Merepeka Raukawa-Tait: Heads to roll over Sutton exit

Roger Sutton was allowed to give his side of the story in the sexual harassment case. Photo / File

What a complete balls-up. The Roger Sutton saga that played out last week. An orchestrated press conference to trivialise a serious workplace issue: sexual harassment. A one-man show.

How Sutton managed to hold a press conference sanctioned by his employer, the State Services Commission, beggars belief. This is a textbook case of how not to handle a senior public servant's resignation and serious, inappropriate conduct allegation. And not much tops sexual harassment.

There are always two sides to every story but when you hear only one side, plausibly put with support from big hitters, is it any wonder the woman who made the complaint has come under fire. People have made a judgment call based on what they heard.

Hearing only a one-sided version of what happened is wrong and unfair. We do not know the exact nature of the complaint. Sutton has given us his views. He's a touchy, feely kind of guy. He gives hugs and calls female staff members sweetie, dear and other terms of endearment. With hindsight, he says that he shouldn't have.

He's now sorry and, of course, will resign as CEO of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) for behaviour that let him down.

State Services commissioner Iain Rennie has been around for a long time. I don't think he can survive his abysmal handling of this situation. What the hell was he thinking? By permitting Sutton to hold a press conference to tell his story, knowing that the basis and outcome of the harassment investigation was confidential to both parties, made a mockery of any process that was being followed. The fact the complainant hasn't decided to open up and tell all, and she would have every right to do so after Sutton so blatantly broke confidentiality, is a credit to her.

I hope she will continue to keep quiet. There is no need for the public to know details. That is a private matter between her and her employer. She was courageous to take action. To lay a sexual harassment complaint against a public service CEO, who would be mates with most other public service CEOs and many members of parliament too, was a brave act. And she should have been able to expect that by signing a confidential agreement all details would remain private to the affected parties and employer. That she would also be safe continuing to work for Cera.

It is reported some work colleagues who thought Sutton was the best thing since sliced bread are angry with her.

Members of the public who felt the same way about Sutton are angry too, you only have to look at the comments on Facebook and Twitter.

You have to ask who was advising the commissioner. When I worked for the commission, Margaret Bazley, now Dame Margaret, was the commissioner. I don't believe she would have presided over and handled the resignation of a public service CEO, for whatever reason, in the unprofessional manner we witnessed last week. You went quietly in Dame Margaret's day. She was a stickler for process. Was fair, decisive and, most of all, thorough. She must be shaking her head at these goings-on.

The commission does have clear guidelines on workplace bullying, sexual harassment and other forms of unwanted attention. They have processes in place to deal with these situations should they arise.

The staff member followed these and should have expected a fair process would be the result. And, that when the investigation was concluded, both sides would be supported to deal with the resulting recommendations and actions taken. The sexual harassment complaint was investigated and upheld by the commission.

But Rennie's conduct this past week in allowing Sutton to break a binding confidential agreement and make self-serving statements in public smacks of collusion.

This week we may yet see another resignation of a senior public servant.

-Merepeka lives in Rotorua. She writes, speaks and broadcasts to thwart the spread of political correctness