To the executive
I am now in possession of my privacy act request and wish to raise some further issues.
From your web site I note that you define transparency as follows “Transparency” can be defined as a principle that allows those affected by administrative decisions, business transactions or charitable work to know not only the basic facts and figures but also the mechanisms and processes. It is the duty of civil servants, managers and trustees to act visibly, predictably and understandably.
This I believe sums up exactly what I wish to know . It is obvious those who made decision in the email poll must have known more about me than what was on my application . I would have hoped that if nothing had been supplied to the members of the board that they would have responded that they did not know enough to make a decision and asked for more information and not provided a declinature.
When I was declined I asked if I could present my self at the AGM so that the members could meet me and make an informed decision I was advised “The Board has also considered your request to attend the 2009 AGM of Transparency International (New Zealand) Inc and your request has been declined” that request was made after the declinature for membership yet you have not included those emails in the privacy request reply.
I also note by the times and dates on the emails that that I was declined before all responses were received , is that ethical?
- The email dated 24 November The author has written “ Ok I vote yes for every one except XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and the third person who is associated with them. My reason for this is that they all have very questionable tactics for achieving their political purposes which includes making slanderous statements. “ please advise
- How this person obtained the information to make this statement, was it based on anything he has been told or heard in the society , or was it information obtained else where, if so which agency did it come from
- i. I would like that member to provide me with the information which he had available to him on which he made that statements. I believe that this is information which needs correcting as I have been unfairly judged.
- In view of that statement I also wish to know if that sentiment has been expressed verbally at any time to influence the other board members , and why is there a reference to three people when only Vince Siemer and I were declined ( yes we do compare notes )
- I was also with Penny Bright yesterday and saw her information request , I wonder why she did not get a copy of that email which obviously bore her name . ( you may also want to tell her why hr application was considered and declined by a member when it had not been tabled. )
Further In the interest of transparency , I would like to know
- Why you are withholding information ? and not being transparent
- What information the members had in front of them when they made the decisions about membership , did they just have names or did the email sent to the board members have the application forms attached and a synopsis on each person? If so what did they have about me?
- I have been on a number of societies and have always been aware that the only rules which are current are those which are filed with the registrar and sealed by him. I note that unlike other societies , your rules are not visible on the Societies web site . I note that you do have rules filed with the charities commission there is nothing in these guide lines which state what the criteria for membership is and I therefore request a copy of the criteria which I was judged against. Why can some people join and why can’t others .
My work, my background and my aims and objectives are in line with those stated in your objectives. I do much to expose corruption and was heartened by your flyer which states corruption ruins lives Fight back.
My family has been devastated because I questioned corruption. I fought back and the very organisation which encourages fighting back will not let me join therefore I cannot I can pass on what I have learnt and observed in the practical sense of fighting corruption.. its like sending the troops into battle and then abandoning them.
I did not wish to join to push my own barrow- but for the good of the public , so that the work that I am doing has wider implications. I don’t have a political agenda other than having stood for the Kiwi party in Epsom, I did not join as a Kiwi party member and I am entitled to my own political affiliations as much as I am assured freedom of association ( bill of rights )
I work at the coal face I work with the people to whom your principals apply.
I am extremely disappointed in the manner in which Transparency International has not lived up to its own objectives, what is ethical about the manner in which I have been judged? Where is the transparency ?
I can only speculate that you do not wish a person such as myself to be a member because I expose corruption and this is not in line with the perspective which you have cast on New Zealand internationally. The reality is that we are as corrupt as the next place only we pretend that we are not corrupt we beat up any one who pokes their head up and says “excuse me but isn’t that wrong?”
I see peoples lives destroyed by corruption and firmly believe that if people stopped seeing New Zealand as a corruption free zone, they may actually start asking questions , questions which would reveal the truth and then they would not be ripped off and their lives would not be destroyed.
Aside from my professional life, I am a mother and a housewife , I used to be a wife but corruption saw the end of my marriage when a lawyer decided to re write my marriage vows because I was sued for speaking the truth .( connection 2 )
I believe that if you sweep dirt under a rug sooner or later you will trip over it and it will come out. To get stains out there is nothing like sun light . Perhaps those who criticise my methods do not realise that the mechanisms that we pretend exist to deal with those issues don’t work and when people are being beaten up through the court and financially crippled because they questioned , have no alternative but to use alternative methods because no one else cares, the only ones that do have suffered the same and then we get criticised for associating with them – no doubt in an attempt to isolate the victims so that no one know how many of us there truly are.
For Four Years I have been questioning
- why we allow people in New Zealand to write legislation which will further their own business interests( and provide potentially vast pecuniary income ) ,
- why people in council can contract to themselves in a trading name
- why it is Ok to make a false statement to the minister to set up a law enforcement agency .
- Why they can solicit public donations claiming to be a charity and deposit money in a bank account only they can access
- Why they can prosecute people and offer diversion for a donation to their trading name and their bank account .
- Why they can use council staff , facilities and resources and claim to be charity and compete with a charity
- Why the court can be used to buy silence .. I was also sued for attempting to locate a director and liquidator – the business partner of David Nathan ( chamber of commerce ) had a finger in the pie and funded the lawyers , he is now a fugitive from our laws but still used the court to beat me up . see news item
I have all the proof in the world obtained from the government departments and councils involved, yet I am the one who was taken to court for defamation for speaking the truth and denied a defence . When the judge could not find enough evidence he had to resort to Google .
Yes I can see why you don’t want me because I believe that what I have touched on is but the tip of a very big ice berg.see https://anticorruptionnz.wordpress.com/the-unitec-connection/
It is good for business that people believe New Zealand is not corrupt.. it bankrupts many and writes off debts. I just wonder how many lives have been lost because of our corruption and the justice system which appears to support it.
I guess your reply will show prove if your organisation is farcical or not .
In the interest of transparency I have put this on my blog to keep the readers informed. https://anticorruptionnz.wordpress.com/