Transparency New Zealand

From: Grace Haden [mailto:grace@verisure.co.nz]
Sent: Thursday, 7 July 2011 2:03 p.m.
To: ‘d.carter@ministers.govt.nz’

Good afternoon  Mr Carter.

Open letter . For reasons of transparency  I will be posting  this open letter on my web site  www.Transparency.net.nz and  be circulating the link widely .

In 2006 I made a very big mistake in  becoming a whistle-blower .  I asked a simple question    “Why doesn’t   the animal welfare institute of new Zealand ( AWINZ )   which   was at the time an approved organisation under the animal welfare act , exist in any manner or form?”

This  saw me  being subjected to 5 years of the most unbelievable  court action  .. This court action would not have occurred if   MAF   had ensured that the  approved organisation  existed in some form or other.

I have corresponded with you a number of times  while you have been  minister for agriculture and feel  that n each and every occasion I have been fobbed off.

It started off with a question of accountability  and it still is a question of accountability     “ who  or what at any given time  was AWINZ the  approved organisation .”

It transpires that when I asked this question  Mr Wells then set about  retrospectively  covering up .

Mr Wells created another AWINZ .. a straw man     and claimed that this  was the approved organisation .

It has been  a bit like asking   who is David Carter.      David Carter is  a Minister and has ministerial powers .   But   there are no doubt other persons named  David Carter.. therefore the other  David Carter must be a minister too .

And then for interest sake we have a group of people  who combined call themselves David Carter    so they  each   then have the same    authority as  the Hon David carter do they?

As you can see   it si therefore   very important to identify just who   AWINZ is.   We are fortunate we have a photo of you and  your signature  represents  you  but this is not so with AWINZ.

Just for some background Mr Wells  had the luxury of  writing  the No 1 animal welfare bill and  had inserted into it   the  ability for  an organisation to become “approved “ under the act . He was then   employed by the select committee   as an independent advisor   during the transition period  of the bill becoming law.

All along Mr Wells was communicating with his associate  Tom Didovich    to set up  a structure which was identical to a business plan he had written for himself some years earlier. http://www.transparency.net.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Teritorial-authority-Animal-welfare-services.pdf

He  then applies  for the mythical  creature AWINZ to  become an approved  organisation, having first  earned the trust of MAF staff and talked  with them about AWINZ to  give it the feel of existence.

The reality is  that in this country   it is generally  held that   a person taking on responsibility   consents to it  usually in writing  and   by putting their signatures to   a document.

So   who  is /are the signatories to the agreements   with government  for AWINZ.

Mr Wells made the application  .. unsupported by a signed deed or  authorisation  from any of the persons  he claims to be representing. See  http://www.transparency.net.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/application.pdf he was the only signatory .

He never supplies  any information  proving the existence  of AWINZ and despite assuring the minister that it    “is being registered “ under the charitable trust act  it never is. The significance of registration  is that under the charitable trust act   registered  trust  attains independent legal existence   and becomes a legal person which enables an  appointed person to sign on   behalf of  the  legal entity.

In an unincorporated trust  the legal entities are the trustees who comprise it , the name is only akin to a trading name  which they assume.

When the application is turned  down   my MAF  it goes to caucus  due to the intervention  of  Bon Harvey  who at the time   was  labour party president. He and Mr wells had worked together in an advertising campaign which saw the KIRK govt into power in 1974.

The application is approved  in 2001

In Wells signs an MOU with  MAF  in 2003  http://www.transparency.net.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/mou-MAF.pdf as trustee  of AWINZ.. you have to wonder  where the signatures are of the other trustees    and why still no copy of the trust deed.  Also there is no record on the MAF files of   correspondence to   or from any of the other  so called trustees. And there is no  consent  for wells  to sign on  behalf of any other person .  I have seen the  files I have asked for this evidence  it does not exist.

The MOU  treats   the Animal Welfare Institute  of New Zealand as if it  is a legal  person  when it is not .  It is simply a name  how can the  government  contract  to an undefined name?

In 2006 I  question the  lack of existence of AWINZ  and with others  categorically prove that it does not exist by  incorporating an identically named trust under the  charitable trust act.   Mr Wells then  retrospectively  covers up   and embarks on a  relentless legal campaign to silence me.

I must be the only person in This country  who has  had to pay damages for having questions asked in  parliament.  I am also one of very few who has been sentenced without the claims against me ever having been proved. But that is  for another minister  and another day.

I wish to point out   that an unincorporated trust    cannot  get a loan, it has to be done through each of the trustees signing with the  lender.

An unincorporated trust cannot own property this is  done through the individuals who comprise it .

an unincorporated trust  has no transparency   and is an excellent vehicle for fraud.

But An unincorporated trust  can  apparently  have  law enforcement ability , the  right to  search , seize prosecute, collect penalties  .. all   from  a place where  no one know  who or what  AWINZ is?

I urgently ask you  to conduct a ministerial  enquiry into

1. who or what  AWINZ  the approved organisation was
2. By virtue of which legislation  did MAF  consider   the applicant “ AWINZ” to be capable of making an  application  ..that is how does  something which does not exist make an application? And why was this not fraudulent?
3. How could that application  by  “ just a name “ come to be given law enforcement   ability despite  having  no  legal existence , form , definition, identity  or structure.
4. Why no attempt was made by MAF to  ensure that  those named as  potential parties to  application  knew of  or consented to the  application , purportedly made in their names.
5. Why a blank trust deed was accepted and if the legal implications of accepting an unsigned undated trust deed were ever considered.
6. How  a trust which was retrospectively  created   using the same name as the approved organisation  came to be  recognised by MAF as the approved Organisation.
7. Why  this situation was allowed to continue after having been brought to the attention   of MAF in 2006
8. Why MAF has concealed their  inability to check if  an organisation exited or not  for all these years and stood by   in  silence  while  I  was hauled through the courts  By Mr Wells for  questioning the lack of existence of AWINZ.
9. If john Davies, Marianne Thompson and Stephen Wilce  can be prosecuted  for having a false CV,  why has Mr Wells  got immunity for  making an application in a false name? why is this seemingly   condoned?

Legally as I see it the application for approved status  ,the manner in which the approved organisation   operated   points to only one things.. that prior to   May 2006 ,  AWINZ was  a trading name for Mr Wells .

Activities from  2006 onwards have  been the creation of a straw man  which has sought to confuse  every one and cover  up  that which  by most peoples definition is fraud and or corruption .  Just because there are some so called reputable persons involved  does not make it right .

This matter has dragged on    for far too long   No whistle-blower should ever   again have to go through  what I have suffered.   I fear that once again I  will be ignored  and  that will prove  to me that  this  government  condones corruption.

I hope that  I don’t get the cold shoulder  again .. there is much to be learned from this case which impacts on all new Zealanders  and our future as a nation.

Regards

Grace Haden

Phone (09) 520 1815
mobile 027 286 8239
visit us at  www.verisure.co.nz