Category: Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Health New Zealand (HNZ) has been warned that keeping financial control is “one of the thorniest” aspects of the government’s rapid push to devolution.

The government blamed loss of financial control when it sacked the central agency’s board two years ago.

Health Minister Simeon Brown on Tuesday promised regions and districts would get more say over budgets and hiring from 1 July so that decisions on medical care were made closer to the patient.

Late last year he ordered HNZ to decentralise rapidly, and this week he said, “This is the most significant structural change our government is making to improve how the health system operates.”

But the latest HNZ internal report on devolution said “people capability is an extreme risk” in the finance and operations area, with centralisation diverting resources.

“Many local teams are under-resourced in financial management,” said the report done in January for a new devolution committee.

Brown on Wednesday said there was a “huge” amount of work underway to build back the local leadership disempowered by over-centralisation.

“We are making sure we’ve got the capability around operations, around finance, human resources, all of those things are being looked at.”

The January report by consultants Deloitte laid that out, he said.

The report has not been publicly released though RNZ has seen parts of it.

‘Clearly underpowered’

Former HNZ Te Whatu Ora board chair Rob Campbell expressed serious misgivings.

“They quickly need to get some financial resources into those regions and districts which are clearly underpowered in this respect,” Campbell said on Wednesday. “That’s the first thing they have to do.”

The devolution plan puts executive regional directors in charge of rebuilding the capability but at a time when money was exceedingly tight said the report.

“The financial challenges are going to increase in 2026/27, meaning there will be even more pressure on financial controls to reduce the deficit …. from $200m to breakeven.

“Currently there will be little to no capacity remaining within the baseline next year without significant productivity improvements and prioritisation decisions,” it said.

Campbell said it was an unenviable task.

“They’re being told they’re getting more autonomy. The truth is they’re really not, and they don’t have the money to do that anyway.”

‘Fully coming into effect’ on 1 July

The devolution report contains self-assessments by Health NZ’s various business units showing some progress, and a lot of risks, around devolving key clinical and service decisions back to the four health regions and 20 districts.

One section on “reduced financial visibility” said, “One of the thorniest aspects of devolution is financial control – ‘who holds the purse strings’ and how to prevent overspending or inequities.”

Financial visibility was fragmented across 20 health boards before 2022’s centralisation, then smeared after it by “confusion … and weak controls” at Health NZ Te Whatu Ora. It then began its nosedive towards a forecast billion-dollar-plus deficit.

The centralisation also pulled experience and skills into the centre in Wellington, the report said.

This was compounded by hundreds of cuts to support jobs since 2024 in a savings drive.

The January report outlined “critical” current gaps and “staff churn” in the workforce, such as in data and digital, analysis and finance, that supports the frontline doctors and nurses.

Under a heading ‘Options to accelerate devolution’ it said, “There is a risk of not understanding cost structures or nuances between districts, further compounding the risk that pushing the funding allocation and management of each region and district to the lower levels quickly may result in loss of financial visibility across the sector again.”

It said some fixes might take 18 months to three years.

However, Brown said on Tuesday the changes underway would “ensure a nationally planned, locally and regionally delivered health system, will come into effect on 1 July”.

Hospitals would be able to recruit and deploy staff without central sign-off but with delegated budgets and responsibility to meet targets in the district or region.

On Wednesday Brown reiterated the 1 July delivery date.

The Deloitte report talked about the many initiatives being done by HNZ “to make sure that districts and regions are ready for 1 July when the devolved operating model … is fully coming into effect”, he said.

“Of course there’s risks in changing an operating model but at the same time the last government … left local clinicians not able to make some of the key decisions.”

Globally, health ran better when a devolved operating model split decision-making between national, regional and local levels, Brown said.

New policy on who decides what

The devolution plan depended on four executive regional directors at the top being “best placed to manage performance and build capability, which can vary significantly between districts”.

Already, a new policy on who gets to decide on hiring and firing, and on spending, was being rolled out.

Papers RNZ has seen showed the policy was approved by the board in December.

They showed there must be consultation with the regional or national head of human resources for all hires, or for creating new positions within budget; and to create any new positions outside budget needed “consultation/approval” from either of these heads or from the executive leadership team.

Campbell said, “You start off looking like they’ve got a lot of power, and then when you really read through it, they don’t.

“Even on items that are within budget and full-time equivalent allocations, there is a need for … consultation, and in a hierarchical organisation like this consultation means getting approval.”

