantly favoured Option One.

The submitters commented on a wide range of issues concerning the management and storage of records. There were a number of key issues raised, and the chart below illustrates which issues were addressed most often.