Chris Hipkins has announced that ex-Police Minister Stuart Nash will be stripped of all his cabinet portfolios after a new scandal has emerged. Video / NZ Herald
An investigation into sacked minister Stuart Nash’s communications with his donors has identified another conflict of interest.
However, Cabinet Secretary Rachel Hayward, who conducted the investigation, determined it was “at the lower end of transgressions”, given Nash’s attempts to manage the conflict.
Nash, the former Police Minister, was placed on a final warning by PM Chris Hipkins for breaches of the Cabinet Manual and was later sacked in March after it was revealed the Napier MP had sent an email in 2020 to donors Troy Bowker and Greg Loveridge with details of Cabinet discussions and noting Nash’s personal disagreements with ministerial colleagues concerning a commercial rent relief package during Covid.
Hayward’s report, released this morning, did not identify any instances - other than those that led to his sacking - in which Nash shared information with declared donors in a “manner inconsistent with the Cabinet Manual” - the set of rules that governs how ministers should act.
However, the report did highlight one matter when Nash identified a conflict of interest when a close associate and donor was appointed to a government advisory board Nash was linked to.
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins sacked Stuart Nash as a minister earlier this year following the Napier MP's communication with donors. Photo / Mark Mitchell
The report said Nash removed himself from the appointment process in an effort to manage the conflict, but Hayward determined Nash should have done more.
“The report concludes he should have also declared his interest when Cabinet signed off the appointment and made it clear that another minister was responsible but the review finds that this is at the lower end of transgressions and in fairness to Stuart he did take actions to manage the conflict,” Hipkins said.
“It’s a helpful reminder of the importance of Ministers making sure their conflicts are fully managed.”
Alongside the report, Hayward would be releasing “relevant communications” with Nash’s donors. Hipkins noted people had a right to approach ministers on matters that concern them and that ministers couldn’t control the communications sent to them.
Hipkins said Nash had “paid the ultimate price” in his sacking.
Nash, who has indicated his intention to resign from politics at the upcoming election, released a statement through the Prime Minister’s Office alongside the report.
In it, Nash said he hoped the report would “draw a line under this issue”.
“[The report is] thorough and does not identify any further instances in which I shared information with declared donors in a manner inconsistent with the Cabinet Manual.
“Whilst never shying away from accepting responsibility for the actions that led to my ministerial demise, I am now hopeful that the Cabinet Office report will draw a line under this issue.”
He said it was the “ultimate privilege” to have worked under Hipkins and former PM Jacinda Ardern, and that he was looking forward to building his career after politics.
What else did the review find?
The new conflict identified was related to Phil McCaw, a high school friend of Nash’s who donated $6500 to the MP’s 2020 election campaign in August of that year.
In May last year, McCaw was appointed as the chairman of the Startup Advisors Council, a body that supported the Minister for Regional Economic Development - a portfolio held by Nash at the time. Nash had initially suggested McCaw as a candidate.
According to officials from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Nash had said he should not have a formal role in the appointment process.
Hayward said she did not criticise Nash for suggesting McCaw as a candidate as it wasn’t a direction that the appointment be made and Nash had disclosed the connection between the pair.
However, she said there could have been the perception of a conflict that should have been managed by transferring responsibility of the appointment to another minister in writing with the agreement of the Prime Minister, by considering ongoing ministerial responsibilities with respect to McCaw’s position and not participating in the announcement of his appointment.
“Overall, I conclude that Hon Nash did not fully manage his conflict of interest in relation to this appointment, but as noted above, this finding is at the lower level in terms of inconsistency with Cabinet Manual principles,” she said.
There was no judgment on McCaw’s actions or communications.
The report also noted that there were some time periods when there were no text message exchanges with some donors. Nash had told those coordinating the review that he did, at times, delete messages from his phone - a protocol he said he developed well before his career as a minister.
