Wintringham also at fault

The Dom Post reports:

A woman who blew the whistle on Mary Anne Thompson’s doctored CV six years ago was hushed up by the country’s top civil servant and told to stop digging further.

Thompson was ordered to pay a $10,000 fine and do 100 hours’ community service after pleading guilty yesterday to one charge of using a document with intent to defraud.

An appropriate penalty.

In an exclusive interview with The Dominion Post, Thompson says she is hoping for a second chance and would desperately love to return to the civil service, where she carved out a reputation as one of its brightest stars.

What may weigh against this is not so much the fake CV, but the issues around the immigration Service, while managed by Thompson.

Executive recruiter Lilias Bell was the first to stumble on Thompson’s secret, after a tipoff caused her to question Thompson’s claim to a doctorate from the prestigious London School of Economics.

Mrs Bell had been hired by the State Services Commission to recruit a new chief executive for the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet – one of the most prestigious and sensitive jobs in the civil service. Despite Thompson having clearances from the Security Intelligence Service, digging by Mrs Bell revealed that there was no record of her ever receiving her doctorate.

But after Mrs Bell flagged the issue with then state services commissioner Michael Wintringham, Thompson withdrew her application and Ms Bell was told to cease her investigation. In court documents, Mr Wintringham revealed that he was worried about the damage that news of the inquiries would do to the reputations of both Thompson and the State Services Commission.

So he hushed it up, and in the end did far far more damage by doing so. If Wintringham has done his job, this may have been all avoided.

He left the commission shortly after, passing on Mrs Bell’s inquiries to his successor, Mark Prebble, only when Thompson landed in strife at the immigration service.

Prime Minister John Key said he was “extremely surprised” that Mr Wintringham did not pass on the information earlier, “and a little disappointed”.

That is putting it mildly. Wintringham was the head of the civil service, responsible for all senior appointments and he failed HR 101 – file notes. Even the most junior HR person knows you do file notes on anything like this. He effectively hid information from his successor, through his failure to do a file note about the doctorate.

Mr Wintringham said yesterday that he had questioned Thompson about her doctorate and she was adamant it was legitimate. After that, there had been no reason to pursue the matter.

I’m sorry – but how can one conclude this. If someone is adamant it is legitimate, then the obvious response is to ask them to prove it, and ask for a copy of their degree.

Thompson is at fault for claiming she had a degree she did not have, but Wintringham shares some blame for knowing the truth, and covering it up.