The biggest difference was a bigger regional element compared to what HNZ was building at the time he was sacked in 2023 for a political attack on National’s water infrastructure policy.

Yet it was “still very tightly controlled” and regional and district managers were “in a no-win situation”, Campbell said.

‘Divergent approaches’

In addition to lack of finance staff, the January report added “fragmentation” to the hurdles for devolution.

“Without strong governance structures and clear national guardrails, regions and districts risk adopting divergent approaches, weakening system-wide alignment and equity in service delivery,” it said.

Those governance structures were still being set up.

Campbell said good governance meant having a business model everyone grasped. “People throughout the organisation still find it very hard to understand what the responsibility for particular issues is.”

The report said Health NZ had had to build national financial guardrails after its lurch towards a big deficit.

“If HNZ devolves too quickly or carelessly, they risk losing the opportunity to use its current … structure and scale” to address system problems, it said.

On the plus side, devolution could help districts take more responsibility for day-to-day spending and not expect topdown bailouts, citing how Australian state hospitals used to have a “rollercoaster of budget blowouts and rescues”.

Brown’s plan retained the Wellington-based bureaucracy for strategy, planning, policies, standards and system integration.

However, the report said many of the national plans existed in name but “have not yet been developed or published, and the decision-making framework to support accountability is still developing”.

Building districts’ financial capability an ongoing focus – HNZ

Late on Wednesday Health New Zealand told RNZ that according to the Deloitte report the agency’s budgeting, planning, reporting, and performance management disciplines had been strengthened since a review of financial management at the end of 2024.

“These improvements have ‘reduced the risk of a loss of financial control levers’,” it quoted.

Building financial capability of districts and regions was an ongoing focus, said executive national director of strategy performance improvement, Jess Smaling.

“Regions and districts will have clear budgets, and delegated authority to make decisions based on the unique local needs,” she said in a statement.

“Budgets will be based on expected activity to meet those local needs, within the resources available to Health New Zealand.”

A national funding board and human resources oversight committee had been replaced by four regional investment committees and “people and culture committees”, along with a national version of that to consider human resource policies so there was national consistency.

A new national investment committee would make funding decisions above the authority of the four executive regional directors.

“Hiring decisions will be made in the regions and districts, within available budgets,” said Smaling.

Those within existing FTE and budget would only require the approval of the hiring manager’s immediate manager.

Decision-makers using delegated authority had to stay within approved budgets and limits, and comply with Health NZ policies and legislation, she added.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

An immigration adviser caught selling a fake job at her husband’s company in taped phone conversations – after he lost his first fake job there – has lost her licence.

Heidi Castelucci, also known as Qian Yu, coached a migrant in how the $70,000 scam would work and how to hide it from authorities, the immigration advisers’ complaints and disciplinary tribunal ruled. Five other complaints from visa applicants against her have also been upheld by the tribunal, which described it as a “concerning pattern of behaviour”.

She worked at Auckland firm Liberty Consulting, trading as Liberty Immigration, but the Chinese migrant’s job was a visa facade and was terminated.

“Ms Yu then persuaded the complainant to resign on the basis he would be re-employed as a manager at twice the salary. This role also did not exist. He had to pay an unlawful premium for the position. He would pay his own salary and tax. He would have to find other employment to support himself and his family, as well as fund the premium (the Tribunal assuming he would be repaid his salary).

“Ms Yu coached him regarding this arrangement, including advice to hide it. All of this was unlawful, as she well knew. The gravity of the misconduct here is at the upper end of serious. The integrity of the immigration system is compromised by fake jobs. They strike at the heart of the system and public trust in it. The involvement of a licensed adviser in creating such a scam is to be condemned.”

The man signed a new employment contract with the agency, whose owner also runs the New Zealand Language Institute and Foreign Exchange Program, as a $100,000-a-year business development manager, being told he would pay $70,000 for the company to support his residence visa – that he could fund through cash-in-hand jobs elsewhere.

He paid one $7500 instalment for the non-existent job before raising the alarm and leaving New Zealand with his children. The tribunal said a fee of $2000-$4000 would have been reasonable for immigration advice for his work visas, but in all he paid $25,588.

Castelucci/Yu had not responded to any of the allegations, but when the tribunal turned to considering penalties she expressed deep remorse, and pointed to “a concentrated period of profound personal, medical and psychological collapse”.

