How could A non existent private law enforcement authority survive for so long? Why condone corruption in Waitakere City?

Open letter to Rodney Hide

Dear Rodney

In 2006 I questioned the existence of the animal welfare Institute of New Zealand ( AWINZ )  which was a private law enforcement  authority   with extensive prosecution , search and seizure   powers under the animal welfare act.

I was to  find that the  only person associated with AWINZ up until 2006  was Neil Wells the person who had written the   bill leading up to the legislation  and he had also been an independent   advisor to the select committee in the time leading to the bill becoming legislation.

While you were in opposition and   you were most helpful and even arranged for questions  to be asked in Parliament [1]

The questions   you asked   were with regards to a trust which Mr Wells claimed AWINZ to be  but it has now emerged that the trust which he claimed was AWINZ was nothing but a red herring and that AWINZ was  nothing more than  another name Mr Wells used for himself.

The time line goes like this

  1. Mr Wells writes the Bill which   facilitates organisations other than the RNZSPCA to enforce animal welfare.
  2. Mr Wells becomes an  independent  advisor to the select committee in the bearing  stages.
  3. Mr Wells makes an applicationfor AWINZ to become an approved organisation under the legislation which he has just contributed so much to .
    1. On page 2 of that document   he states “ A charitable trust has been formed by Deed of Trust as the “Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand “ (AWINZ). It is being registered under Pa r t II of the Charitable Trusts Act 1957”
    2. In correspondence with the minister and MAF Mr Wells makes false statements and avoids the production of a deed.[2]
    3. In 2006 Neither Waitakere City or MAF have any documents   which have details  of the other trustees  and there are no documents which give  Mr Wells consent for persons to act on their  behalf   either jointly or severally .
    4. There are not trust deeds on file which back up the MOU’s being one with MAF which Mr Wells signed as a trustee    and the other with waitakere dog control which he signed on behalf of a non-existent organisation  Animal welfare Institute of New Zealand.
    5. In early  2006  There were no organisations registered  anywhere  by the name Animal welfare institute of New Zealand    and Mr Wells was operating   this “ organisation from his place of work Waitakere city council dog control  where he was now manager.
    6. By incorporating the name Animal welfare institute of New Zealand  on 27 April 2006 we categorically proved that No other organisation by that name existed.
    7. Mr Wells then started a cover up campaign[3] , evidence which has come out recently proves that Mr Wells was in fact AWINZ  and that  no other person was involved in the running of it.

Mr Wells was the dog and stock control manager at Waitakere city council, using the name AWINZ to disguise the fact   that he contracted to himself he performed services which   were as follows.

  1. The staff under Mr Wells  control at Waitakere  dog and stock control  were  trained by him to be  animal welfare officers.
  2. They were warranted on recommendation of AWINZ
  3. In their paid time for the council  if they came across an animal welfare matter in the course of  their duties or were asked to attend an animal welfare matter ( which took priority over council work )  they would attend take, action  and reported the circumstances  to their council boss  Neil Wells  manager.
  4. He would pass it to the head of AWINZ – Neil wells  for authority to prosecute
  5. He passed it to the  barrister for AWINZ  Neil wells  who  would  do the paperwork and court work
  6. The money which came back by virtue of  section 171 AWA  was handed back to Neil Wells who ran a bank account in the name  of   Animal welfare institute  of new Zealand  for that purpose.  Fines under the animal welfare act  could be up to $250,000.

I was relieved when you won the seat  , You had been  so supportive when you were in opposition I  thought  Good something will happen now.

Instead I have not been able to get near you and was told by one of your  support staff that it is now  conflict of interest for you  to be involved.

Rodney  I would   very much like to know

  1. why it is a conflict of interest   ?
  2. why   AWINZ was able to continue to trade until January of this year?
  3. Why  you condone  contracts for law enforcement to be entered into   with unidentifiable  “organisations”?
  4. Why this has been concealed from the public?
  5. And what else is happening out there that the public have no right to know about yet   is paying for?
  6. Why do you no longer support the call for an independent commission against corruption?

I will be publishing a copy of this letter on the Blog www.Transparency.net.nz and will be happy to  publish your reply .

Looking forward  to being ignored again

I thought it was funny when I called in  at your meeting last  night  and  the   idiot at the back told me to see my local MP,  it was great to be able to  say  I have tried   Rodney is it .

He had a good idea   why not let Mr Key know  so this is  it  I will let Mr Key know and  all the other members of our parliament and the press.

I will keep on pushing this issue through the election campaign  I am going to get this  exposed.

Get your spin doctors out .. I want some answers.

Regards

Grace Haden

Phone (09) 520 1815
mobile 027 286 8239
visit us at  www.verisure.co.nz
[1] 19741 (2007). Rodney Hide to the Minister of Agriculture

19742 (2007). Rodney Hide to the Minister of Agriculture

9240 (2007). Rodney Hide to the Minister of Agriculture

9241 (2007). Rodney Hide to the Minister of Agriculture

9065 (2007). Rodney Hide to the Minister of Agriculture

7723 (2007). Rodney Hide to the Minister of Agriculture

2 For clarification the false statements are

  1. Registration does not add months  , it is completed in  days
  2. It has nothing to do with IRD
  3. The undertaking  that AWINZ will be registered   was false.. It never occurred.
  4. He never sent a copy of a trust deed
  5. Originals are never sent  he knew this as he had registered other trusts
  6. The deed when it emerged did not have a section 20 (a)

3 By first  having me and my  fellow board members intimidated By Vivienne Holm Then having a  very nonfactual letter sent by   lawyer David Neutze who supplied a  trust deed for a group of people  who  have never had any legal connection with the approved organisation   other than by inference. We offered to meet to discuss the issues, but as these people were not actively involved it was too difficult as these people were not aware of the true nature of the operation. MAF were now asking questions and due to the urgency  Wells had to come up with trustees and recruited  Wyn Hoadley Wyn Hoadley , Graeme Coutts and Wells , without  documentary evidence of being a trustees took legal action  on fabricated grounds. ( Passing off and  breach of fair trading- They had formed a group  used the name AWINZ and   took action against our pre-existing legal entity .


[2] For clarification the false statements are

  1. Registration does not add months  , it is completed in  days
  2. It has nothing to do with IRD
  3. The undertaking  that AWINZ will be registered   was false.. It never occurred.
  4. He never sent a copy of a trust deed
  5. Originals are never sent  he knew this as he had registered other trusts
  6. The deed when it emerged did not have a section 20 (a)

[3] By first  having me and my  fellow board members intimidated By Vivienne Holm Then having a  very nonfactual letter sent by   lawyer David Neutze who supplied a  trust deed for a group of people  who  have never had any legal connection with the approved organisation   other than by inference. We offered to meet to discuss the issues, but as these people were not actively involved it was too difficult as these people were not aware of the true nature of the operation. MAF were now asking questions and due to the urgency  Wells had to come up with trustees and recruited  Wyn Hoadley Wyn Hoadley , Graeme Coutts and Wells , without  documentary evidence of being a trustees took legal action  on fabricated grounds. ( Passing off and  breach of fair trading- They had formed a group  used the name AWINZ and   took action against our pre-existing legal entity .

One Response to “How could A non existent private law enforcement authority survive for so long? Why condone corruption in Waitakere City?”

Leave a Reply