It's been revealed the Reserve Bank chairman sent a warning letter to Treasury in the wake of Adrian Orr's resignation.
Neil Quigley warned that it would 'immediately destroy the goodwill' between the two entities if it publicly released details of the fateful meeting.
NZ Herald Wellington business editor Jenee Tibshraeny explained further.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from News Talk sed B.
Follow this and our wide range of podcast now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Now back to that warning letter that the chair of
the Reserve Bank sent to Treasury over Adrian All. What
happened was Treasury was getting ready to release the minutes
of a meeting between Adrian Or and Treasury officials. They
told this is Treasury. They told the Reserve Bank chair
Neil quickly they were going to do it, which prompted
him to email back that it would immediately destroy the
goodwill between the two organizations if it happened. Genetib Cherny
(00:38):
is The Herald's Wellington business editor and with us Hello Jane, Hi. Ever,
it's pretty extraordinary.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
Yes, I mean immediately destroy the good will. That is
pretty strong language. Now I have seen the minute that
was taken after a meeting on February twenty four, shortly
before Adrianau resigned. This was a meeting between Nicola Willis,
Adrian Or, the head of the Treasury in Rennie, the
Board of the Reserve Bank, Neil Quigley, and some other staff.
(01:04):
And you know, to be honest, there was nothing dramatic
about this minute. Like I don't understand what the what
the drama is. So the minute at the minute said
that Adrian Or made it clear that he disagreed with
the Treasury over the amount of government funding he thought,
you know, the Reserve Bank needed. The minutes also say
that he expressed his frustration regarding the relationship between the
(01:28):
Reserve Bank and Treasury, and then he left the meeting.
Now the minute suggests he left the meeting early. I
had that confirmed. He did leave before he was meant to.
Did he leave quietly? Did he storm out? We don't know,
you know, but I don't think it is crazy for
it to be noted that there was a disagreement between
two departments.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Yeah, it does seem quite wild. Is it possible that actually,
is it possible that what Neil, what made Neil quickly
so upset is because he was in the meeting and
he knew how it went down, and and and any
kind of any kind of confirmation, even if it is
a mild confirmation, is not a great confirmation.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (02:09):
Look, presumably, And I think at that time things were
really rocky. Like we know through other information release that
Adrian Or raised his voice in another meeting with a
staff member from Treasury over this whole funding issue. You know,
Adrian thought the Reserve Bank needed a lot more funding,
so things were tense, and you know, as we've realized,
(02:30):
the way that the information came out was really vague,
so you know, it just doesn't help. It's one of
these these situations where things obviously weren't great, but it doesn't.
It's almost like at the at this point, the cover
up is worse than the crime.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
Ages ago ages ago, though right it totally it jumped
the shark a long time ago. I'll tell you what's
fascinating is that he was angry that Treasury had even
kept notes, which I think is interesting. But also then
you have a look at the Director of Legal Services,
Nick McBride, who writes from from the Reserve Bank to
Treasury and says, even if the note tries to be
quoe careful with its summary, recording such details of the
(03:12):
discussions and enclosing it would undoubtedly inhibit future expression of
blah blah blah blahlah. But he point, I mean, what
he's basically made quite clear there is that the version
that we've got is a very tame version of what
actually went down.
Speaker 3 (03:25):
Well, I mean, I don't know it looks like it,
and you know I don't I've never worked in the
public sector. I don't understand the risk of version that
there seems to be around these things. But historically there
has been tension between the Reserve Bank and the Treasury.
I can think of numerous examples of this, and you know,
it's healthy for there to be some tension between the two,
(03:45):
and there is tension between different government departments. I mean,
we've seen this recently with this whole banking inquiry competition issue,
where we had the Commerce Commission say the Reserve Bank
should change its bank capital rules and then Adrian All
say no, and then the Reserve Bank come back and say, okay,
we will change the rules. So I don't really think
it's the end of the world now, Heather. I do
(04:07):
have some other news for you today that's the related
to this. I've heard back from the Ombudsman this afternoon.
I was one of many people who made complaints about
the way the Reserve Bank had released information about Adrianaor's resignation.
The Ombusman has decided that, you know, the Reserve Bank
was in fact entitled to withhold the information it has,
(04:31):
but that there is an overriding public interest in the
Reserve Bank releasing a summary timeline of the key information requested.
So it sounds like we will get the summary timeline
of information. So we'll get a little bit more, but
not necessarily a whole lot more to answer the questions
which I had, which is quite honestly, why did he resign?
(04:53):
You know, did he choose to resign or was he
kind of push to resign?
Speaker 2 (04:57):
Personal decision?
Speaker 3 (05:01):
Yes, And actually I should just quickly credit Michael Riddell,
who's the person who made these official information requests, and
my colleague j me Nseil who wrote about it for
The Herald.
Speaker 2 (05:10):
Thank you for that. Hey, listen, have a look at
this stuff and then let us know if there's anything
in it. Jane, I appreciate everything about this our nerdal
tenacity here Jane Tipschraeney, the Herald's Wellington Business editor. Interesting.
What I didn't mention earlier is that Nikola Willis has
had to disagree with Neil Quickley again. Nicola Willis told
The Herald she was aware of Nick Neil Quigley's email.