“The extenuating circumstances advanced appear to have occurred after she set up the scam with the fake job,” the tribunal concluded.

“The public need to be protected from advisers who conceive arrangements themselves to exploit clients and the immigration system. Her dishonesty here warrants cancellation of her licence on its own. Despite one belated letter acknowledging her wrongdoing and expressing remorse, the tribunal is not persuaded she has ‘turned a leaf’.”

She received abusive and threatening messages and phone calls when the offending became public, she said, and been forced to repay fees when other migrants became aware of what she had done.

Publicity from the case had already severely damaged her professional reputation, her licence was suspended, many clients terminated retainers and she suffered substantial loss and medical fees.

The tribunal fined her $4000 and noted it could only cancel her licence for a maximum of two years, with the registrar of immigration advisers deciding if she could be relicensed.

Job tokens

The migrant’s employment advocate May Moncur said lifetime bans should be available for cases involving dishonesty. “I think if it’s a character issue, two years is too short. I would say a life ban would be more appropriate. And also that would send a message. When the deterrent is severe enough, that would deliver a strong message.”

Jobs were still being sold via ‘tokens’ INZ gave to companies that gained accreditation to recruit migrants.

“The worst I’ve seen, you know, agents, these kind of proxies, recruited probably dozens or even a hundred workers. I don’t know what kind of penalties or sanctions they are subjected to. It’s very disappointing, actually, that they’ve made millions in illegal incomes, and New Zealand benefited nothing.

“Those migrants, they paid a huge premium to come to New Zealand, hoping to have a genuine employment but ended up with no job, no income, and not only themselves, also their family members were affected by such a scam.”

It also created a distorted economy, with tax revenue losses from workers being paid under the table.

“It really undermines the real employment opportunities, because some companies, they could make a profit out of selling job tokens, which is still going on nowadays.

“Some people may think naively this has nothing to do with them and they are not in the immigration sector. It’s not good for anyone. It’s really affecting everybody in New Zealand.”

One recent example was a woman charged almost 200,000 RMB ($49,000) for a job, she said.

“I’m still being approached by some migrant workers and I understand there are licensed immigration advisors who are actively involved in the recruitment process and outside their immigration services and all responsibility, they are acting as proxies to charge illegal premiums.”

The Registrar of Companies has initiated action to remove Liberty Consulting, an immigration firm based in the North Shore suburb of Rosedale, from its register. A new company set up by Castelucci’s husband last year, Global Pathways Consulting, operates from the same address.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Too many rules, too little judgement – why one Kiwi professor says the country is strangling itself with red tape.

Professor Natasha Hamilton-Hart has a simple rule for stupid rules: get rid of them.

She says the country’s love for red tape is making life harder and society less effective.

So, she’s written a book about it.

It’s aptly called Stupid Rules: Reducing Red Tape and Making Organisations More Effective and Accountable.

She tells The Detail that modern workplaces are trapped in a culture of compliance that replaces judgement with bureaucracy.

“We have too many stupid rules, which are the rules that regulate when we really should delegate authority, and if we actually ceded a little discretion to authority, we would paradoxically have more freedom, and we would get more of what we want,” she says.

In this episode, Hamilton-Hart, who is a professor in management and international business at the University of Auckland, gives examples of both personal and professional experiences.

The personal: volunteering with a conservation group, helping teams to get rid of pest plants in urban areas.

“The first time I did this, headquarters sent us this health and safety form which had a matrix on it, and you were supposed to list every conceivable adverse event, and then you were supposed to attach a probability of it happening and how serious it would be if it did happen.

“And when you start thinking about it, well, actually, people could injure themselves pretty badly if you take them gardening, they might even have a heart attack.

“The point was, if you took it literally, and go, ‘we are not taking a defibrillator out with us on our weeding expedition, so if someone had a heart attack, actually they would probably die,’ we wouldn’t have been able to do it at all.

“So obviously I was supposed to lie when I filled out this paperwork,” she says. “But that’s kinda ridiculous, that has gone overboard.”

Changing a hyphen

Her professional experience included a hyphen in a name on a university website, which was wrong.

“I thought, ‘no problem,’ I got my office manager to send the web people a note and say, ‘can you take the hyphen out?’.

“This had to get escalated to the head of administration in my faculty, because I was told that the rule book said the hyphen had to be in there.

“I’m pretty sure the rule book doesn’t have naming rights over study centres.”

