This week I was told by Rodney Hides office that he could not meet with me due to a conflict of interest due to a public discussion paper which is going to be released next February… all I knew was that it has not yet been written .
I have been questioning why a local government contracts animal welfare services to a trading name for an undisclosed trust and there are no documents which contract council to a legal person . What complicates this is that the person representing the trust , is also the council manager and effectively contacts public services to himself .
Rodney Hide is the minister of local Government and he is my Local MP and it looks as though he is planning his next move after he has the super city set up .The council manager who in my opinion has made false statements to the crown and has worked with a pretend trust then set another trust up to give it some substance is also so the man who wrote the legislation which now appears to me to be being used to privatize dog and stock control, legislation which has wide sweeping powers and little accountability for the enforcers and will be a licence to print money.
We are not supposed to know what is next on the menu but it appears that some already know and are actively planning and this is one year before the public discussion paper is going to come out . so why are some already in the know and How democratic is al of this?
From information I have received from various sources I am of the belief that Dog and stock control will be taken from councils and the SPCA will take over this role. The SPCA and the RNZSPCA will take on extra inspectors , actually I believe that the RNZSPCA will be wound up and new SPCA’s with new constitutions take over.
Royal New Zealand SPCA’s National Chief Executive, Robyn Kippenberger and Rodney Hide are well connected as Robyn was none other than Robyn Mc Donald who was in parliament with Rodney when she was a NZ First list MP.
Despite millions of dollars stashed in trusts, the RNZSPCA is pleading poverty ,this lack of funds was brought about by tactical measures which moved significant sums into other trusts as with the Waikato branch of the RNZSPCA . A recent example of shifting of funds can be seen at SPCA: benefactor’s cash safely invested | Stuff.co.nz
In the mean time more branches are popping up the International league of horses , which tried to become an approved organisation and failed has now become a branch of the SPCA
Many RNZSPCA Inspectors volunteer their time and get little support while the Business of the SPCA grows using the legislation written by a former director and gives them much power and little accountability or transparency.
Few see the significance of the blurring of boundaries with the SPCA and the RNZSPCA much confusion is occurring here and no one seems to be asking questions.
What is significant is the select committee is currently looking at increasing the penalties for animal welfare offences. My submission was rejected and I believe this to be so that the conflicts of interests and the fact that these penalties are payable to the enforcement authorities can remain out of public view.
While this is going on preparations have already commenced for the training of the extra officers and I am picking that this is going to be done through the Waikato Animal Welfare Foundation, which just like AWINZ is just a name and not a legal person .
See news items http://www.infonews.co.nz/news.cfm?l=69&t=72&id=50174
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1003/S00362.htm
http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/news/3526478/New-home-will-be-animal-haven
Hands up who would like to write the legislation for their own business venture, then with as little accountability as possible enforce offences which are strict liability and collect the fines yourself all set in motion without consultation to the public.
Looks to me like an open door to corruption. So why Won’t Rodney speak to me ? does he support corruption? or does he not grasp that councils should not allow managers to contract to themselves and avail themselves of public money by using council staff for their private purposes or fundraise for services provided by council staff and put money in a private bank account held in a trading name for undisclosed persons.
Perhaps its time Rodney looked up the definition of corruption as provided by the United Nations convention against corruption and if New Zealand is at all serious about ratifying the convention then turning a blind eye takes us further from that objective.
Anticorruptionnz's Blog 
I am not surprised at your article/post. I believe what you concluded and said is true from my own personal experience as supported by my research. I also believe that since the mid 1990’s the animal rights supporters (fanatics) had been infiltering and is now firmly entrenched in both the Government, RSPCA, courts and also influencing/recruiting the young academics in universtites . In Australia these fanatics call themselves the “Voiceless Organisation”. In Australia RSPCA aided and abetted by the State Governments committed fraud, defamation, prosecuting for profits in its thefts of “livestock” with fabricated/tainted evidence and false advertising/media releases promoting the “Saviours of ANIMAL CRUELTY” to beg DONATIONS from the PUBLIC. RSPCA in Australia was incorporated on 23/12/1999 as a pet industry trading primarily in pets and a contractor to the State Governments. RSPCA organises the “seizures” and it’s inspectors who carries out these seizures with media and movie coy in tow (administering the Act without supervision from the Governments) carries the “loot” back to it’s shelters where it’s Vets and contracted movie company (Imagination Television Inc. -NZ) manufactures the evidence for the courts, media and television series – Animal Rescue. Check out http://www.petmafia.com.au or Google search “RSPCA corruption” in Australia.
