Anticorruptionnz's Blog


Transparency International again lists New Zealand as the least corrupt on the perception index.

Filed under: Uncategorized — anticorruptionnz @ 5:23 pm

What is perception.. It is a view point and according to Transparency international corruption is defined  as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. This definition encompasses corrupt practices in both the public and private sectors. The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) ranks countries according to the perception of corruption in the public sector.

For New Zealand there were 6 reports  which collated the information from which the perception was deduced these reports were

EIU 2010, GI 2010, IMD 2009, IMD 2010, WEF 2009 & WEF 2010  see source English

These were set out in tables in this document English

Abbreviation EIU GI IMD WEF
Source Economist Intelligence Unit Global Insight IMD International, Switzerland, World Competitiveness Center World Economic Forum
Name Country Risk Service and Country Forecast Country Risk Ratings IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook Global Competitiveness Report
Year published 2010 2010 2009 & 2010 2009 & 2010
Who was surveyed? Expert staff assessment Expert staff assessment Executives in top and middle management in domestic and international companies Senior business leaders, domestic and international companies
Subject asked The misuse of public office for private (or political party) gain: including corruption in public procurement, misuse of public funds, corruption in public service, and prosecution of public officials The likelihood of encountering corrupt officials, ranging from petty bureaucratic corruption to grand political corruption Category Institutional Framework – State Efficiency: “Bribing and corruption exist/do not exist” Undocumented extra payments or bribes connected with 1) exports and imports, 2) public utilities, 3)tax collection, 4) public contracts and 5) judicial decisions are common/never occur
Number of replies Not applicable Not applicable 3960 More than 12,000 &13,000
Coverage 135 countries 201 countries 57, 58 countries 133 & 139  countries

So let’s analyse the  questions asked

1.       The misuse of public office for private (or political party) gain: including corruption in public procurement, misuse of public funds, corruption in public service, and prosecution of public officials

2.       The likelihood of encountering corrupt officials, ranging from petty bureaucratic corruption to grand political corruption

3.       Category Institutional Framework – State Efficiency: “Bribing and corruption exist/do not exist”

4.       Undocumented extra payments or bribes connected with 1) exports and imports, 2) public utilities, 3)tax collection, 4) public contracts and 5) judicial decisions are common/never occur

But is it fact or fiction  check this out

1. The misuse of public office for private (or political party) gain  etc

See About AWINZ – Animal welfare institute of New Zealand

including corruption in public procurement,

see What is New Zealand doing about corruption – why is it better to be a fraudster than Question corruption ?

misuse of public funds,

How to get your litigation funded through the public purse

corruption in public service,

see Submission to the select committee

and prosecution of public officials

see Constable Connors of Waikato Fabricates offences, receives counselling- IPCA condones this course of action.

2. The likelihood of encountering corrupt officials, ranging from petty bureaucratic corruption to grand political corruption

High   just don’t question it  except if you want your life destroyed. Questioning fraud gets higher penalty than those who are convicted of fraud

3. Category Institutional Framework – State Efficiency: “Bribing and corruption exist/do not exist”

Where as in many countries money changes hands in new Zealand the” old boys’ net work” is so strong  that it reaches  far and wide , those with an LLB  or  have been in a position of trust are protected because we do not  wish any one to think that  we may have made an error in judgement.  It is far better to conceal than to  reveal  those who are corrupt.

Using the court to conceal corruption

4. Undocumented extra payments or bribes connected with 1) exports and imports, 2) public utilities, 3)tax collection, 4) public contracts and 5) judicial decisions are common/never occur

We have no one checking  so how would  we ever know ?  Councils allow contracts  to be signed off by  managers    and  without  accountability  and auditing  who would know what goes  on.

Bribes.. no  we don’t bribe  but a  Christmas ham is a traditional gift to those offering contracts..  that’s not a bribe its tradition.

so there you have it  folks  that is why NZ is the least corrupt .. we hide it so well

Funny that New Zealand is the only country in the top 10  which has never ratified the United nations convention against corruption   yet we do so well.. its called perception or is that deception .

Funny how NZ is  the only one in the  top 10  which has not ratified the United nations convention agaisnt corruption.