She says rule books can become shorter and more effective if companies, sectors, governments, and organisations cede authority to people in a hierarchy or empower them to decide what is appropriate.

She points to General Motors, which once had a clunky employee dress code that grew to 10 pages long.

But when Mary Barra became vice president of global human resources in 2009, she replaced the whole thing with two words: “dress appropriately”.

Hamilton-Hart says this sort of change achieves two things: it makes common sense and requires authority.

Employees gain more discretion, but managers will have to step in when someone gets the dress code wrong.

And this is what the book is about.

“What inspired me, if inspired is the right word, was actually coming back to New Zealand after many, many years away, and mostly working in Southeast Asia, where, whatever else they suffer from, tends not to be stupid rules. And coming to New Zealand and thinking, why can’t we get things done?

“Why can’t we build buildings that don’t leak? Why can’t we have finance companies that don’t go bankrupt? Why is it so hard to actually deliver the stuff that people want delivered?

“There is no disagreement – we want better hospitals, we want better schools, we want to raise literacy rates, but we don’t seem to be able to do it.

“And I know there will never be just one reason, but I sort of got curious about what stops organisations delivering on their purpose.”

She says she discovered a “flight from authority” in recent decades, which has stripped organisations of command capacity and resulted in workplaces where employees tick boxes rather than exercise initiative.

She says the answer isn’t to abandon rules altogether – but to rethink how organisations govern themselves.

That means trusting expertise, strengthening leadership authority, and holding people responsible for outcomes rather than compliance.

In other words, fewer rules – but clearer responsibility.

She says if nothing changes, the country could be left with more bureaucracy, less effectiveness, and a system where everyone follows the rules, but nothing works quite as it should.

Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here.

You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook or following us on Twitter.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Fellow Melbourne based New Zealander, Bec Lister, who has lived across the Tasman for 13 years, shares Maclean’s yearnings.

“I love autumn in Melbourne, it’s probably my favourite time of year in Melbourne, but I also know of all of the feijoas that I’m missing out on.”

Both have found ways to source the fruit in Melbourne, which occasionally means paying prices that would make many Kiwis’ eyes water.

Maclean has seen them selling on Facebook Marketplace for about AU$15 (about NZ$16.10) a kilo, but when she was hit with a feijoa craving while in a fruit shop, she paid far more.

“I picked a few out thinking these will probably cost me but might not be too bad. When I took them over, she said, oh, that’ll be $2.49 (AUD) each. I paid $7.50 (AUD) for three medium-sized feijoas.”

New Zealander Jen Jones, who has called Melbourne home for 13 years, has seen some other novel ways new Zealanders source feijoas.

“There’s the Facebook good karma networks and things where people would say, ‘hey, I’m here from New Zealand, I’m craving for feijoas. Does anyone have any?’”

But Jones enjoys foraging for the fruit in her local neighbourhood.

“We ride our bikes down the laneways and just collect feijoas, and sometimes we even go up to a door and say, ‘hey, we’ve noticed you’ve got all this fruit on the ground, do you mind if we collect them?’”

Jones says finding a good tree is a year-round mission.

“Through the year, you drive around and feijoa trees are on the radar. You kind of just log it in your mind and know that when Autumn comes around, you might just drop by and see how it’s going.”

For Lister, a generous workmate has provided her a steady supply this season. She sits with another New Zealander in the staff room at the school where they work spooning out the juicy flesh.

“There was a massive bowl of feijoa skins just on our desk … all of our workmates were just like sitting around, being like, ‘what the hell is going on? What are these things?’”

Mark O’Connor, an Australian poet and self-proclaimed “feijoa expert”, explains why the feijoa has “not been taken all that seriously as a fruit” outside of New Zealand.

“When they were setting up the city of Canberra, which was an artificial city set up as a capital, when you arrived you had a right to get something like six free trees from the government nursery and 40 free shrubs.”

Feijoas were counted as a shrub and were recommended due to their ability to tolerate the soil and climate of Canberra. But they were never prioritised for eating.

“All over Australia, almost any nursery will have feijoas in it for sale at any time. But they will not be selected for fruit.”

O’Connor explains this has led to a low opinion of feijoas as fruit, and many people consider them as similar to a loquat and other trees where the fruit is “not taken seriously” and considered only good for jam.

O’Connor grows feijoas in his Canberra backyard and is often giving them away – there are no surprises who his main beneficiaries are.

