Nic Hill Gives Evidence (Part Two)

29 April 2025. The New Zealand Reporter: Detailed coverage of the remainder of day 4 of the Susan Mowat v Christchurch Boys' High School Board of Trustees ERA case. See link to Part One.

He [Nic Hill] made one incompletely recorded comment and then that the 'reality I was bullied....hardest bit was impact on family'. This might be a direct quote.

Susan and Richard Mowat sat with their heads bowed. Dalziel assured Hill he was safe.

Hill said he didn't feel safe. He was not referring to the hearing.

He recalled speaking at a school assembly and Mowat saying he was a bad speaker from the back. That night he broke down, he says. He felt or believed he was constantly under attack.

By phone the following morning, The NZR editor asked Mowat about that incident. She struggled to remember it but did not deny Hill's rendition. She openly pondered but The NZR editor doesn’t clearly recall the balance of response.

Principal, Nic Hill (centre) flanked by AJ Lodge, counsel for Christchurch Boys’ High’s school board.

Day 4 Continued

Kahu Road Safety Lines and Cones Incident

Mowat had alleged that senior leadership knew of plans to install cones and lines on Kahu Road. Hill told the ERA member Lucia Vincent he knew about the proposed lines (which were ultimately not approved) but not about the cones.

In this context, Dalziel probed Hill about his relationship with Mowat.

You're the headmaster, she said. There's a power imbalance here, she accused. Dalziel put it to him he had told her she didn't raise the matter with senior leadership. No one in senior leadership knew until after arriving at school, Hill responded. Dalziel countered this. Others in senior leadership had been sent an email about the lines.

Dalziel moved onto the International Women's Day fracas. Mowat had alleged Hill believed she was an organiser of a group of female teachers who decided not to sit with Hill on stage. Hill had told Mowat-this is perhaps recorded in his statement-he appreciated she had told a woman [a female staff member] not to sit on stage.

He had decided she [Mowat] was an (or the organiser) before asking her, Dalziel probed. Hill disagreed. It was appropriate to talk with him, to ask, and to try and work together, he said.

Communication and decision-making were not an issue? asked Dalziel. He agreed.

On 15 March 2018, Hill investigated two things Mowat had told him, said Dalziel. He was concerned, said Hill, she had told him things that weren't true. Dalziel alleged he favoured J [the staff member's first initial] over her. Hill's response is recorded as 'Describe way forward'.

Dalziel said [likely Hill] found J's accusation was true, JW [a staff member of board member] had said Mowat 'not true' and in a conversation with Leanne Watson told Mowat had not been accurate. Hill, she alleged, did not give Mowat a chance to respond. Hill agreed there was a power imbalance.

Hill had given Mowat directions as a result of the findings, said Dalziel. Mowat could feel told off, alleged Dalziel. Hill didn't know.

According to Hill, he had talked with Mowat regarding “not gossiping or representing against me".

Hill told Dalziel he thought she had done this.

Dalziel moved the questioning to a suppressed matter, before discussing the issue of his and Mowat's involvement in the Student Voice. This had been the origin of the Kahu Road fracas. The NZR notes do not record this aspect of the hearing with sufficient clarity.

In April 2018, says Hill, he was told that Mowat had spread negative stories. Dalziel alleged Hill accepted this as true. Hill said he had raised it with her.

Dalziel referred Hill to comments by Mowat about student W leaving the school because he was unhappy. The reason Mowat had given for his departure were said to be inaccurate.

Hill referred to his statement, in which he states he told her to be careful about statements. This might have been written in an email of 10 April 2018.

Dalziel said he had issued [Mowat, sic] with a directive even if it was informal. You determined, she said to him, she had said W was leaving because he was unhappy. No determination had been made, Hill retorted.

The TVNZ Filming Gaffe

Mowat had no idea about the filming, Dalziel told Hill. She had also said staff were told by Hill after, not before, the event. She believed he had hung staff out to dry for the way the filming had been mishandled.

Hill said a man called Brigham had been a go-between, and the consent issue had been discussed with Mark Chrysal and the filming had been communicated to staff a week before. Hill added Mowat had spoken to TVNZ.

Hill added that Mowat was not responsible for consent and that Chrysal and he had understood [the exact nature of the arrangement is not clear] there would be no filming of under 16s.

The Positive Education Event

Mowat had alleged Hill had dissuaded her from attending because she might speak about the school. This was, according to her, he did not want.

Hill told Dalziel he was willing to work with her as she was passionate about the boys.

He believed Mowat was undermining him by the time of the conference came around, but he rejected the idea he had told her not to speak.

He was always careful and always took advice.

The Anonymous Letters Scandal