The Treasury has confirmed concerns were raised about former Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Orr’s conduct.
Its comment comes as it responds to an allegation there was more to Orr’s departure than the public has been led to believe.
NZ Herald Wellington business editor Jenee Tibshraeny speculates 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 (00:00):
Ever, du So Treasury has confirmed concerns were raised about
former Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Or in his conduct. Last
night we talked to the Bank's chair Neil Quiggley about
a claim that Adrian Or had sworn in a meeting
with Treasury staff and also had sworn in a meeting
with Nikola Willis, the Finance Minister. Now, Neil Quiggley wasn't
going to tell us a lot about that. Did he
swear in a meeting with Treasury on the twenty first effair?
(00:22):
I can't comment on that. Why can't you comment on that? Well,
because that's a matter of privacy that I don't that.
I don't think I should discuss. Pretty same say about
the meeting with Nikola? Did he swear in a meeting
with the Finance Minister three days later?
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Well, I've heard that that's been said, but I.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
Can't comment on that. Weren't you at that meeting?
Speaker 2 (00:45):
I was at that meeting?
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Yes, so did he swear? And he can't say anything
about the letter that he apparently sent Adrian Did you
send him an email saying to him, Hey, here's a
whole bunch of specific and concrete alligations against you. About
your behavior. Well, see, I can't go into that head.
Jeanne Tibtrainy is The Herald's Wellington business editor with us. Hello, Janney, Hey,
(01:09):
did he what happened? Tell me, Jane, I'm dying to know.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
Well, I'm dying to know as well. Today the Treasury
was very helpful and it confirmed that Neil Quiggly emailed
a Treasury staffer about All's behavior after a meeting that
they had on February twenty. So we don't know what
exactly about the behavior was raised, but it was obviously
(01:33):
bad enough that the Chairman of the Reserve Bank thought
that he would email the Treasury staffer. So that is
the one bit of fact we know. The interesting thing
here is that the Reserve Bank is being very tight
lipped about what happened around Adrian Or's resignation. It says
it's because it's bound by legalities. You know, it obviously
(01:56):
entered into an agreement with Adrian Or when he left.
There would have been confidence reality clauses. The Reserve Bank
is standing behind those clauses and that's limiting what it
can say. The unusual thing, though, is that the Treasury
appears willing to potentially release this email to me. So
(02:16):
it is unusual that this email can't be released, the
one that Neil quickly sent the Treasury staff. It is
unusual that that can't be released by the Reserve Bank,
but it maybe can be released by the Treasury.
Speaker 1 (02:29):
But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out
it's because the Reserve Bank is the one bound by
the gag order with adrian Or but not Treasury. Right.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
Yes. So now this is where it gets into some
sort of technical thing because the official you know, the
official information that captures all of government. So it is
you know, I think this is something for the lawyers
to figure out. How is it that one agency can
say no and the other one might be able to
say yes. And so the Reserve Bank has said to me, well,
(02:58):
that's legal obligations and different to that of the Treasury.
But you know, if the Treasury can in fact release
this email, then I have to ask, well, what else
can it actually release because myself and a whole bunch
of other people made requests of the Reserve Bank and
the Treasury around Adrianaal's departure and we were largely stonewalled.
(03:21):
So if they released this email, then what else can
they release?
Speaker 1 (03:24):
Well, what else did they not release that they should
have released?
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Well, yes, exactly. This is the thing that we don't know.
Speaker 1 (03:31):
You know what silly buggers gets you called out in
the end day like don't play silly buggers, don't don't
This is because this is clearly what's gone on here.
Tell me something. Do you think that a gag order
that ties the hands of Adrian or and the Reserve
Bank also ties the Finance Minister.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
Well, well, this is a good question because at to
date they all seem to be acting in unison. So
for example, the day that Adrian all resigned and the
following days, my colleagues and I we sent requests under
the Official Information Act. I asked specifically Treasury, Reserve Bank,
and the Finance Minister's Office the same questions, you know,
(04:07):
release information about the circumstances around the resignation. The Reserve
Bank came back with a statement summarizing what happened in
its view and limited set of documents. The Finance Minister's
office also came back with some stuff. For example, that
came back with the document that showed that she was
briefed on answering questions about if adrian Or yelled at
(04:31):
her in a meeting. But largely it seems like that
the requests have been dealt with together. So this is
the interesting thing, you know, should they have been dealt
with separately? So I've actually just I've just made a
complaint to the Onbodsman's office. I think this is the
on Bodsman is going to.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
Need to John Allen.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
It's a new person. I don't know John.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
I think it might be John Allen. And if it's
John Allen, then he doesn't play silly buggers. He should
be okay with it. Listen, Janet, answer me this question, though,
Should they not have answered given us everything that they
possibly could and been as straight up as they possibly
could at the start, because then we wouldn't be like,
how far are we? This is like four and a
half months later and we're still talking about him. Had
(05:13):
they not just offloaded everything at the very start, this
would be a lot better for them, wouldn't it.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
Oh for sure? And you know, it arguably would have
been better for adrian Or as well. And even if
the information wasn't great at the time that made them
all look bad in one way or another, it's surely
that is better. And you know, the more this goes on,
the more we get skeptical and we feel like it's
hard to trust what they say, which just isn't good
(05:39):
for anyone. You know, I don't want to. I don't
want to be that sort of obsessive person who questions,
well I am. I know that's driving me.
Speaker 1 (05:48):
You had I appreciate it. I'm in therewith you two.