“I certainly give them away in bucket loads, especially to people from New Zealand.”

O’Connor is interested in cultivating the fruit, and is in awe of the state of play in New Zealand.

“You don’t know how lucky you are in New Zealand that you can go to Bunnings and find half a dozen of the very best varieties on sale for really the price of seedlings.”

While Australian-based New Zealanders may be misunderstood for devouring feijoas, Lister describes it as something of a comfort.

“You do get homesick. I guess that’s one thing that can kind of comfort you is having that love for feijoas.”

Which is something echoed by Jones.

“There’s a bit of a homesickness that comes with it, and you end up more keen for them than you probably would if you were back home. It’s more than just eating the fruit, it’s a bit of nostalgia. It’s a taste of home.”

Lister also has some advice for Australians.

“You can treat Kiwis like shit all year round, but if you bring them feijoas on one day they will love you for life.”

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The executive director of the Firearms Safety Authority has been cleared of misconduct following an employment investigation in relation to disgraced former Deputy Commissioner Jevon McSkimming.

The investigation says that given the knowledge Angela Brazier had when providing a reference check for McSkimming, it would have been “prudent” for her to disclose the fact he was receiving harassing emails and that there was a police investigation.

However, the investigation found there were “shortcomings” in terms of how the Public Service Commission (PSC) obtained the reference check and that Brazier’s conduct did not bring police into disrepute and therefore could not be considered to amount to misconduct.

Speaking to RNZ, Brazier says the investigation was “another waste of taxpayers’ money” and wants police to publicly clear her name.

• Do you know more? Email sam.sherwood@rnz.co.nz

The Independent Police Conduct Authority’s report recommended employment investigations against three staff – former Assistant Commissioner Paul Basham, Detective Superintendent Chris Page, and Brazier.

Police Commissioner Richard Chambers engaged Kristy McDonald KC to lead the investigations.

The investigation into Brazier – who announced her retirement in January – related to a reference check she provided to the Public Service Commission when McSkimming was vying for the role of Interim Commissioner in 2024.

The IPCA said that when the Public Service Commission approached her for a reference check, she knew McSkimming had an affair, that he was being “harassed” with emails from the woman and that former Deputy Commissioner Tania Kura had informed McSkimming that she had to investigate him as part of the police response.

However, Brazier told the PSC she had nothing relevant to disclose. She told the IPCA she did not think her knowledge was relevant to PSC’s question.

“[Brazier’s] disclosure was inadequate in light of her knowledge at the time,” the IPCA said.

RNZ has obtained a copy of the McDonald’s investigation report, dated 19 February.

In the report, McDonald said Brazier declined to be interviewed but did provide additional information she requested, including her response to the draft IPCA report.

McDonald said the reference obtained by the PSC on 8 October 2024 was part of what the PSC described as a “shortened version of their vetting process”.

“Following Commissioner Coster’s resignation in 2024, an interim Commissioner needed to be appointed. By convention the longest serving statutory Deputy Commissioner is appointed, which in this case would have been Mr McSkimming.”

She said McSkimming went through a “thorough vetting process” run by PSC when he was appointed statutory Deputy Commissioner in 2023. This included full reference and probity checks.

However, when considering McSkimming for interim Commissioner the PSC took a “shortened version”.

This was for several reasons including that McSkimming had been deputy commissioner for about 18 months and had already been interim Commissioner on several occasions and “by convention” was the person who was going to be appointed to the role.

“Mr McSkimming had recently been thoroughly vetted when appointed as a statutory Deputy Commissioner. Therefore, there was an anticipated inevitability of Mr McSkimming’s appointment which impacted the manner in which the probity checks were undertaken.

“As a result, the normal checks were not conducted in an in-depth way as would typically be done. For example, only three references were obtained and they were from people nominated by Mr McSkimming.”

McDonald said the PSC’s focus was whether anything had occurred in the 18 month period from when McSkimming had been vetted for his current role.

“This context coloured the approach PSC took to the appointment process, including the reference obtained from Ms Brazier.”

As part of her investigation, McDonald interviewed the PSC employee who took the reference check from Brazier. McDonald said she understood the employee was not interviewed by the IPCA.

The employee confirmed she called Brazier on 8 October 2024 and asked Brazier if she was able to provide a reference check for McSkimming. Brazier agreed and the interview was then carried out.

“As such, Ms Brazier did not have time to reflect on matters that she may have wished to discuss,” McDonald said.

