Statement from RBNZ chair Neil Quigley about OIAs on Adrian Orr's resignation
We are taking into account the feedback that we have received on our management of these OIA requests and looking carefully at how we can improve our response times in the future,' Mr Quigley said.
'RBNZ was late in producing a response to some of the OIAs we received on Adrian Orr's resignation. I regret that this delay occurred,' Reserve Bank of New Zealand – Te Pūtea Matua Chair Neil Quigley says.
'The circumstances and the volume of information associated with the OIAs on Adrian Orr's resignation were complex, and we needed to be sure that our consideration of relevant information was comprehensive.
'As well as our obligations under the Official Information Act, we needed to take into careful consideration the former Governor's exit agreement and privacy law. For this reason, we extended consultation on the information and our response, including review by senior external counsel,' he said.
'On 5 March I was limited in what I could say about the former Governor's resignation both by the terms of his exit agreement and the fact that we were still working through finalisation of the detail of the next Five-Year Funding Agreement (FYFA).
'We were conscious of the need to explain to staff of the RBNZ the potential implications for staffing levels of a lower level of funding and needed time to consider the details of that.
'We are taking into account the feedback that we have received on our management of these OIA requests and looking carefully at how we can improve our response times in the future,' Mr Quigley said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
8 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
Grant Robertson reveals clash with Adrian Orr over housing policy
When Grant Robertson was Finance Minister, he clashed with Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Orr on one memorable occasion, he has revealed in his new book. The clash occurred shortly after Labour had won a second term with a majority in the 2020 election, Robertson wrote in 'Anything Could Happen'
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
This isn't a housing market meltdown, it's a full-blown crash
The average home value in New Zealand has fallen more than 13% from its Covid-era peak, according to the latest QV House Price Index. That average is flattered by the relative stability in Canterbury and few other Southern regions like Queenstown, Southland and the West Coast. Christchurch City's average home values are just 0.2% lower than the nationwide peak. Prices in those other regions are actually above the nationwide peak in 2022. Meanwhile, in Auckland and Wellington, there has been a wipeout on a scale that used to panic the Reserve Bank when it imagined catastrophic scenarios to stress test the financial system. Values in Auckland now sit 19.7% below the nationwide peak of January 2022. Home values in Wellington City are 27.3% below the nationwide market peak. This housing slump is certainly worse than the Global Financial Market Crisis in 2008. After the GFC the average national house price fell about 5%. Economists Arthur Grimes and Sean Hyland (from Motu Economic and Public Policy Research) did some work which showed that in real (inflation-adjusted) terms, house prices fell 15.3% between 2007 and 2011. On the same basis, the last three years in Auckland and Wellington would represent not just a slump, but a serious crash. Infometrics chief forecaster Gareth Kiernan noted this week that at the same stage of the last two major property cycles (13 quarters after the December 1997 and December 2007 peaks, respectively) house prices were only 2% and 5.5% below those respective peaks. Okay, we should acknowledge that the peak in 2022 was exaggerated and artificially inflated by Covid stimulus. Sure, you can call it a phoney boom. But that doesn't make it any less real for those who bought houses at peak and now find themselves in a worrying position of having negative equity – or worse – facing a mortgagee sale. Numbers out from property data firm Cotality last week showed the number of people making losses when they sell their homes is at the highest level since 2014, with Auckland sellers being hit particularly hard. Homeowners also have short memories. We should factor Covid stimulus gains into our maths when we consider our relative wealth. But we don't. The hit to consumer confidence and retail spending is all too real. And unfortunately, while some regions are recovering, I don't think the Wellington and Auckland markets are about to turn around. The REINZ house price index, which came out on Thursday, fell by 0.5% in seasonally adjusted terms in July. That was led by a chunky 1.2% fall in Auckland. Looking at those numbers, Westpac senior economist Michael Gordon noted that Auckland's stock of unsold homes on the market has been rising again in recent months (in contrast to the rest of the country). A slump of this size used to be the stuff of nightmares for the Reserve Bank (RBNZ). A decade ago, when house price rises were in overdrive, the RBNZ ran stress tests that looked at the impact of house price falls of both 20% and 30% on the banking system. The concerns it had about banking industry risk led to the development of stricter lending criteria – devices like loan-to-value ratios (which limit the amount of lending banks can do to customers with low levels of equity) and debt-to-income ratios (which limit lending based on the ability to service payments). It's fair to say they did the job. Banks have survived this historic downturn unscathed. Hooray, thank goodness all those Aussie shareholders aren't suffering, I hear you say. Sarcasm (and big profits) aside, it