I have had a call from a number of RNZSPCA inspectors who have voiced their concerns that while those at the top have holidays and are on an income derived from donation , the volunteers i.e. those doing the work get very little support .
This is in keeping with a trend which I have observed with charities, both trusts and incorporated societies.
I recently dealt with an incorporated society where the head was on $60,000 per annum and was running about in a $40,000 car paid for the by the incorporated society . It appears that tis lady was ‘in charge” of the entire set up having worked her way up from volunteer to a position where by she could hire and fire the entire executive and select her own executive who had no idea what was going on and approved with everything she put to them because of the trust they had in her.
There is something very wrong with our set up for trusts and incorporated societies ,sure there is now a register but registers need to be more than that – no one apparenlty verifies anything .
Had there been a verification process an ‘ organisation” like AWINZ would not have passed the test it would have failed because
- it did not have a publicly available trust deed
- was not incorporated
- the trustees did not sign the application to the minister
- there was no evidence that those alleged trustees consented to any one applying for “ the organisation “ to become approved
- no one has apparently ever checked the minutes of the “ organisation”
- The trust according to evidence given in court ,does not meet. ( it is not that kind of trust )
This brings me to the issue of trusts there is a huge amount of confusion behind them . There are many people who sit on trusts and the Auckland Air cadet trust is one of them where by one person takes charge and the others simply nod and give consent.
Very few trustees or those on executives of incorporated societies know what their legal roles are . It is therefore essential that any one who wishes to be in control of a trust or incorporated society had a group of “nodders” and disposes quickly of any one who questions and therefore threatens the control.
When action is commenced against a trustee or an executive member to remove them the others should question and not sit back and accept the unverified spin of the person who is seeking to remove a member.
My company Verisure can help in situations like this we gather the information so that impartial material is placed before the meeting and the facts examined rather than allowing some one to be bullied off the organisation .
Anticorruptionnz's Blog 