2690
THE NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE
No. 119

on a proper construction of these provisions and of the Official Information Act 1982, the former provisions govern the proper response to the company’s request and that these provisions do not authorise compliance with the request that has been made.

3. The advice on which this direction is based has been received from the Crown Law Office as to legal issues and from the Director-General of the Post Office as to factual issues. The purport of that advice is as set out above.

Dated at Wellington this 2nd day of July 1984.

R. L. G. TALBOT, Postmaster-General.

Post Office Bonus Bonds—Weekly Prize Draw No. 1, July 1984

PURSUANT to the Post Office Act 1959, notice is hereby given that the result of the weekly Prize Draw No. 1 for 7 July is as follows:

One prize of $25,000:
4383 775050

Twelve prizes of $5,000:
574 036591,
1796 979842,
1996 366092,
2390 281311,
2392 096820,
2686 166348,
5281 356117,
5984 622301,
6880 906393,
7289 704333,
7787 910152,
7881 212477.

R. L. G. TALBOT, Postmaster-General.

Direction Not to Disclose Information

PURSUANT to section 32 (4) of the Official Information Act 1982, a copy of a direction to the Director-General of the Post Office is hereby published for public information. The grounds for the direction and the source and purport of the advice on which it is based are set out in the direction.

POST OFFICE PACKET SWITCHING TENDER

1. I have decided that the information sought by Mr P. W. Harpham on behalf of Progeni Systems Ltd., and recommended to be released by the Ombudsman pursuant to section 30 (2) of the Official Information Act 1982, namely two evaluation reports and a contract relating to a Post Office packet switching tender, should not be made available to him, and accordingly direct you pursuant to section 32 (1) (a) of the Official Information Act 1982 not to disclose it.

2. The grounds for the direction are:
   (1) (a) The information sought contains information which was supplied in confidence to the Post Office by tenderers and relates to competitive commercial activities of those tenderers;
   (b) It is in the public interest that similar information continue to be supplied; and
   (c) The making available of the information could reasonably be expected to prejudice the supply of similar information.

(2) The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the free and frank expressions of opinions by officers of the Post Office, and there are no other considerations which render it desirable in the public interest to make that information available.

(3) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the Crown and the Post Office to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage its commercial activities, and there are no other considerations which render it desirable in the public interest to make that information available.

(4) Access to information relating to Government tenders is governed by the Public Finance Act 1977, the Government Stores Regulations 1960 and the Government Stores Board Instructions. I have been advised and have concluded that on a proper construction of these provisions and of the Official Information Act 1982, the former provisions govern

the proper response to the company’s request and that these provisions do not authorise compliance with the request that has been made.

3. The advice on which this direction is based has been received from the Crown Law Office as to legal issues and from the Director-General of the Post Office, as to factual issues. The purport of that advice is as set out above.

Dated at Wellington this 2nd day of July 1984.

R. L. G. TALBOT, Postmaster-General.

Decision No. 17/84
IND 5/84 and IND 6/84

Before the Indecent Publications Tribunal

IN the matter of the Indecent Publications Act 1963 and in the matter of a referral from the Tauranga District Court in respect of the following publications:

Fantasy Fuck No. 1, publisher unknown.

Park Lane No. 1, publisher unknown.

Sexpaper No. 183, published by Undercounter Publications, Australia.

Sexpaper No. 181, published by Undercounter Publications, Australia.

Vibrations Vol. 6, No. 7, published by Tabor Publications, U.K.

Vibrations May 1982, published by Vanity Publishing Co., New York.

Bizzarr Sex Lovers No. 1, published by Viola Press, West Germany.

Xotica No. 4, publisher unknown, Australia.

Wichsvor Lage No. 11, published by Viola Press, West Germany.

Rodox Special Magazine No. 8, published by Color Climax Corporation, Denmark.

Exciting, published by Color Climax Corporation, Denmark.

Teenage Sex No. 15, publisher unknown.

Chick Licks No. 9, published by Briarwood Corporation, U.S.A.

Porno Weekend, publisher unknown.

Baby Blue Anal, publisher unknown.

Penthouse Variations, February 1983, published by Penthouse Variations, London.

Oui Letters, published by Laurant Publishing Ltd., New York.

Randy Girls, published by Sierra Publications Adelaide, Australia.

From Here to Virginity, published by W. H. Allen and Co. Ltd., London.

Us, Two, Women, published by Bantam Books Inc. New York.

Lingerie and Lace Vol. 3, No. 4, published by Komar Ltd., U.S.A.

Silk Vol. 2, No. 6, published by Tabor Publications, U.K.

Searchlight No. 326, publisher unknown, Australia.

Chairman: Judge W. M. Willis.

Members: H. B. Dick, L. P. Nikera, J. V. B. McLinden, I. W. Malcolm.

Hearing at Wellington on the 23rd day of May 1984.

Appearances: C. Hillman for Comptroller of Customs. No appearance of importers.

DECISION

THESE publications were seized from 2 private importers by the Customs Department at Tauranga. The Collector has exercised his discretion and has decided to prosecute the importer for an offence under section 48 of the First Schedule of the Customs Act 1966 for importing prohibited imports. The District Court at Tauranga has referred the publications to the Tribunal for classification. One of these publications is Searchlight No. 326. This is a newspaper published fortnightly and as such is outside the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Whether or not it is indecent must be decided by the Court.

The remaining publications can be put in several distinguishing categories.