How much is AWINZ intertwined with the RNZSPCA? the role of Tom Didiovich … Trustee of AWINZ and RNZSPCA officer ..
You will find Didovich’s web site at http://www.lifecoachtom.com/
He is a life coach known as “life coach Tom”. His web site says “Be well. Seek and find your own and therefore authentic truth for there you will find contentment and harmony with your self and the universe.”
He claims his credentials through Coach inc but he is not listed on their web site.
His history can be summed up from this article from the RNZSPCA “Tom Didovich was recently appointed national education and branch support manager, based at national office . Much of Tom’s 25-year background in animal welfare has been as manager of Animal Welfare Services in Waitakere,west of Auckland”
What is not revealed is Didovich’s connection with AWINZ this can be shown historically as follows.
Didovich was manager of animal welfare Services in 1994 when Wells first put forward the concept of An spca for Waitakere city A in Waitakere city
In May 1995 Wells acting as a consultant for waitakere city corresponds with MAF enclosing a proposal for the animal welfare division of Waitakere city to commence a pilot programe for the council officers to be trained to a standards equal to or exceeding that of RNZSPCA officers – ( note the charge out rates on page 7 )
In preparation for the transition into a private service the Animal welfare Division which Didovich heads has an overnight name change … nothing more than a stroke of a pen.
An agreement “pilot contract” is forwarded to Didovich from Wells which includes provision for Wells to act as Barrister see clause 4 (e)as part of the “pilot programme”
15 January 1996 Wells writes to Didovich about the plan for a Territorial Authority Animal Welfare Services a division of N.E. Wells & Associates
They later appear to work on a draft paper integrating animal welfare with animal control . Note at the bottom of the first page the invitation for Didovich to ad Lib a little bit more.
As the Bill which has been written by Wells progresses through the select Committee (where Wells is employed as a independent adviser ) it becomes clear that a formal structure is required to facilitate the concept of this “ territorial animal welfare Authority “ and Wells proposes a Trust concept for which he is paid , the invoice is approved by Didovich and paid for by public funds .
In January 1998 a proposal document “strategic options ” emerges in which it states “Care would be needed to ensure that activities are not perceived to be in competition with the SPCA although this might be a challenge.”
3 march 1998 Wells communicates with Didovich and has commented on Didovich’s Draft .
April 1998 email wells email “Confidentially, as you know there is a thrust to form a new charitable organisation similar in objective to the SPCA but organizationally different in that it would be a charitable trust rather than an incorporated society. But both are not-for-profit organisations.” While delivering animal welfare compliance would be one of the objectives it would not be the only one.
While there would be no thrust to promote the new charitable trust as an “alternative SPCA” it would not take long for the public to gain this perception. This is all part of contestability”.
13 may 1998 Didovich provides comments on why there is a need for a trust
Didovich email august 98 suggests that the trust should have sponsors for credibility.
31 aug 1998 It would appear that the pilot programme which was set up for 6 months continued to operate without any official authority ( based on the word interregnum) . despite the fact that the “pilot programme” appeared to be operating in anticipation of the new act becoming law .
2 sept 1998 Didovich announces that Animal welfare Waitakere has the dog control contract for the North shore and comments that the North shore is a wealthy area into which they can tap for DONATIONS. He also talks of calling the service provided to North shore as Animal care and control, this is again but a trading name.
2 sept 1998 there is a letter from Wells to DIDOVICH clarifying that “The pilot programme has now passed Into an ‘Interregnum’ phase.” There is no evidence that Didovich ever questioned what this meant and if he had authority to continue on with the programme.
didovich email sept 98Didovich updates his superiors and tells them of a requirement for a trust and a response is received from John Rofe principal adviser council owned business . and a Further more official response is located which appears to have been prompted by Didovich pressuring the council in that establishing a trust step was Urgent paragraph 2 .council direction re trust
On 30 November 1999 an invoice is issued by Wells to recruit the trustees this invoice is authorized for payment by Didovich invoice re trustees this trust was to include Waitakere city but it never eventuated as such an no deed was ever signed.
23 December 1998 there was communications with some of the council staff with regards to the waitakere trust “In discussion today with Tom and Neil Wells, it was agreed that from a public relations perspective, their position should be preserved in some way – either as is or by being absorbed in or connected with the new trust. However, a great deal of the current Animal Welfare development proposal is confidential for the meantime and some Friends of the Ark are connected with SPCA”
19 jan 1999Neil Wells tells MAF that the council have opted for not being in the trust but it appears that this is not communicated to Didovich (or the council) who continues to push the council to set up a trust many months on. didovich email june 99
14 june 1999 Didovich keeps the pressure on to the council and cites the reason being that “The alternative is for Animal Welfare Services to lose all the warrants and this will set us back considerably”. Is he ignorant of Well’s plans doesn’t he know that wells has already told MAF that the city is not going to be involved, or is Wells playing one off against the other?