The reference checking process took up to 7 minutes, McDonald estimated, finishing at 1.45pm.

The employee did not tell Brazier she should provide “full and frank answers” at the beginning of the interview.

“In response to the Integrity Question Ms Brazier stated: ‘Nothing that I am aware of that would impact [Mr McSkimming’s] ability to do the job or bring the agency or the NZ government into disrepute’.”

McDonald said all of Brazier’s answers were brief, and that the employee did not ask any follow up questions “to try to illicit more information from Ms Brazier”.

McDonald said it was “clear that there were shortcomings in terms of the way the reference was obtained from Ms Brazier”.

This included that the employee did not read the PSC script that interviewers typically read out at the beginning of reference interviews.

The script used by the employee did not include any statements designed to encourage Brazier to provide “fulsome responses.”

Asked why this was, the employee told McDonald she believed the interview with Brazier was “an open and closed reference check”.

“The PSC Employee stated that: given that Mr McSkimming was the longest serving Deputy Commissioner he was the obvious candidate for the interim Commissioner role; that she did not think that there was anything wrong with Mr McSkimming; and that her job was to see if Mr McSkimming still met the fit and proper person test – having been found to satisfy this requirement in 2023.”

The employee also said that the then Assistant Commissioner at PSC had already spoken to Coster before Brazier was contacted to provide a reference. Coster had told the PSC about McSkimming’s affair, and that the woman was being prosecuted for harassment of McSkimming, McDonald said.

McDonald said a manager at PSC said that if this information was known by the employee, then they ought to have asked further questions of Brazier given her “short but caveated response to the integrity question”.

McDonald said in response to her draft findings, the PSC said the employee could not have known that information at the time she called Brazier. This was because the PSC said Coster was interviewed only shortly before Brazier was spoken to. Following her final report, McDonald issued an addendum which said while additional documents provided by the PSC showed when the interview with Coster began, it did not say when it ended.

“Given the above and the fact that when I interviewed the PSC Employee she repeatedly stated that she already knew, at a high level, about the disclosures made by Commissioner Coster prior to her interviewing Ms Brazier, it is possible that [a manager at PSC] had already spoken to the PSC Employee about those disclosures before the PSC Employee interviewed Ms Brazier.”

Regardless of whether or not the PSC employee knew about the discussion before calling Brazier, it did not “materially alter” her findings in relation to Brazier’s conduct.

McDonald said the employee had only recently started conducting reference interviews and had done about 15 previously which were “for very different roles”.

“The PSC has now changed the manner in which it obtains references, including how it asks integrity questions and has provided additional training to interviewers. The PSC Employee confirmed that the manner in which she conducts reference interviews now is significantly different to the way she approached Ms Brazier’s interview.”

McDonald concluded that given the knowledge Brazier had when providing the reference it would have been “prudent” for her to disclose the fact that McSkimming was receiving harassing emails and that there was a police investigation into those emails – even if she believed that investigation looked at him as a complainant.

“Such information was still relevant contextual information. Given Ms Brazier’s work experience, having worked in senior positions for the Police for over twenty years, she ought to have understood the relevance of such information.

“I have considered, in light of the factual findings I have made, whether Ms Brazier’s conduct could be viewed as amounting to a breach of the Police Code of Conduct by bringing Police into disrepute. My recommendation is that it does not.”

McDonald said while Brazier “could have been more forthcoming”, there were several “highly relevant” factors.

This included that the PSC employee did not advise Brazier of the expectation to provide full disclosure of any relevant information she may have at the start of the interview, and that they did not do any follow up questions.

“Ms Brazier was not given advanced warning of the interview and it is likely that she did not have time to prepare or reflect on matters that she may wish to discuss.”

McDonald also noted that the IPCA did not interview the PSC employee as part of their investigation.

“And, therefore, did not take account of the manner in which the interview was conducted before making its findings against Ms Brazier.”

On 27 February, Brazier received a letter from police confirming that Deputy Commissioner Mike Pannett had accepted McDonald’s recommendation that Brazier’s conduct did not amount to a breach of the Police Code of Conduct and was not misconduct. He also agreed no further action was required.

Brazier told RNZ the investigation was a “waste of taxpayers’ money”, but was “pleased” when she read that the report cleared her of any misconduct but was not surprised as she did not think she had done anything wrong.

