Top public servant offered to quit after misleading Parliament — his boss said no

The head of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), Nic Blakeley, offered to resign after a parliamentary committee found he had misled Parliament. But his boss, Public Service Commissioner Brian Roche, said no. (RNZ)

A group of MPs called the Privileges Committee looks into cases where Parliament's rules have been broken. The committee found that Blakeley and former Immigration New Zealand head Alison McDonald had deliberately misled Parliament about a multi-million-dollar IT project. The committee did not recommend any further punishment beyond the finding itself. (RNZ)

Roche said Blakeley had been in the chief executive job for only six weeks when the misconduct happened. That did not excuse what happened, Roche said, but it was a factor in his decision not to accept the resignation. Finance Minister Nicola Willis gave the same reason. She called the committee's findings "very serious indeed" and said the conduct was unacceptable. (RNZ)

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon pointed to three things in Blakeley's favour: he had been in the job for a very short time, he had been poorly advised by his staff, and he had admitted the issue upfront. (RNZ)

Roche also asked lawyer Michael Heron KC to carry out a detailed inquiry into the IT project. (RNZ)

Immigration Minister Erica Stanford had previously refused to say whether she had confidence in Blakeley. She has now changed her position and said she is confident he can fix MBIE. Stanford said there is "a rot" in the ministry and that Blakeley had promised to make sure the failures never happen again. (RNZ)

Luxon, Willis, and Roche all pointed to the same reasons for keeping Blakeley: his short time in the job, the poor advice he received, and his willingness to own up. Whether those reasons hold up when MPs and committees keep asking questions is the next test.

The broader context here is a tension between two things. On one hand, misleading Parliament is a serious matter and should carry consequences. On the other, there is a practical question: who is best placed to fix the problems that caused all this? The Privileges Committee's contempt finding is one of the most serious steps Parliament can take short of further punishment, and the committee chose not to go further. Roche's decision to keep Blakeley means the person now responsible for fixing the problems is the same person whose conduct was found to be in contempt. Stanford's words capture that tension neatly: she called out "a rot" inside MBIE while also saying she trusts the man appointed to clean it up.

The Heron KC inquiry will be the next big step. Its findings, and any recommendations about accountability or changes to how MBIE handles IT projects, will bear directly on whether the current setup holds. For ministers and journalists covering Parliament, the question is whether the reasons given for keeping Blakeley survive what the inquiry finds.