Comment by Geraldine — 02/04/2010 @ 7:35 am
It concerns me very much that there are no controls over the rspca in Australia, where it is absolutely a law unto itself. Also of concern are the qualifications of the vets they use. It seems to me that these people are frequently quite incompetent, and owners of stock are not given notice of proposed rspca raids so they have no chance to call in an independent vet. I would also query the qualifications of many workers employed by the government and used during these raids.
One most alarming factor is that in South Australia a law has been passed allowing the rspca to take and sell farm stock before the case even comes to court. And what qualifications do the rspca have to assess farm stock? It seems the main criteria is knowledge of Law Administration – so many of these Inspectors are Ex-policemen with little knowledge of animals. A THOROUGH ENQUIRY INTO THIS “CHARITY” IS ESSENTIAL.
Comment by Ellen Ash — 03/04/2010 @ 8:28 pm
This information and your comments are extremely concerning. I had no idea that this type of thing was happening, so will have to do some research. I have always gone on trust that councils were all “above board” and that the SPCA in any country was working within the law.
I must admit that I gave up watching the Australian programme Animal Rescue as I was fairly disgusted at any programmes that had horses/donkeys etc in them. The SPCA people and the vets, and farriers, they used seemed to have absolutely no idea about handling horses and particularly good foot care.
Comment by Sandra — 06/01/2011 @ 10:32 am
First off, someone who thinks the RSPCA and the SPCA are separate organisations immediately marks themselves as a conspiracy theorist, that urban myth has been around for decades. Rather like the one that Catholics are not Christian, and the reasoning is similar.
ILPH was a NZ branch of a British charity which has recently changed its name to International Horse Welfare, search Youtube and you will find them. The Princess Royal is a Patron. As the chartiy dollar got tight around the world, the mother organistation had to cut the NZ Branch loose, leaving it without the support which had been it’s lifeline, which is when they looked around to see if they could merge with a larger organisation which had similar aims, a bigger public profile and an infrastructre which could allow them to do their job without reinventing the wheel on a $0 budget.
Perhaps moving such responsibilities under one umbrella will avoid public confusion over what rights Stock officers have and what rights The inspectorate have, prevent doubling up (though I don’t see any mention of the MAF inspectorate) and may actually be a step towards what the SPCA has been calling for for years, standardised, nationwide Dog Control measures with central databases, so owners who build up a bad reputation in on jurisdication cannot, as now, simply up sticks and move to a new area with a clean slate (which can work the other way with a responsible owner)
Comment by Emma — 06/01/2011 @ 10:53 am
The reality is that every SPCA and RSPCA in NZ is a separate organisation you just need to look at the societies web site.
They are independent societies and trust which have amalgamated first under the Federation which was dissolved and now the RNZSPCA .
The private agreement between the bodies is their own arrangement like someone deciding to become a Girl Guide or not .. it is a membership.
The international league of horses are their own incorporated society which decided to look where the funding and the benefits were and merely joined the structure which was most beneficial for themselves.
They tried to become an approved organisation on their own account, MAF turned them down so now they come under the spca which is part of the RNZSPA and there by now has the status which MAF denied them.. there is always a back door .. they found it.
you may also wish to read the post what is the expected standard of an SPCA inspector? put the name BOYD inthe search fiels on this site or go to
what is the expected standard of an SPCA inspector?
Comment by anticorruptionnz — 06/01/2011 @ 11:45 am