I disagree with the views put forward by the chair
(05:32):
because I think it's entirely appropriate for treasury officials to
take minutes of a significant government meeting. She said, I
don't know how many more times Nichola Willis can disagree
with Neil Quickley and yet retain him in the position. Yes,
it's bloody awkward.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
For more from News Talks at b Listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to a podcast from News Talk sed B.
Follow this and our wide range of podcast now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Now back to that warning letter that the chair of
the Reserve Bank sent to Treasury over Adrian All. What
happened was Treasury was getting ready to release the minutes
of a meeting between Adrian Or and Treasury officials. They
told this is Treasury. They told the Reserve Bank chair
Neil quickly they were going to do it, which prompted
him to email back that it would immediately destroy the
goodwill between the two organizations if it happened. Genetib Cherny
(00:38):
is The Herald's Wellington business editor and with us Hello Jane, Hi. Ever,
it's pretty extraordinary.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
Yes, I mean immediately destroy the good will. That is
pretty strong language. Now I have seen the minute that
was taken after a meeting on February twenty four, shortly
before Adrianau resigned. This was a meeting between Nicola Willis,
Adrian Or, the head of the Treasury in Rennie, the
Board of the Reserve Bank, Neil Quigley, and some other staff.
(01:04):
And you know, to be honest, there was nothing dramatic
about this minute. Like I don't understand what the what
the drama is. So the minute at the minute said
that Adrian Or made it clear that he disagreed with
the Treasury over the amount of government funding he thought,
you know, the Reserve Bank needed. The minutes also say
that he expressed his frustration regarding the relationship between the
(01:28):
Reserve Bank and Treasury, and then he left the meeting.
Now the minute suggests he left the meeting early. I
had that confirmed. He did leave before he was meant to.
Did he leave quietly? Did he storm out? We don't know,
you know, but I don't think it is crazy for
it to be noted that there was a disagreement between
two departments.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Yeah, it does seem quite wild. Is it possible that actually,
is it possible that what Neil, what made Neil quickly
so upset is because he was in the meeting and
he knew how it went down, and and and any
kind of any kind of confirmation, even if it is
a mild confirmation, is not a great confirmation.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (02:09):
Look, presumably, And I think at that time things were
really rocky. Like we know through other information release that
Adrian Or raised his voice in another meeting with a
staff member from Treasury over this whole funding issue. You know,
Adrian thought the Reserve Bank needed a lot more funding,
so things were tense, and you know, as we've realized,
(02:30):
the way that the information came out was really vague,
so you know, it just doesn't help. It's one of
these these situations where things obviously weren't great, but it doesn't.
It's almost like at the at this point, the cover
up is worse than the crime.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
Ages ago ages ago, though right it totally it jumped
the shark a long time ago. I'll tell you what's
fascinating is that he was angry that Treasury had even
kept notes, which I think is interesting. But also then
you have a look at the Director of Legal Services,
Nick McBride, who writes from from the Reserve Bank to
Treasury and says, even if the note tries to be
quoe careful with its summary, recording such details of the
(03:12):
discussions and enclosing it would undoubtedly inhibit future expression of
blah blah blah blahlah. But he point, I mean, what
he's basically made quite clear there is that the version
that we've got is a very tame version of what
actually went down.
Speaker 3 (03:25):
Well, I mean, I don't know it looks like it,
and you know I don't I've never worked in the
public sector. I don't understand the risk of version that
there seems to be around these things. But historically there
has been tension between the Reserve Bank and the Treasury.
I can think of numerous examples of this, and you know,
it's healthy for there to be some tension between the two,
(03:45):
and there is tension between different government departments. I mean,
we've seen this recently with this whole banking inquiry competition issue,
where we had the Commerce Commission say the Reserve Bank
should change its bank capital rules and then Adrian All
say no, and then the Reserve Bank come back and say, okay,
we will change the rules. So I don't really think
it's the end of the world now, Heather. I do
(04:07):
have some other news for you today that's the related
to this. I've heard back from the Ombudsman this afternoon.
I was one of many people who made complaints about
the way the Reserve Bank had released information about Adrianaor's resignation.
The Ombusman has decided that, you know, the Reserve Bank
was in fact entitled to withhold the information it has,
(04:31):
but that there is an overriding public interest in the
Reserve Bank releasing a summary timeline of the key information requested.
So it sounds like we will get the summary timeline
of information. So we'll get a little bit more, but
not necessarily a whole lot more to answer the questions
which I had, which is quite honestly, why did he resign?
(04:53):
You know, did he choose to resign or was he
kind of push to resign?
Speaker 2 (04:57):
Personal decision?
Speaker 3 (05:01):
Yes, And actually I should just quickly credit Michael Riddell,
who's the person who made these official information requests, and
my colleague j me Nseil who wrote about it for
The Herald.
Speaker 2 (05:10):
Thank you for that. Hey, listen, have a look at
this stuff and then let us know if there's anything
in it. Jane, I appreciate everything about this our nerdal
tenacity here Jane Tipschraeney, the Herald's Wellington Business editor. Interesting.
What I didn't mention earlier is that Nikola Willis has
had to disagree with Neil Quickley again. Nicola Willis told
The Herald she was aware of Nick Neil Quigley's email.
I disagree with the views put forward by the chair
(05:32):
because I think it's entirely appropriate for treasury officials to
take minutes of a significant government meeting. She said, I
don't know how many more times Nichola Willis can disagree
with Neil Quickley and yet retain him in the position. Yes,
it's bloody awkward.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
For more from News Talks at b Listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.