Haumaha ‘looking forward’ to continuing
The appointment of Police Deputy Commissioner Wally Haumaha has been cleared by a Government inquiry.
Claims the high-ranking police officer lacked integrity for the job were found to be unsubstantiated, with the process of his appointment deemed ‘‘adequate and fit for purpose’’.
The report’s author, lawyer Mary Scholtens QC, also found bullying allegations, which have since emerged and are being investigated by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA), were unknown and were not immediately relevant. Concerns raised by Louise Nicholas, a victim adviser to police, which sparked the inquiry were found to have ‘‘no verifiable basis’’.
Haumaha said in a statement he was grateful to those who supported him, and was ‘‘looking forward to the opportunity of continuing this work’’. ‘‘It has not been easy for anyone, as I know from my own weeks and months waiting for the outcome.’’
But the question of his suitability for the role remains.
With the IPCA investigation yet to be finalised, neither Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern or Police Minister Stuart Nash would express confidence in the deputy commissioner.
State Services Minister Chris Hipkins said Nicholas’ reputation was not tarnished by the report’s findings, and she would continue to do good work with police.
The victim advocate made headlines in June, saying the deputy commissioner lacked the required integrity for the job.
Central to the concerns were comments made by Haumaha in 2004, describing officers accused of rape by Nicholas in positive terms.
Nicholas met with Commissioner Mike Bush, Deputy Commissioner Mike Clement and Haumaha to express her disappointment at his promotion in May. Later emails show she agreed to work with Haumaha.
‘‘It’s my intention to move forward and to be open to developing a working relationship with Assistant Commissioner Wally Haumaha,’’ she wrote.
‘‘... this conversation was never about having any expectations of NZ Police to end the appointment, but it is about putting the NZ Police ‘on notice’ to say I am concerned.’’
Bush believed her concerns were resolved before the appointment. Scholtens said Nicholas’ prior concerns were one of two pieces of information not available to the State Services Commissioner (SSC) in its consideration of Haumaha for the role.
It meant the risk Nicholas ‘‘might’’ share concerns with the media, and undermine the appointment, was overlooked.
The second – any formal complaint of bullying – would have likely been a consideration in assessing Haumaha’s strengths and weaknesses for the job, she said. The report detailed the two formal bullying complaints laid against Haumaha in September – coming from three women staffers of Ministry of Justice and Corrections working on a joint project. There was considerable tension among project staff, and in one meeting Haumaha allegedly angrily asked each individual for their commitment to the project and to him.
Nicholas had heard these concerns, and raised them with Clement in 2016. But it was reasonable that no formal complaint resulted, Scholtens said.
SSC disregarded information that Haumaha previously considering standing for NZ First.
Nash was notified, and decided against notifying Cabinet.
Scholtens agreed it was irrelevant.
She recommended the SSC should look widely when seeking information on candidates and approach people other than nominated referees, including anonymous and confidential views from employees, where required.
A review of international best practice is being considered by the State Services Commissioner.
‘‘I recommend that a focus of this review be on identifying and managing the risks around unexpected publicity,’’ Scholtens said.