It is important to note here that there is a statutory obligation for public sector organisations to, within reason, provide a response in 20 working days.
Delay after delay followed, however, before the Reserve Bank (RBNZ) finally provided a summary of those documents this week.
In doing so, it still decided to withhold information, citing privacy and legal privilege, and made an argument that the public interest didn’t outweigh these grounds.
The statement did, however, answer the ‘why’ as to its former captain abandoning ship. A disagreement over funding.
Hardly a scandal. So why the need for secrecy?
Further oddities were included in an email sent to the RBNZ leadership team the day after Orr resigned, part of which was released to this newspaper.
It read: “A reminder about transparency. We know there will be a lot of eyes on us as an organisation in coming days. Our code of conduct is there to keep us all safe in these scenarios. It is really important not to talk to media.”
Seemingly from that moment on, the staff at the RBNZ dug their fox holes – and they dug them deep, in anticipation of riding out the oncoming barrage of queries from journalists and the public.
As politicians of all stripes tend to make a habit of, the public sector – particularly those who lunch on Lambton Quay – sometimes slip into a shared siege mentality.
It results in an us-versus-the-rest-of-New-Zealand attitude. A we-know-best dogma. At best, this comes across as patronising and, at worst, it erodes public trust in our institutions.
People naturally begin to ask, if they are willing to hide the mundane, what else is being kept in the bureaucratic basement?
We have just experienced a period in our country’s history when every RBNZ announcement became an event, its decisions debated and listed as an agenda item for dining-table chats.
This unusually bright spotlight may have made the previously unseen central bank worker uncomfortable. But we also live in a time when a growing number of people are experiencing ambivalence towards democracy and its ideals. So, perhaps now more than ever, transparency and authenticity are vital to ensure we have confidence in the RBNZ and others.
Yesterday, RBNZ chairman Neil Quigley issued a statement and said he personally regretted the delay in producing the response to the OIAs.
It followed Finance Minister Nicola Willis saying she had told the RBNZ to do better.
In Quigley’s statement, complexity and the volume of information were used as reasons for the delay, but encouragingly, he also said the RBNZ was taking into account the feedback and will look at how it can improve.
Orr’s strange departure should now serve as a reminder to each government department leader, and their teams of advisors, that transparency is rarely the wrong path to tread.
Sign up to the Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
