Wintec boss probe calls for review
An investigation into allegations against former Wintec chief executive Mark Flowers has found a ‘‘conflict of interest’’ with an employee should have been better managed and another instance where Wintec did not adequately respond to a serious complaint.
No details of either case have been released publicly ‘‘in order to respect the confidentiality and privacy of everyone involved’’, Wintec council chairman Barry Harris said in a statement released yesterday.
The investigation by Queen’s Counsel Simon Mount found a majority of complaints could not be established on the balance of probabilities.
‘‘However, I did find instances where the Chief Executive should have better managed and dealt with a conflict of interest in relation to one employee; and where Wintec did not adequately respond to a serious complaint. I found that the absence of a specific policy to deal with the complaint at the time was a factor, and I recommended Wintec review and revise its existing policies in a number of areas,’’ he said.
Mount acknowledged the success of Wintec under Flowers’ leadership, in terms of financial performance, building programmes and internationalisation.
‘‘At the same time, a consistent theme from many I interviewed was that Wintec did not always strike the right balance between flexibility and due process,’’ Mount said.
‘‘This manifested itself in the areas described above, including a failure to manage a conflict of interest, and the absence of specific policies to deal with issues raised. It also contributed to a perception among many of the staff I interviewed that the Chief Executive could direct employment outcomes without following proper process. Among other things these matters emphasise the importance of a strong, professional and independent HR function.’’
In a statement Flowers said he was pleased with the findings.
‘‘One of the many challenges facing any CE is managing under-performing individuals or those who are not aligned with the organisation or team,’’ he said.
‘‘Sometimes hard truths and decisions are required for the good of the organisation. Striking the balance between processes and controls, and agility, progress and results can be an area fraught with danger.
‘‘The other matter is the inquiry by Audit New Zealand. I have been unable to engage meaningfully in this process due to my ill-health, but I understand there are some procedural areas which have not previously been identified in annual audits that may require further iterative improvement. I am pleased – but not surprised – no evidence was found of wrongdoing.’’
In a statement Wintec council chairman Barry Harris said: ‘‘The Wintec Council is satisfied with the robustness of this latest inquiry, and has confidence in the findings. In fairness to all parties we will not be releasing any further details in order to respect the confidentiality and privacy of everyone involved.’’
The Wintec Council has now also received a damning report from Audit New Zealand which was scathing of Wintec’s use of public money on overseas trips.
Audit NZ found a number of serious issues including incomplete and missing accounts.
‘‘The Wintec Council will outline, through its sub-committees, an urgent action plan and programme of work based on these recommendations for management to work through. This report clearly shows the need for improvement of many Wintec-wide processes, despite many of these shortfalls being historic, as far back as 2009, and no evidence of wrongdoing.’’
The fresh probe into Flowers followed an investigation into the allegations in 2015 that cleared Flowers of any wrongdoing. However, in May 2018 Wintec council sought a review of the 2015 investigation.
The examination of the 2015 findings by Queen’s Counsel Victoria Casey found that the investigation was not robust enough for the council to have confidence in its conclusions.
In August the fresh probe by Mount was launched and completed by mid-December.
A separate review by Audit NZ into overseas spending by Flowers and the Wintec executive is expected to be released this month.
Wintec has spent more than $200,000 on lawyers, auditors and investigators to stop a investigation.
‘‘A consistent theme from many I interviewed was that Wintec did not always strike the right balance between flexibility and due process.’’