Two things happen at about this time Neil Wells and some of the people who Tom Didovich gas recommended to council in his email august 98 set up the trust national animal welfare trust which is the name of the trust mooted to council for the proposed trust name in early 1998 .At the same time these same people set up ark angels trust which is not to be confused with the friends of the ark mentioned in the email 23 December 1998
The second thing that happen at this time is that a notice of intent is sent to the minister before the bill is even completed and a month later an application is made for funds for the non existent organisation AWINZ. Two names appear on the application. Neil Wells and Tom Didovich.
at about the same time Didovich and Wells let the SPCA know that they have set up a trust , the general impression is that a trust exists but nothing has ever been done to set one up.
In November Neil Wells on behalf of AWINZ ( a trading name for person or persons unknown) applies for this to become an approved organization. The trustees named are the people Wells recruited and invoiced Council for ( approved by Didovich)
14 December 1999 Didovich is advised by Maf that all warrants expire
Maf require verification from both Waitakere city and North shore city as to support for AWINZ and Didovich does this on two separate letter heads One for north shore and one for Waitakere
Tom later sends through statements from all fourteen staff with regards to their enforced willingness to work for AWINZ, I have attached those of Lyn McDonald QSM and Jane Charles who both lost their jobs later because they were perceived as a threat to AWINZ. Staff to whom I have spoken said that they were upset with this move as they were given no opportunity to decline this involvement and received no extra pay.
AWINZ‘s transition into an approved organisation is not smooth so Didovich writes to the council lawyers with the following instructions “Neil has suggested that he draft a contract under section 37(t) which you could then provide a robust opinion on for subsequent presentation to MAF Policy to see if they will accept such a path forward.” This legal opinion is then forwarded By Wells to MAF6 august 2000
1 sept 2000 Discussion occurs with MAF and further legal opinions are sought all for the setting up of a Private enterprise all paid for by the public purse
AWINZ against the recommendations of MAF and treasurybecomes an approved organisation just after Bob Harvey who at the time was the president of the Labour party and Mayor of Waitakere was consulted.harvey briefed
In 2004 Didovich and Wells signed an mou for waitakere . Didovich signing on behalf of the linked organisation Waitakere city and also according to their files for North shore City.
Didovich has the honour of being written up in the herald he makes the point of stating “”We enforce both the Dog Control Act 1996 and the Animal Welfare Act 1999, other councils don’t. “
In 2005 Didovich and a staff member form a liaison and Didovich has to move on . Neil Wells takes over as manager animal welfare and remains CEO of the so called AWINZ effectively contracting to himself. A check of the companies Web site for ONLINE GOODS LIMITED shows that Didovich is in business with Vicki Whitaker who resides at the same address as him she is an AWINZ inspector and is employed by Waitakere city council as a dog control officer
Didovich on leaving the council takes up a role with the RNZSPCA National Education and Branch Support Manager but later find his way into being a life coach .
When we raised Questions with regards to the existence of AWINZ in 2006 a trust deed emerges dated 1/3/2000 . It has to be noted that Didovich witnesses the signatures of Nuala Grove, Sarah Gilltrap and Graeme Coutts . Didovich in an affidavit claimed that he drove about Auckland to collect the signatures, it would appear that they could not even meet for such an important event as signing the trust deed and you can help but wonder if the date on the trust deed was accurate.
I am told that two of the trustees resigned allegedly because I harassed them ( I said excuse me are you a trustee of AWINZ ? ) Wells, Coutts and Hoadley take legal action against me ( see Hoadley’s involvement )
Didovich turns up in court regularly and is the only support person for Wells on occasions. In December 2006 a new trust deed emerges and Didovich is identified as a trustee.
According to the charities web site Didovich became a trustee ( although not signing a deed ) on 14/8/06
As can be seen on the charities register Wells is a trustee of The Waikato SPCA Trust ( with Peter Blomkamp chief executive SPCA ) Laingholm Baptist Church and The Animal Welfare Institute Of New Zealand
Didovich on 3 December 2009 placed an advertisement in the Gisborne Herald
Tom Didovich
SPCA NZ National Branch
Support Manager:
branchsupport@rnzspca.org.nz or
Ph (09) 827 6094 or fax (09) 827 0784
So what are the parameters between AWINZ and RNZSPCA are they acting as if they are one organisation or does it not matter that those in control of one are also in [psotions of control of the other?
The RNZSPCA are aware of Didovich’s involvement in AWINZ they obviously don’t take it as seriously as one Government department6 dec 2000 lotr did when they discovered that AWINZ had been employing RNZSPCA officers for the provision of false end titles for the Lord of the rings.aha
[…] See also The role of Tom Didiovich … Trustee of AWINZ and RNZSPCA officer […]
Pingback by RNZSPCA Waikato asks ratepayers to fund their bad bookkeeping. « Anticorruptionnz's Blog — 05/02/2011 @ 3:58 pm
[…] 2005 Tom Didovich who had written to the minister on behalf of not one but two councils Didovich for waitakere […]
Pingback by ANIMAL LAW MATTERS | Anticorruption New Zealand — 10/01/2012 @ 8:59 am