He voiced his concern about the “tenor of dialogue” at meetings Orr had with Treasury officials on February 20 and Willis on February 24.
And, he questioned whether Orr would be able to do his job with less government funding than he deemed necessary.
Orr responded on March 3, rejecting the assertions in the letter, but agreeing there was a lack of trust between the parties.
He then resigned on March 5 on the condition the board withdrew the letter it sent him on February 27.
His “exit agreement” was approved and entered into on March 6.
When Quigley fronted media on March 5, he refused to detail what happened, other than to say the resignation was a “personal decision” made by Orr.
It wasn’t until June 11 that the Reserve Bank said Orr resigned because he disagreed with the board over the amount of government funding to pitch for.
The Reserve Bank provided details of the letter and exit agreement in the form of a summary timeline.
This is what the Ombudsman instructed it to do, after receiving numerous complaints (including from the Herald) over the Reserve Bank’s handling of information releases related to Orr’s departure.
The Ombudsman didn’t compel the Reserve Bank to release additional documents, including the exit agreement or the letter the board sent Orr on February 27. Indeed, the board and Orr agreed for this to be scrapped.
However, information previously released by Treasury revealed Orr lost his cool in a meeting with a Treasury staffer on February 20. Quigley emailed the staffer afterwards to apologies on Orr’s behalf.
Orr then left a meeting he had with Quigley, Willis, Treasury chief executive Iain Rennie and other staff on February 24 early, expressing frustration over the relationship between the Reserve Bank and Treasury.
Another previously released document shows Quigley wanted details of the February 24 meeting kept under wraps.
He had a go at Treasury for taking detailed minutes of the meeting, and said that releasing them under the Official Information Act (OIA) would “immediately destroy the goodwill” between the Reserve Bank and Treasury.
Chief Ombudsman John Allen said getting the Reserve Bank to release a timeline of events struck the right balance between serving the interests of the public and respecting Orr’s right to privacy.
Quigley concluded, “Apart from being late with our OIA responses, the approach we took in responding to OIA requests was a reasonable one to the requests and met the overall public interest by balancing transparency with privacy and other legitimate concerns.”
Orr has declined numerous requests for comment.
Willis has repeatedly expressed her disapproval over Quigley’s handling of the matter.
She has also declined to shed light on what happened, saying it is a matter between Orr and the board. This is despite Willis being the person who decides who is appointed Reserve Bank Governor and board chair.
There have been calls for Quigley, whose term ends on June 30, to resign.
The board is in the process of recommending who Willis should appoint Governor for a full term.
Jenée Tibshraeny is the Herald’s Wellington business editor, based in the parliamentary press gallery. She specialises in government and Reserve Bank policymaking, economics and banking.
