In this the ” perceived ” least corrupt county in the world it is very unwise to be a whistle-blower. Believe me I know.
The events surrounding Joanne Harrison Transport Ministry fraud case and see here and here and here have again highlightes the plight of whistle -blowers
MoT fraudster’s ‘destructive streak’
* Joanne Harrison’s $725,000 ‘web of deception’ revealed
* Fresh claims prompt call for new investigation into Transport Ministry fraudster
Three whistle-blowers at the MoT were treated “abysmally”… Winston Peters
The outcome may be different but the story is basically the same as the animal welfare fraud that saw me crucified as a Whistleblower even to the extent that 11 years later a news item has to be published labeling me with names which were used by a police woman in 2012 . Her comments were so confidential that the police refused to release them to me under the privacy act but some how they ended up in the news in 2017.
To me this shows the massive undercurrent of how we deal with Whistle-blowers in New Zealand .
In the instance of Joanne Harrison , her former boss claimed that he had ” handled the saga decisively, and investigated it thoroughly.” But despite this Joanne Harrison was proved to be a fraudster partly by invoicing Fake companies.
My saga began in 2006 when I discovered that a fictional trust had been given law enforcement powers, because no one checked to see if it existed .
Like the Harrison Case we have the former boss taking on a higher role in Government. That is what happened in my case with AWINZ ( the Animal Welfare institute of New Zealand ) .
Had Harrison been a lawyer she would have taken her whistle blowers to court for defamation. For good measure she would have manipulated the proceedings and had their defence of truth and honest opinion struck out , bankrupted them, discredited them and she would have got away with it .
Our courts are routinely used to legitimize fraud , if you have the money and or connections anything is possible including a few extra words from the judge totally slating your whistle blowers reputation .
Harrison was not so lucky , but so far Wyn Hoadley, Graeme Coutts , Tom Didovich and Neil Wells have been able to get away with their respective roles in the concealment of what had the makings of a massive public fraud .
In the AWINZ matter a lawyers a crown law gave a legal opinion in the application process for AWINZ to be granted statutory law enforcement powers for search seizure and prosecution of animal welfare offences, in the statute which Mr Wells had been the author of the No 1 bill and as ” independent” adviser to the select committee .
While the legal opinion may have been sound he never checked the fundamental ….Does the trust actually exist , Had he done so he would have found that it did not .
This lawyer went on to become chief legal officer to the MPI. So to admit that a fraud had occurred would have been to admit to his own negligence. see AWINZ deception evidence I also raised the question
Can MPI legally conceal fraud or does that make them an accessory after the fact?
Martin Matthews the Controller and Auditor-General will also find himself in this conflicted situation.
I have long been critical of Transparency International New Zealand , they claim to be
Transparency International New Zealand (TINZ) is the recognised New Zealand representative of Transparency International, the global civil society organisation against corruption. We are a not-for-profit incorporated society with charitable status. We are non-political and non-partisan.
We Are
- A caretaker of New Zealand’s high trust, high integrity society
- Author of the “2013 New Zealand Integrity Plus National Integrity System Assessment“
- The local chapter of Transparency International, the world leading anti-corruption agency and publisher of the Corruptio
n Perceptions Index
The reality is that Transparency International is funded by the very people they measure . this means that there is no independence and if TINZ was to write something bad about the departments who sponsor them then those who write the reports will not be funded .
It is useful to note that the office of the auditor general is the corner stone Platinum partner . The office of the auditor generals is effectively ” independently ” rated by Transparency International who are sponsored by them .. CONFLICT of interest!
What happened to the petition for a commission against corruption ? see the evidence here Evidence in support of the Petition of Grace Haden and others 5 11
Had something been done in the past then we could have had systems in place to deal with the likes of Joanna Harrison . But in reality in the ” economic ” Business structure we run, we can afford he losses its cheaper than checking.
Well I can tell you as a whistle-blower it has not been economic for me, it cost me my marriage, initially my family, 11 years and well over $300,000.
While the government can expend heaps on crucifying me they cannot spend time looking at the facts to do so would mean that more like mr Martin Matthews would be removed from the security of their high paying jobs ad an old boys net work could very well crumble.
Note NZ ratified the United nations convention against corruption 1 December 2015. Nothing has been done to set up an independent commission against corruption
How many more whistle blowers have to be under attack ? Time to support whistle -blowers
Leave a Reply