Genetive Australia, The Herald's Wellington Business editor. For more from
Heather Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to news talks. It'd
be from four pm weekdays, or follow the podcast on
iHeartRadio
Ever, du So Treasury has confirmed concerns were raised about
former Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Or in his conduct. Last
night we talked to the Bank's chair Neil Quiggley about
a claim that Adrian Or had sworn in a meeting
with Treasury staff and also had sworn in a meeting
with Nikola Willis, the Finance Minister. Now, Neil Quiggley wasn't
going to tell us a lot about that. Did he
swear in a meeting with Treasury on the twenty first effair?
(00:22):
I can't comment on that. Why can't you comment on that? Well,
because that's a matter of privacy that I don't that.
I don't think I should discuss. Pretty same say about
the meeting with Nikola? Did he swear in a meeting
with the Finance Minister three days later?
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Well, I've heard that that's been said, but I.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
Can't comment on that. Weren't you at that meeting?
Speaker 2 (00:45):
I was at that meeting?
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Yes, so did he swear? And he can't say anything
about the letter that he apparently sent Adrian Did you
send him an email saying to him, Hey, here's a
whole bunch of specific and concrete alligations against you. About
your behavior. Well, see, I can't go into that head.
Jeanne Tibtrainy is The Herald's Wellington business editor with us. Hello, Janney, Hey,
(01:09):
did he what happened? Tell me, Jane, I'm dying to know.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
Well, I'm dying to know as well. Today the Treasury
was very helpful and it confirmed that Neil Quiggly emailed
a Treasury staffer about All's behavior after a meeting that
they had on February twenty. So we don't know what
exactly about the behavior was raised, but it was obviously
(01:33):
bad enough that the Chairman of the Reserve Bank thought
that he would email the Treasury staffer. So that is
the one bit of fact we know. The interesting thing
here is that the Reserve Bank is being very tight
lipped about what happened around Adrian Or's resignation. It says
it's because it's bound by legalities. You know, it obviously
(01:56):
entered into an agreement with Adrian Or when he left.
There would have been confidence reality clauses. The Reserve Bank
is standing behind those clauses and that's limiting what it
can say. The unusual thing, though, is that the Treasury
appears willing to potentially release this email to me. So
(02:16):
it is unusual that this email can't be released, the
one that Neil quickly sent the Treasury staff. It is
unusual that that can't be released by the Reserve Bank,
but it maybe can be released by the Treasury.
Speaker 1 (02:29):
But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out
it's because the Reserve Bank is the one bound by
the gag order with adrian Or but not Treasury. Right.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
Yes. So now this is where it gets into some
sort of technical thing because the official you know, the
official information that captures all of government. So it is
you know, I think this is something for the lawyers
to figure out. How is it that one agency can
say no and the other one might be able to
say yes. And so the Reserve Bank has said to me, well,
(02:58):
that's legal obligations and different to that of the Treasury.
But you know, if the Treasury can in fact release
this email, then I have to ask, well, what else
can it actually release because myself and a whole bunch
of other people made requests of the Reserve Bank and
the Treasury around Adrianaal's departure and we were largely stonewalled.
(03:21):
So if they released this email, then what else can
they release?
Speaker 1 (03:24):
Well, what else did they not release that they should
have released?
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Well, yes, exactly. This is the thing that we don't know.
Speaker 1 (03:31):
You know what silly buggers gets you called out in
the end day like don't play silly buggers, don't don't
This is because this is clearly what's gone on here.
Tell me something. Do you think that a gag order
that ties the hands of Adrian or and the Reserve
Bank also ties the Finance Minister.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
Well, well, this is a good question because at to
date they all seem to be acting in unison. So
for example, the day that Adrian all resigned and the
following days, my colleagues and I we sent requests under
the Official Information Act. I asked specifically Treasury, Reserve Bank,
and the Finance Minister's Office the same questions, you know,
(04:07):
release information about the circumstances around the resignation. The Reserve
Bank came back with a statement summarizing what happened in
its view and limited set of documents. The Finance Minister's
office also came back with some stuff. For example, that
came back with the document that showed that she was
briefed on answering questions about if adrian Or yelled at
(04:31):
her in a meeting. But largely it seems like that
the requests have been dealt with together. So this is
the interesting thing, you know, should they have been dealt
with separately? So I've actually just I've just made a
complaint to the Onbodsman's office. I think this is the
on Bodsman is going to.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
Need to John Allen.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
It's a new person. I don't know John.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
I think it might be John Allen. And if it's
John Allen, then he doesn't play silly buggers. He should
be okay with it. Listen, Janet, answer me this question, though,
Should they not have answered given us everything that they
possibly could and been as straight up as they possibly
could at the start, because then we wouldn't be like,
how far are we? This is like four and a
half months later and we're still talking about him. Had
(05:13):
they not just offloaded everything at the very start, this
would be a lot better for them, wouldn't it.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
Oh for sure? And you know, it arguably would have
been better for adrian Or as well. And even if
the information wasn't great at the time that made them
all look bad in one way or another, it's surely
that is better. And you know, the more this goes on,
the more we get skeptical and we feel like it's
hard to trust what they say, which just isn't good
(05:39):
for anyone. You know, I don't want to. I don't
want to be that sort of obsessive person who questions,
well I am. I know that's driving me.
Speaker 1 (05:48):
You had I appreciate it. I'm in therewith you two.
Genetive Australia, The Herald's Wellington Business editor. For more from
Heather Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to news talks. It'd
be from four pm weekdays, or follow the podcast on
iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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