“I was annoyed that the IPCA hadn’t interviewed the person that did the reference check with me… they basically made their decision without any facts about what the referee process was.”

She said the IPCA report and the subsequent fallout had a significant impact on her.

“It impacted on the way I felt about the organisation, it impacted on my health and wellbeing, because it was publicised and my name was in the media, and that would have made it very difficult for me to find another job in the public sector whilst I had an under investigation against my name, even though there was nothing to it.

“It also meant that my team will have been questioning what my involvement was. It had wide-reaching impact, unfairly.”

After announcing her retirement, Brazier told RNZ she felt “targeted” by police leadership. She said this week she stood by those comments.

“It’s been completely unfair. I’m not the only person that’s been targeted. If you were to look at the number of people that have left, kind of under a cloud, I guess, over the last 18 months, then, yeah, a lot of people who have worked very hard and have been very credible and trustworthy individuals have left.”

Brazier her reference check was done “very quickly with no prior notice”.

“It was not a thorough interview in terms of a reference checking process for a senior role. So I think that they should have owned that from the outset, but instead they try and point the finger at me.”

She said that when she was interviewed by the PSC there was nothing she thought that would or could prevent McSkimming doing the job at the time.

“If they had asked me if he had had an affair, I would have been very clear, because my choice then would have been tell the truth or tell a lie, and I would have told the truth without question of a doubt.

“But it wasn’t. It was never tabled in that way. So I didn’t feel that it was, it was an important element of his ability to do the job, because he had been a statutory deputy for a number of years and had regularly covered for the commissioner, so he had no issues with doing the job, in my mind, even though he’d had an affair, but it was so long ago.”

In a statement to RNZ on questions about the investigation into Brazier, Deputy Commissioner Mike Pannett said police had the same privacy obligations as any other employer and therefore could not provide any information or comment.

“As previously announced, Ms Brazier is retiring from her position at the New Zealand Firearms Safety Authority in April.”

Police said two of the investigations being carried out by McDonald remained in progress.

“Police will not be commenting on the findings.”

Brazier is “unhappy” police won’t publicly confirm she was cleared of misconduct.

“They could have said there was no finding of misconduct or no breach of the Code of Conduct about me… I’m happy for them to say that, because it’s my privacy that apparently they’re trying to protect. So I don’t see why they couldn’t say that… they’re choosing not to.”

She believes police have not given thought to her being a “loyal, hardworking, trustworthy employee”.

“They have just gone about carte blanche doing an investigation on this and on that, without actually considering me as a senior member of police for over 20 years with no history of ever having any sorts of issues, they just went straight to investigation.”

A Public Service Commission spokesperson told RNZ the matter was “thoroughly and independently examined by the IPCA”.

“The IPCA found that disclosures made to the Public Service Commission during the 2024 interim Commissioner appointment process were inadequate and fell well short of what would reasonably be expected in a process of that significance.

“Separately, inquiries made by the Public Service Commission to the IPCA confirmed that a complaint was under active consideration at the time. As a result, Mr McSkimming was not recommended for appointment to the interim role.”

The PSC also commissioned an independent review by Miriam Dean KC into its reference checks and probity processes for senior Police appointments such as the Police Commissioner and Deputy Police Commissioners.

“The Commission accepted the findings of the Dean Review in full and has implemented improvements to strengthen its appointment processes and disclosure requirements.

“Ms McDonald carried out a confidential employment investigation for Police into the conduct of one of their former employees. Any findings or actions are therefore a matter for Police.”

A IPCA spokesperson told RNZ that in drafting their report, they relied on the file note of PSC’s reference check with Brazier.

“We also had access to Miriam Dean KC’s report, which had considered the way PSC conducted reference checks. Further, we relied on the evidence of Ms Brazier, including her submissions during our natural justice process. She did not deny the non-disclosure.”

The spokeperson also referred to paragraphs of the report in which Brazier “provided us with reasons for why she did not disclose relevant information”.

“We have not seen the employment investigation report.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The Employment Relations Authority found Fire and Emergency (FENZ) breached good faith and its duty to consult under its collective agreement with unions in how it handled its restructure proposal last year.

FENZ proposed in November last year to cut 140 positions and make changes to 700 roles.

Of these, both the Public Service Association (PSA) and New Zealand Professional Firefighters Union (NZPFA) said 97 non-firefighting roles would go, and 66 significantly changed.

The ruling released on Wednesday found FENZ did not consult early enough to allow for consultation on whether the change should occur and the reasons for the change.