is good for all of us that the financial system has stayed strong. We all know who'd be doing the bailing out if the banks started collapsing. The bad news is that the wider economy hasn't coped as well as the banks. We are clearly, as the RBNZ and many others (including myself) warned, overly reliant on the property market to bolster our economic growth. Aucklanders in particular have lived on the sugar high of rising property prices for too long. Now we're going cold turkey. Property values have become the biggest driver of consumer confidence. And so much of Auckland's small business economy is built around property-related services: building, renovation, driveways, roofing, pools, sheds, landscaping, and interior decorating and more. The city doesn't have the manufacturing sector it once did, and the tourism sector is still struggling to get back to pre-Covid levels. If there is an upside to this long, painful process, it is that it may drive a much-needed cultural shift around property in Auckland. The city needs to push harder to develop other drivers for economic growth. We do have a growing tech sector, and there's a movie and video games industry. But as much as we want to be a smart, innovative economy, these sectors aren't coming to the rescue fast enough. The idea of an extended property sector downturn that helps revitalise the productive is nice in theory. But in the real world it may involve too much pain and risks long-term damage to the economy. We should be hoping to find some sort of middle ground. We don't want to see a bungy-like bounce from bust to boom and then another bust. But we need some growth back in the property sector. There needs to be some motivation for construction companies to keep building, and we need the economic shot in the arm that housing market confidence can deliver. I'm optimistic that we might find the sweet spot this time. We are yet to see the full benefits flow through from the Official Cash Rate cuts we've already had. We can also expect rates to go lower. Another 25 basis point cut is looking like a dead cert when the RBNZ meets next Wednesday. After that, economists are divided between optimists who think that will be it and pessimists who think we'll need another one or even two cuts by the end of the year. Growth will eventually return as borrowing costs fall. But the prospects of another housing market boom in Auckland look very distant. Liam Dann is business editor at large for the New Zealand Herald. He is a senior writer and columnist, as well as presenting and producing videos and podcasts. He joined the Herald in 2003.
Otago Daily Times
2 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
Another Cabinet minister caught up in UN letter-writing saga
By Craig McCulloch of RNZ Another Cabinet minister has been caught up in the United Nations letter-writing imbroglio, with new documents showing David Seymour first ran his response past Paul Goldsmith before he sent it. Seymour, writing as Regulations Minister, fired off a blunt reply to the UN in July that prompted public rebukes from both Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Foreign Minister Winston Peters for bypassing proper processes. Seymour refused to concede any mistake but agreed to formally withdraw his letter so Peters could issue one on behalf of the full government. New correspondence, released to RNZ under the Official Information Act, reveals Goldsmith, the Treaty Negotiations Minister, had been looped in early on and appeared comfortable with Seymour's approach. On 1 July, two days before the letter went to the UN, one of Seymour's advisors sent a draft to Goldsmith's office. "Attached is the Minister for Regulation's proposed response... He mentioned that we had agreed to run it past your Minister before we sent it off," the email read. "It is a little more direct than what MFAT might draft. Please let me know if your Minister is happy." Goldsmith's office responded the next day, asking for a phone call. By the morning of 3 July, Seymour's advisor emailed him: "Goldie is happy for us to send it. He is going to send his own mild MFAT holding letter on behalf of himself and [Māori Development Minister Tama] Potaka." Seymour replied: "Ok, great." His letter was sent to the UN that afternoon. In a statement provided to RNZ on Saturday, Goldsmith said: "When asked, I did not object to [Seymour] sending the letter, but when commenting on UN matters, it is the Foreign Minister's views that are relevant, not mine." A spokesperson for Seymour said he had nothing further to add. Earlier correspondence in late June showed Goldsmith's office drafted an initial "holding response" to the UN but requested it be sent with Seymour's letterhead as "the senior Minister for this response". Emails between Seymour's staff also canvassed the options for responding to the UN. It noted MFAT's preferred approach would be a joint reply from "relevant Ministers" Seymour, Goldsmith and Potaka, in line with previous UN communications in 2024. Instead, Peters ultimately issued a government-wide letter on 11 August, striking a softer tone and expressing regret for the "breakdown in protocol". The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K Barume, had raised concerns on 12 June about Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill, suggesting it failed to recognise Māori traditions or uphold Treaty principles. Seymour's reply branded the critique "presumptive, condescending and wholly misplaced" and "an affront to New Zealand's sovereignty". After news of Seymour's letter broke in July, Luxon told media he agreed with its content but Seymour was wrong to have sent it: "I expect Winston Peters to be the person that engages with the UN."
