Neil Sands
Michael Heron KC
Prominent barrister Michael Heron KC will head an inquiry into whether senior public servants withheld information and misled ministers about a failed multi-million dollar technology project at Immigration New Zealand (INZ).
Public Service Commissioner Sir Brian Roche announced Heron’s appointment, saying he will investigate the conduct of officials from Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s (MBIE’s) – which runs INZ – in relation to the Biometric Capability Update (BCU) project.
“This is an important inquiry. It goes to the trust and confidence of ministers who must be able to rely on advice they receive from officials. The conduct and integrity of public servants is also fundamental to the trust and confidence New Zealanders have in their public service,” he said.
Sir Brian said he was pleased to engage Heron, a former solicitor-general who previously headed an inquiry into allegations that census data had been misused and also investigated Cycling New Zealand in the wake of Olympian Olivia Podmore’s death.
“He has extensive legal experience and has been involved in a number of independent investigations for government agencies,”
The inquiry, which is expected to take several months, comes after Immigration Minister Erica Stanford last week gave a scathing assessment of officials involved in the BCU project, which was quietly shelved late last year resulting in write-downs of more than $30 million.
“Firstly, ministers were misled. Secondly, people were moved from the project when they raised concerns. And thirdly… creative accounting practices had been undertaken to keep costs of the project below Cabinet’s mandated limit,” she said, describing the conduct as “almost as bad as it gets”.
Honest advice needed
Heron, assisted by barrister Jane Barrow will investigate the advice that MBIE gave ministers, what MBIE knew – or should have known – about the project, how it dealt with concerns raised about the project, and whether ‘creative accounting’ was used to avoid Cabinet scrutiny.
It will also examine whether officials followed the “no surprises” principle of keeping ministers informed and what factors may have led to deficiencies in MBIE’s advice, including organisational, governance, cultural, system issues, or external pressures.
The inquiry will have the power to obtain all relevant information from MBIE and summons witnesses.
It will not determine the employment, disciplinary, civil or criminal liability of any individual, but can make findings of fault and recommend that appropriate bodies can take further steps.
“Public trust and confidence in the public service depends on ministers receiving advice that is free and frank, honest, robust, and timely, particularly in relation to complex and high-risk programmes,” the inquiry’s terms of reference say.
“MBIE is responsible for supporting ministers through the provision of high-quality advice, including during periods of delivery challenge or uncertainty. Maintaining the integrity of that advice is fundamental to good decision-making and to the proper functioning of responsible government.”
0 Comments