Denmark New Zealand Singapore Finland Sweden
Perception rank
1 1 1 4 4
signed UN convention
10-Dec-03 10-Dec-03 11-Nov-05 9-Dec-03 9-Dec-03
ratified UN convention 26-Dec-06 6-Nov-09 20 Jun 2006 A 25-Sep-07
Canada Netherlands Australia Switzerland Norway
Perception rank
6 7 8 8 10
signed UN convention
21-May-04 10-Dec-03 9-Dec-03 10-Dec-03 9-Dec-03
ratified UN convention 2-Oct-07 31 Oct 2006 A 7-Dec-05 24-Sep-09 29-Jun-06 




RNZSPCA same issues different country

Filed under: Uncategorized — anticorruptionnz @ 1:25 pm

Animal Advocates, British Columbia

We, Animal Advocates of British Columbia, figured out why there is so little concern for animal welfare, and protection from cruelty for animals in BC. This led us to the reform of the BC SPCA, for which we are being sued.


to see the work which  Judy does visit


details of the charges which were withdrawn against the Toronto Humane Society


Dear Judy,

Thank you for your email in support of the campaign for accountability, transparency and governmental oversight of the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.   Problems with the Ontario SPCA appear to be similar to what you are experiencing with the British Columbia SPCA.  Indeed, Ontario and BC SPCA’s have a long history of exchanging staff.

In Ontario, a motion calling for governmental oversight of the OSPCA was recently tabled by PC MPP Frank Klees.  Both the provincial PC caucus and several NDP MPPs have publicly endorsed the motion.

FYI, the following is a broad overview of the components of our advocacy campaign.

Ontario web designer Doug Brown.  A man touched by the May 2010 goings on at the Newmarket SPCA, he built the website independently.  Doug’s  approach is measured and lawful.

Gord Macey ably administers a 40,000 member FaceBook page entitled  “Stop the Slaughter of over 350 animals at the Newmarket OSPCA!!!”   A independent, passionate, multifaceted group with the skills and tenacity needed to understand and reform this flawed SPCA system/model.

We have been inadvertently blessed by major faux pas on the part of the OSPCA, the timing of which has been very much in our favour.

  • The OSPCA’s 2009 investigation of their largest and most troublesome affiliate, the Toronto Humane Society, culminated in the withdrawal, by the Crown Attorney, of ALL  animal cruelty charges laid by the OSPCA against THS management and directors.   The Crown Attorney publicly, scathingly cited multiple, serious charter violations.  As this was arguably the OSPCA’s most significant investigation ever, and as such, it would have been in the hands of management and senior staff, let the Crown Attorney’s statement be a clear indicator that investigative and enforcement powers of any kind, let alone the right to warrantless entry, do not belong in the hands of this organization.
  • The emptying of and subsequent shut down of the THS on April 11, 2010 following weeks of highly publicised legal skirmishes between the two parties, served only to highlight how utterly dysfunctional Ontario’s animal welfare system really is.  The THS “re-structured”, re-opening with fanfare in June of 2010.  Both the public and the media appeared to take these OSPCA/THS theatrics in stride.
  • On May 11, 2010 the OSPCA confirmed they too would empty their shelter and shut down; citing the need to eradicate a stubborn, exceptionally virulent strain of ringworm which allegedly posed a grave danger even to the surrounding community.  All animals in the building would be euthanized.  In the face of unprecedented public and media outrage, the OSPCA stopped the killing, but not before 102 animals lay dead.  Ironically, testing revealed none of the saved animals were infected with ringworm.  The OSPCA has not seen fit to release information in support of their “ringworm” claims.  They confirm only that the Newmarket shelter remains contaminated and closed until January 2011.  We have noted though, that the organization has begun distancing itself publicly from statements they originally made about the severity of the strain of ringworm.  In the meanwhile, the OSPCA, like the THS, is  busily “re-structuring.
  • An Ontario Veterinary Medical Association’s press release directly linked the practice of importing and selling “Katrina/hurricane puppies” by OSPCA affiliates and animal shelters over the years, to a tenfold increase in heartworm in south western Ontario. Puppies housed in stacked crates were sold by OSPCA affiliates; at times out of transport trucks in mall parking lots.  Press releases confirm sales often occurred within hours of arrival without veterinary examinations.  Ontario dogs were being euthanized while this was going on.
  • Multiple locations in the OSPCA’s province wide network of affiliates and branches recently exhibited examples of utterly dysfunctional governance.  Resigning boards. Ousted boards.  Allegations of misspending. Boards suing and being sued.  Boards attempting to strip members of voting rights.  Directors and management charged with animal cruelty.  Multiple provincial directors earning income working for the very organization whose enforcement activities they’ve been elected to oversee, in blatant violation of Charity Law.

The OSPCA’s head office, the infamous Newmarket “ringworm” shelter,  is located in the riding of a seasoned Progressive Conservative MPP who mobilized every resource at his disposal in the wake of the events of May 11, 2010.  Ontario advocates are truly grateful for the support of MPP Frank Klees and the PC party of Ontario.

