Wyatt Creech interview on Blue Chip and Mark Bryers

Wyatt Creech. Photo / Sarah Ivey

Wyatt Creech, a former deputy prime minister, was on the Blue Chip board as an independent director from December 2004 until June 2006.

In this full and exclusive interview, he discusses Blue Chip and its former boss, Mark Bryers.

Herald: How did you come to be on the Blue Chip board?

WC: I was invited by Jock Irvine, the chairman, who I had worked with [when I was] in government. He rang and asked me. I didn't know Mark Bryers at that stage. I only knew Jock Irvine.

Herald: Do you think the model was workable, without the drain of inter-party lending to Bryers' interests. I wonder whether it was reliant in the longrun on a continuing strong housing market?

WC: My understanding when I first got involved was it was merely to be a vehicle through which people invested in property investment in Auckland. And investing in property in New Zealand is a fairly longstanding way of people investing, so I don't think there is any problem with that.

Herald: Did it become something that you had not envisaged? Let me put it this way. Did you have concerns when you left in June 2006?

WC: I left because I had concerns and I made them clear [to the board].

Herald: Did you write a letter to the board?

WC: I did but it was a private letter to the board. I didn't release it. I don't think John Luxton released his either.

Herald: Do you still have a copy?

WC: It would be against ... I wrote to people giving my reasons. I didn't want to make it anymore difficult for the people who were still there. At the time I left it had just completed due diligence with Macquarie Bank. Deloittes were then the auditor. The accounts were up to date. But I lost confidence in the chief executive/MD.

Herald: Mark Bryers.

WC: Yes.

Herald: Why did you lose confidence? Were your concerns similar to John Luxton's?

WC: Yes. I actually went a little earlier. June was the date of the AGM. I told them I was going about a month before that.

Herald: What about the managing director gave you cause for concern?

WC: My understanding had been based on what I had been told was the capital raising would solve ... make it so it was well and truly cashed up. And it did and it should have carried on [being in a good cash position]. We weren't told about it.

Herald: About what, the dire cash situation?

WC: It wasn't dire at that stage.

Herald: Internal documents from September and October of 2006 indicate it was pretty desperate, but that was six months after your departure.

WC: By the time I left it was cashed up.

Herald: So it came down to your lack of confidence in Mark Bryers?

WC: Yes.

Herald: The Luxton letter indicates that Bryers had held out he had a significant personal fortune with the implication that that could give comfort. But Luxton didn't believe him.

WC: Well, I had reached that stage too.

Herald: It seems like Bryers was a great salesman who needed a nuts and bolts person to get him on the ground?

WC: As part of the agreed package after I came aboard, a full risk management strategy ... we hired a guy who had been high up in Westpac, Australia. A full risk management which we [directors] were assured would be implemented was agreed. I just didn't think things were happening the way I expected them to happen and I lost confidence in Bryers.

Herald: You say it was fully funded at that stage. Are you saying the related-party lending flowing out to Bryers' companies was not the problem?

WC: That was not supposed to be happening. We were told that wasn't happening several times. You are placed in a very difficult position when you are an independent director. You only know what you get told and you are not a forensic accountant and detective. I felt very much let down by what had happened and I simply told them I wasn't going to allow my name to go forward again.

Herald: By 'what happened' do you mean the related-party lending?

WC: I had thought that had been tidied up. We had been told that had been tidied up.

Herald: Does that leave the sniff test re Bryers?

WC: I had no confidence in him at all at the end.

Herald: Were you aware of his earlier track record [as an insolvent property developer]?

WC: I wasn't aware of the detail but Jock Irvine had told me that he [Bryers] had had some issues earlier on but that he believed that they were behind him.

Herald: Some investors may have drawn comfort from the likes of you and John Luxton being involved.

WC: I made it clear when I left that my name was to be removed from everything.

Herald: Was going public with your concerns an option?

WC: I don't think I had a case to, not just because you have a duty to the company but because at the point I left it had just succeeded in a capital raising and the figures were showing that the company had a lot of cash.

Herald: Raised from?

WC: Macquarie Bank. Macquarie Bank had done the due diligence. They gave me some confidence too.

Herald: In the end did you decide that the company relied extremely heavily on Mark Bryers and that he didn't have your confidence?

WC: That was my reason for leaving.

Herald: What's your view of Mark Bryers?

WC: I would have no confidence in him now and I think what he has done is appalling.

Herald: Do you think he had the best intentions but didn't have the skill set?

WC: [long pause] I'm not 100 per cent sure whether the guy was deluding himself as to what he was capable of. I feel personally a considerable amount of disappointment that I was ever involved but as soon as I realised in my mind that it wasn't going right, I did the only thing I could do which was to resign. I didn't even have evidence it wasn't going right at that stage but as soon as I lost confidence in him I resigned, which I think was the honourable thing to do.

Herald: What was Jock Irvine's reaction? He brought you on. Did he try to change your mind?

WC: He obviously would have preferred I'd stayed but I'd made my mind up so he just accepted it.

Herald: Have any investigators interviewed you? The SFO?

WC: No, never heard anything from anyone.

Herald: Can I have a copy of your resignation letter please?

WC: Look, I don't think that would be cricket. I sent it in confidence to people ...

Herald: After your resignation were you contacted by any journalists at the time to ask the reason for your resignation?

WC: No.

[ends]