State capture. does the Auditor General know what it is ?

In reply to my request for investigation  I received the following reply from auditor general

I have responded as follows

From: Grace Haden
Sent: Friday, 3 August 2012 12:11 p.m.
To: ‘Jude Hutton’;
Cc:; ‘’;;;;; ‘’; Chester Borrows (;; ‘’; ‘’; ‘’; ‘’;
Subject: refusal to investigate and privacy act request.

Open letter in response to  the Auditor General

Thank you for your response  Jude.

This is not an Individual  matter  but one  which   goes to the heart of  corruption In New Zealand

The AWINZ matter involves two distinct types of  corruption

  1. State capture
  2. Public office for private pecuniary gain

These issue are  very serious  and  of public concern.

I have given you  a lot of  evidence   which shows that

  1.  That managers  in  public office  can contract to themselves
  2. That  trusts are used and that there is a general   naivety  and lack of understanding of requirements when  dealing with various forms of  trusts  .
  3. The use of public resources to derive a  private income and the lack of  awareness to prevent this
  4. The inability of  Councils and government departments to verify alleged facts , instead relying on trust and being deceived.
  5. The ability for people to write legislation, and advise on it for  their own business plans.
  6. The ability of interested parties to write caucus papers  to see their own project be accepted by cabinet.
  7. The inability of the charities commission to  administer their act .
  8. The ability to manipulate the process of law.
  9. The propensity to cover up  rather than expose  wrong doings within   councils and government departments

It would appear to me that the tactics used in  the  AWINZ scenario  are  wide spread .Vast sums  of tax payers and rate payers funds are being lost   and  here we have a perfect example   which   provides many lessons  but we cast it aside and say we prefer not to remain ignorant .

By learning lessons from  the AWINZ matter better procedures and   process could be put into place  and   the   billions being syphoned off from the public will instead go for the betterment of  society as a whole.

In the AWINZ matter  the  council never considered if it  wished to  provide “ animal welfare services “ to the rate payers   and the council never  gave approval for    their staff to be used by a third party organisation yet it happened, legal opinions for this private enterprise were also obtained    at a cost to the rate payers.

I would have presumed that   the  audit office would not have  approved of  council managers using the staff under their control  to  use the councils vehicles, infrastructure and resources to  prioritise non council   work. It could well be  that there are no  policies for this  and  that you  simply assume that “ that doesn’t happen”

There is much to be learnt from this very well documented matter  and it proves that there are no safe guards against corruption and  that you do not intend   to have any in place.

I have three requests.

  1. Privacy act request – Please provide me with all  personal information   that you hold on me   .
  2.  Please provide a definition for  both State capture   and public office for private gain   and provide  copies of the policies   which you have in place to deal with    those forms of corruption    .
  3.  Please advise if you have   ever uncovered or  investigated matters  involving   state capture  or public office for private pecuniary gain.

I am the  lead petitioner in  a petition calling for an independent commission against corruption,  the reply I received from you today  will  become part of the evidence as to why we need   such a body.

This  letter will be  published on


Grace Haden

Leave a Reply