Archive for February 2012

In today’s herald there is  an article   Watchdog in crisis, MPs told  and yesterdays article  Bulging backlog creating a ‘crisis’ in Office of the Ombudsman

6 years ago  I asked a simple question  ” why does this private law enforcement authority not exist ”

MAF had  failed to check  the existence of the animal welfare institute of New Zealand , which was given statutory powers of search and seizure and the ability to prosecute  the public.The  person completing the application  had written the bill for  the legislation  and had advised on it.  He then ran an SPCA type organization   using council resources,  staff and infrastructure to derive an income for himself.( banked into an account with a pseudonym , an account  only he had access to )

I  did not mean to be a  whistle blower  but because I proved categorically that the organization  did  not  exist and was nothing more than a fiction ,I was  hauled through the courts .

MAF  have  done nothing but  cover their backs  and  those involved in 1999 are the same persons  who  now control the release of information and have gone all out to  protect themselves  withholding information  , doing limited audits which  had parameters set so as to avoid the fraud .

When MAF  had  the results of  the audit,  the perpetrator wrote to them and demanded  that this information was withheld from me  , this information proved that I  had not  defamed  any one .  It took the ombudsmen 18 months to release  these papers , during which time I battled the courts  in an attempt to get justice. A time during which my Family was physically torn apart.

I complained to the state services commission  about MAF’s breach of code of conduct  but MAF  provide them  with a  version of  events  again collaborating with the perpetrator, this resulted in the state services commission choosing not to investigate.

I have now obtained the report which was provided to the SSC and  found the following statement proving that  MAF  have also influenced  other government departments  and ministers   offices so as to control information   ” Consequently, all correspondence from GH directly to the Minister, and all that referred to the Minister from the PM and other Ministers get transferred to MAF to manage and respond too.”
How convenient .How nontransparent.

While MAF was not able to investigate  it does  appear to  have  clairvoyant tendencies  because   in September 2011 MAF knew about bankruptcy action  which was not commenced until  December  .  No evidence of any bankruptcy proceedings was available anywhere  prior to  mid December , proving that  MAF is still  collaborating with the perpetrator the very person who  made a  false application  for approved status in 1999.  see anticorruption.co.nz.

The ombudsmen office is the only form of accountability we have  , Government departments know  the ombudsmen to be  ineffective ( because they are so bogged down ) and  Long serving government officials know the system, they are trusted and some abuse  their  trust and when they face retirement they have to go to all lengths to   cover the  errors or transgressions  of their past .

I suspect that my case, which is totally provable, is the tip of the ice berg of corruption in New Zealand  but no one seems to  be interested.

As an investigator I use the   equation Corruption = monopoly+ discretion- Accountability  .

Without an effective ombudsmen office  there is no accountability .

We silence those  who speak up  with court action  in a civil jurisdiction which denies  justice… you need only look up Law system a ‘laughing stock’   Anthony Molly QC   has  been speaking out on this for years. I fully support him.

IF government departments were made more accountable and transparent  and dealt with issues of integrity by  means other than covering them up, the work load of the ombudsmen would be reduced and we  may just win the battle against corruption