He maintained he was not even aware of Ms Z’s existence until he was briefed on November 6 and immediately called meetings with the Public Service Commission (PSC) and Solicitor-General to raise his concerns the next day.
“I am a father of two daughters, and I have been a local MP for 15 years. And part of my role is protecting people against the power of the state when they butt up against it,” he told Heather du Plessis-Allan.
“I pushed as far and went as hard as I could as a minister to make sure that Ms Z was actually being looked after.”
He took issue with the way Coster had presented her allegations against McSkimming during the briefing, suggesting the deputy top cop had been presented as “a victim”.
“There’s a massive power imbalance, where he created a job for a young woman, then she gets discarded, and then she’s sort of butting up against the power of the state.”
The Police Minister said his earlier communications with the PSC on October 14 had concerned a probity check on the appointment of a temporary commissioner.
He said he was informed the Independent Police Conduct Authority were assessing some information, but he didn’t know the nature of the complaint or any surrounding details until the PSC prompted the commissioner to brief him.
“Coster didn’t come forward voluntarily to brief me. He was instructed by the PSC to brief me, and that is when I found out.”
Mitchell also responded to Coster’s comments yesterday denying knowledge of an email protocol directing staffers to divert all emails concerning McSkimming.
Since December 2023, Mitchell received 36 emails from Ms Z, but claimed the former Commissioner had intercepted her complaints and kept him in the dark.
“Police have confirmed that protocol wasn’t put in place, and it was put in place by the commissioner’s office, and it’s unfathomable to think that he didn’t know about that.”
He said it’s simply not “credible” for Coster to suggest he was not aware of the protocol.
On RNZ’s Morning Report this morning, he defended his staff, who he said were not at fault for the interference.
“I’m telling you now, they acted appropriately, they acted professionally, and they followed the right process.”