Nearly 2,000 legislative petitions covering 101 provincial ridings have been hand delivered and receipted at Queen’s Park.   MPPs are strongly encouraged to represent their constituents by publicly reading at least one petition each.   No Liberal MPP has yet stepped forward to publicly endorse governmental oversight of the Ontario SPCA. Frustrated constituents remind the Liberal Party  – the October 6, 2011 provincial election is just around the corner.

A cabinet shuffle occurred recently.  The new Minister (perhaps inadvertently) revealed the government’s position…. the OSPCA follows a universally accepted model, in use without incident internationally, we therefore see no need for change.  The litany of accusations against the OSPCA and cries for accountability repeatedly heard during province wide Committee Hearings for Bill 50 in July 2008 must have fallen on deaf ears.  Residents of England, Australia, New Zealand, British Columbia, Manitoba and the US  are invited to share with Minister Bradley how well the SPCA is working in their neck of the woods.  Ontarians are also welcome to email the Minister. .  Frankly, the “SPCA model” isn’t working well at all in Canada or internationally.  Animal welfare and enforcement does not belong in the hands of self-administered, self-funded charities.

Faithful protesters represent the cornerstone of our advocacy efforts.  They’ve kept vigil for months holding up their homemade signs on a lonely, windswept stretch of Woodbine Avenue in front of the Newmarket OSPCA.    Although increasingly intimidated by the bullyboy tactics of OSPCA (defamatory press releases, being filmed and followed by security guards), these dedicated women kept the issue of governmental oversight of the OSPCA front and centre.  No doubt, without them, the slaughter of 350 animals by the OSPCA would simply have just gone ahead.

The Ontario Landowners, a powerful provincial advocacy group with approximately 15,000 pre-dominantly rural members, is very aware of, and perturbed by, the OSPCA’s antics.  A 2008 policy statement, drafted in the wake of repeated calls for help from animal owners targeted by inexperienced, overzealous OSPCA inspectors and volunteer agents reads as follows:  “The responsibility for the care of animals rests with the owners. When owners demonstrably fail in their responsibility, it is in the public interest to ensure animal welfare. Public authorities must accept all resulting responsibilities for both their enforcement activities and animals in their care.” The Landowners are renowned for travelling province wide in support of animal owners during OSPCA raids, Animal Care Review Board hearings and court cases.

I mustn’t forget the stalwart victims of the OSPCA and the many animals who have been killed by the OSPCA over the years. Both truly have paid the ultimate price for the flawed legislation that is Ontario’s SPCA Act.

In 1989 Ontario Federation of Agriculture President Brigid Pyke formally lobbied the province to have police powers removed from the OSPCA.  In 2006 twenty nine OSPCA directors resigned, among them the Chair and the Treasurer.  A letter was sent to Premier McGuinty, signed by eight directors, demanding police powers be removed from the organization.  Requests of this magnitude can only be the direct result of systemic, entrenched abuse of police powers by an organization.

The province obviously reacted differently, responding in 2008 with the passage of Bill 50 granting the OSPCA extraordinary new powers including the right to warrantless entry.  For good measure, the OSPCA also received a one time provincial grant of $5 million and a federal grant of $1.8 million among others.

Ontario families, farmers, animal businesses and animal lovers are outraged.  They have silently and patiently suffered the indignities and lawlessness that only a private police force operating entirely without governmental oversight dares to so brazenly inflict.  Families have become outcasts in their communities in the wake of sensationalist, opportunistic press releases seeking  donations, glory and publicity for the OSPCA.  Repeated harassment by the OSPCA even resulted in a distraught Massey Ontario farmer attempting suicide in the presence of the OSPCA.

Sadly Judy, your advocacy campaign for accountability and transparency of the British Columbia SPCA resulted in you being sued by the BC SPCA.

Even more disappointing, frightening even, is the BC government’s lack of response in the wake of your evidence.

It would appear then, that our achievements here will be of great import not only to the people and animals of Ontario, but also across Canada and internationally.


Sunny  Reuter


SPCA Greed a world wide issue are we going to condone it?

Filed under: SPCA / RNZSPCA — anticorruptionnz @ 10:13 am

Time for a review of RSPCA Animal Charity’s Bullyboy Tactics ?


What happens in New Zealand is generally  something which has happened over seas.   do  look at  this excellent site   and see  what is in store for us.

compare the  posters above  with the poster by Neil Wells  of AWINZ    see a similar trend?

British Columbia The BC SPCA has run itself into a $10 million deficit and fiscal crisis during the past three years, which in my view is an unconscionable abuse of donors’ goodwill.  More

BC SPCA sues AAS for defamation in BC Supreme Court    Nothing new here this is exactly what has  happened to me   for  questioning the non-existent AWINZ    read the   BCSPCA story

Manitoba a great article  on  contracting out of policing   to SPCA’s

Ontario NO OVERSIGHT – NO ACCOUNTABILITY! See how  dogs were put down by the SPCA

USA        Cruelty to Pet Owners? Some Owners Accuse Their SPCA Chapter of Taking Their Pets and Selling Them  …

SPCAs have an image of being animal rescuers. And there’s no question that the many Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals around the country do a lot of good work, rushing in to save animals from abusive people.

But some people who’ve had animals taken away by animal rescuers say some SPCAs have acted like petty tyrants on power trips. They say they use their police powers to take away people’s animals, even when the animals don’t need rescuing…..

see     and see the parallels  of what  is happening here in New Zealand

Time to wake up  New Zealand  the following is a letter to a minister In   Ontario   it   will  fithte bill here too

Dear Minister Bradley

Residents of Ontario are helpless and so angry at the continued lawlessness, arrogance, vindictiveness and ignorance exhibited by Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ (OSPCA) inspectors and volunteer agents.   Tell me, where do we go for help?

The  Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services under Minister Bartolucci empowered the OSPCA with extraordinary police powers (Bill 50) which directly violate the Canadian Charter of Rights (warrantless entry in the hands of a self-funded charity – who does that???).

Millions of tax payer dollars have gone to the OSPCA provincially and federally in the form of one time grants.    This in addition to the $15 million they collected in donations in 2009.

None of that would be an issue except that there’s a COMPLETE AND UTTER LACK OF OVERSIGHT, ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY.

You admit, under current legislation your Ministry is precluded from investigating the OSPCA.   How is it that possible?

We can’t go to the Ombudsman for help because the OSPCA although called forth, mandated, empowered and partially funded  by the government is “not a governmental agency”.

Appeals of orders and/or seizures via the Animal Care Review Board are available only if requested during the first 5 days.  After that – nothing.

Truthfully, the only vehicle available to farmers and animal owners with a grievance against the OSPCA are the courts which, realistically speaking, are not an option for the common man or woman.

We are at the mercy of your Ministry’s legislation and we are begging for your help.   We have been begging for help for years.

The law must be changed.  The OSPCA has done as it pleases for far too long.

Issues of improper governance, spending, euthanasia rates & shelter protocol, abuse of enforcement powers, perjury, lack of transparency, charter violations, conflict of interest, allegations of extortion etc.  must be swiftly addressed.  We’ve already had one farmer attempt suicide as a direct result of repeated bullying tactics of OSPCA inspectors.

SOMEONE, SOMEHOW, SOMEWHERE must be able to hold this private self-funded police force accountable for their actions.

Please amend the OSPCA act to ensure accountability, transparency and governmental oversight of the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

Recently well over 2,000 petitions have been distributed to virtually every MPP in the provincial legislature.

We demand that your Ministry review the powers of the OSPCA.

Re-read the province wide Bill 50 Committee hearings in Hansard July 2008.

Do not ignore this issue.  Too many families live in utter fear of the Ontario SPCA.  I do not believe this is what the government’s intent was in passing the Ontario SPCA Act.


What skeletons will be found in the closets when the cities amalgamate?

Filed under: Neil Wells,transparency — anticorruptionnz @ 9:54 am

Bob Harvey  has  said his farewells   and acknowledges those special helpers    in a list which includes  his colleague  Neil Wells  who he shares history with right back  to advertising days.see  mayoral acknowledgement to neil wells and welcome to wells

The meeting was also attended by  a colleague of mine   who has reported  the  massive film industry losses  on his blog

What will come out of the wood work when the cities close their doors?


Constable Connors of Waikato Fabricates offences,receives counselling- IPCA condones this course of action.

Filed under: corruption,police — anticorruptionnz @ 10:52 am

Recently I wrote about the abuse of the *555 system Police failing to investigate filing court action without evidence.

I have now received replies from the Police and the IPCA .  the police had the good sense to admit that they were wrong  but hen went on to   counsel Constable Connors – an action which is less than a slap with a wet dish rag for  what I believe is  a serious  matter concerning the integrity of the police.

I have written an open letter to the minister of police as follows.   I attached the letters  being ,letter from Police reply from the IPCA

From: Grace Haden []
Sent: Tuesday, 5 October 2010 10:37 a.m.
To: ‘’
Cc: ‘’; ‘’; ‘’; ‘’; ‘’
Subject: Contable Connors of Waikato Fabricates offences , receives counselling – IPCA condones this course of action.

Open letter to Judith Collins.

Dear Minister

I would  like to   take this opportunity to make you aware that your officers can  tell lies  and  lay false  charges in court against people  without fear of repercussion.

Every day people  are charged and  fined  for things  which they  do unintentionally . The fines  set for these things are  sufficiently high  to  hurt  but sufficiently low to make  challenging the claims uneconomic.

Constables  with Quotas to fill have now taken this concept to a new height  and that is   the total fabrication of offences.

Last January  I received a traffic infringement for an offence which I had not committed  and  the police had no evidence for.

Being a former Police prosecutor ,I brought this  to the attention  of as many supervisors in the police  as possible each time asking for  a review and pointing out  just where their evidence was lacking.

Despite this the police chose to continue the  prosecution,  the fine was $150  and I was tempted to pay it as it was the most economical thing to do, to defend it  I would have had to have  had two trips to  Thames.. One to enter a plea of not  guilty  the other  for a defendant hearing . If it was not  for the fact that I had been a police prosecutor and knew how to  run a defendant hearing  I would have paid it  as the time for putting the case together even without the expense of a lawyer  simply is not worth  it.

I had no fear of losing my licence and  I purely defended it  because  I did not commit the offence.

The initial  not guilty   appearance was generously disposed of    and  when  I appeared in court for the defendant hearing  , I won because there was no evidence of the alleged offence.

The police have now  admitted that  they were wrong , and  say that  not only  should I not have been charged , they should have reviewed the file and withdrawn the charges.

I have taken it to the IPCA   and although this incident has cost me  a lot  there has been little or no  repercussion for the  constable  who  laid a false charge.

When there is no accountability   or repercussions we can only expect  false charges to  continue . Counselling  is hardly  deterrent and the stand taken by  the  district and the IPCA appears to  condone  the action.

The police have a duty to crime prevention   to allow their constables to commit a crime  by  bringing false charges  is in direct conflict with the police  role.


The police code of conduct states ( available at the hyperlink)

In the introduction it states

The purpose of this Code is to establish the standards of behaviour expected of all New Zealand Police employees. New Zealand’s police service is often judged by the way its employees represent it. It is therefore necessary to maintain a high standard of personal and professional conduct. The cornerstone of this Code is that all

employees of New Zealand Police will work to the highest ethical standard

the codes include

  • Employees are committed and loyal to the vision, values and goals of New Zealand Police. They inspire trust and behave honestly, ethically  and with integrity.
  • All employees have a responsibility to act with fairness and impartiality in all dealings with their colleagues and the public, and to be seen to do so, avoiding any potential or perceived conflicts of interest.
  • All employees understand that their role is to acknowledge and respond to our diverse society and to treat all people and their property with dignity and respect.

Under the heading Misconduct

  • negligence or carelessness in the performance of duty
  • treating a person harshly

Under the heading Serious  Misconduct

  • knowingly falsifying a document or Police record/s or knowingly making a false declaration or statement, including  an incorrect record of attendance or false explanation of an absence

Why do we than have a code of ethics  which  In my opinion the constable has breached as shown in bold .

I am disappointed that the IPCA  believe that counselling a cop  who deliberately lied  and filed  fabricated  charges, is sufficient  . Laying  a false charge is a criminal offence  one which  done by a police officer is through this action ,  apparently condoned.

The integrity of the police needs to be preserved and those officers  who  mislead and deceive the courts  and the public need to be held accountable.  By allowing  constables to be  counselled for  what I believe is a serious offence  and according to the  code of conduct serious Misconduct ,   undermines the integrity of the police and makes the code of ethics a farce .

I wish to bring this to the attention of the minister, so that  action can be taken which  will enhance the integrity and accountability of the police.

I am a  anti corruption specialist  and believe that  by making people accountable for  their actions  is a step towards a less corrupt  society.

As with other letters I have sent to ministers  I expect that you will just cast this aside and I will never hear again   so I will be posting this on my   blog

I hope that for  the integrity of the police and the confidence that the  public  that action is taken   with regards to  constables who fabricate charges.  The mere fact that I have gone to the lengths that I have and nothing has been  done  just shows  how  far the police itself condones   this practice as  does the IPCA   which is totally ineffective.

I do hope that you see the seriousness of it


Grace Haden

Phone (09) 520 1815
mobile 027 286 8239
visit us at

Create a free website or blog at