“After consultation commenced, FENZ has not demonstrated it engaged with the unions motivated by a desire to reach consensus or used genuine effort to respond to the views of those being consulted, when the unions communicated with FENZ about its views on the process FENZ had adopted,” said the ruling by authority member Sarah Kennedy-Martin.

She found that FENZ breached its statutory obligation of good faith, saying the timing of the release of the consultation document happened when PSA was tied up with bargaining, and NZPFA was having its annual conference.

Kennedy-Martin said this was not conduct aimed at “maintaining a productive employment relationship”.

The authority member said all parties agreed that the issue of compliance orders could be reserved, and FENZ indicated it would consult with the unions in accordance with the authority’s conclusions.

In a statement to RNZ, FENZ acknowledged the decision.

“We acknowledge the findings that we could have done more in regards to consulting with the unions. We are now considering the findings and working through what this means for our next steps”.

Unions vindicated, want to see FENZ and govenrment commit to no job losses

PSA’s national secretary Fleur Fitzsimons said the ruling was damning for FENZ, and a significant victory for all FENZ workers.

“FENZ worked up a sweeping restructure in secret for months, then gave unions 24 hours’ notice before dropping it on the whole organisation including during the NZPFU annual conference and while PSA bargaining was under way. The authority has confirmed that was unlawful,” she said.

“What we now need to see is FENZ and the government take this proposal off the table, to commit to investing in FENZ, and to guarantee that no one will lose their job,” said Fitzsimons.

The roles affected by FENZ’s proposal included critical expertise, such as training for firefighters and volunteers, and roles helping communities understand fire prevention work, said Fitzsimons.

“These job losses are dangerous for all New Zealand,” she said.

NZPFU’s national secretary Wattie Watson said the madness of the restructure had to stop.

The union said some workers have had to live with the uncertainty of their future employment repeatedly, during FENZ’s rollercoaster of restructures since its establishment in 2017.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

A Jetstar plane swerved off the runway after landing at Christchurch because the pilot accidentally put the thrust lever on to full power causing the plane to accelerate, investigators say.

Passengers aboard the Airbus A320 plane travelling from Auckland reported a bumpy and “frightening” landing on 31 May 2024, although no one was injured.

The Transport Accident Investigation Commission (TAIC)’s report out on Thursday put the accident down to pilot error but also a lack of proper training from Jetstar.

Chief investigator of accidents Louise Cook said during the flight one of the plane’s three hydraulic systems failed and the plane lost the ability to use its nosewheel to steer.

The crew followed standard operating procedures and continued with the flight to land at Christchurch where they planned to use differential braking to steer off the runway onto the rapid exit taxiway.

The landing went well until the crew lost directional control and the plane veered off the taxiway, hit an aerodrome signboard and continued across the grass until stopping back on the main runway, Cook said.

“The crew did a great job of landing the plane, had they stopped and then been towed off there would’ve been no issues,” she said.

“But they were trying to do the right thing and clear the runway so that other planes could use it, and so used the rapid exit way, and as they went to do that that’s when the pilot thought they were putting it into idle but in fact put the thrust lever forward into climb and full power.”

Cook said the pilots were likely so focused on making that exit they missed important cues that the position of the thrust levers was not as intended.

“On the face of it, this option appeared safe and achievable to the pilots because Airbus documentation, repeated in Jetstar’s Flight Crew Techniques Manual, provided no guidance on use of differential braking specifically for steering off the runway via a rapid exit,” she said.

A Jetstar spokesperson said the airline had since changed its guidance to flight crews.

“We’ve worked closely with the regulator and Airbus to fully understand what occurred and have strengthened our procedures to help prevent a recurrence and ensure the ongoing safety and resilience of our operations,” Jetstar said.

TAIC said Airbus had accepted the commission’s recommendation to revise aircraft manuals and instructor guidance to mitigate the risk that other pilots might move the thrust levers while on the ground to an unintended position.

Airbus planed to do this in April and May 2026, it said.

“This accident also highlights the importance of maintenance engineers conducting a detailed inspection of new parts for potential damage before installation. In this case, a titanium hydraulic pipe was just 1mm out of shape – slightly oval, not round. It is very likely the deformity occurred when the pipe’s packaging was damaged in transit between Airbus warehouses in 2015,” the commission said.

“The damage was not detected before or after installation and failed after 18 months of service.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand