How many times has the Ministry used fake names for Benefit Review Committee members?

Katherine Raue made this Official Information request to Ministry of Social Development

The request was partially successful.

From: Katherine Raue

Dear Ministry of Social Development,

I request the following information:
1 A copy of the recent "memo" from the Chief Executive's agent Mr Van Ooyen to the Social Security Appeals Authority in which Mr Van Ooyen states that the Ministry routinely provides fake names or pseudonyms instead of the actual names of members of the BRC. I would expect all details regarding the identity of the client to be redacted, but I request all other information contained in the memo.
2 A copy of the Minutes issued by the SSAA on 8 and 9 March 2017 regarding that memo.
3 How many times has the Ministry used fake names?
4 What action was taken in response to the fact that this matter was brought to the attention of the Ministry in 2015?
5 All communication between Ministry staff regarding the matter of the Minutes issued by the SSAA.
6 All information regarding the practise or policy of using fake names for BRC members, including all information regarding discussions and decisions about the practise.

Yours faithfully,

Katherine Raue

Link to this

From: OIA_Requests (MSD)
Ministry of Social Development

Tēnā koe Ms Katherine Raue

Thank you for your email received 5 April 2017, under the Official Information Act 1982. Your request has been forwarded to the appropriate officials at National office to respond. You may expect a decision regarding your request to be sent to you as soon as possible.
 
Nā mātou noa, nā

Official and Parliamentary Information team   |  Ministerial and Executive Services
Ministry of Social Development

Our Purpose:
We help New Zealanders to help themselves to be safe, strong and independent
Ko ta mātou he whakamana tangata kia tū haumaru, kia tū kaha, kia tū motuhake

show quoted sections

Link to this

D Dahya left an annotation ()

It appears that MSD staff members feel the need to conceal their real names/identity regarding BRC matters. If we are expected to respect this, then surely, the same should be applied to those that are beneficiaries/job seekers or those that have requested their identity details be concealed?

I raised point with Stephen Ward (chairman BRC hearing) of why it was necessary to record my personal info ie age ,marital status etc on the BRC report when he was aware I would be escalating matter to an external agency and I was not comfortable having that personal information passed to any external organisation. He advised that the matter(ROD) related to my entitlements that were based on age,marital status etc. I advised that this was not the case as the ROD was entirely about why MSD/WINZ failed to provide any assistance or support to me regarding my job application to MSD in 2014 for a Web Administrator which subsequently was declined.

Refer link to my complaint ...'Key points ignored by MSD/BRC & Social Security Appeals Authority'..
https://fyi.org.nz/request/5727-key-poin...

Link to this

From: OIA_Requests (MSD)
Ministry of Social Development


Attachment 20170504 Extension RAUE.PDF.pdf
111K Download View as HTML


Tēnā koe Ms Katherine Raue

Please find attached a letter advising of the need to extend the time available to make a decision on your request until 24 May 2017
 
Nā mātou noa, nā

Official and Parliamentary Information team   |  Ministerial and Executive Services
Ministry of Social Development

Our Purpose:
We help New Zealanders to help themselves to be safe, strong and independent
Ko ta mātou he whakamana tangata kia tū haumaru, kia tū kaha, kia tū motuhake

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: OIA_Requests (MSD)
Ministry of Social Development

Dear Ms Raue

On 5 April 2017 you emailed the Ministry requesting, under the Official
Information Act 1982, the following information:

·         A copy of the recent "memo" from the Chief Executive's agent Mr
Van Ooyen to the Social Security Appeals Authority in which Mr Van Ooyen
states that the Ministry routinely provides fake names or pseudonyms
instead of the actual names of members of the BRC.  I would expect all
details regarding the identity of the client to be redacted, but I request
all other information contained in the memo.

·         A copy of the Minutes issued by the SSAA on 8 and 9 March 2017
regarding that memo.

·         How many times has the Ministry used fake names?

·         What action was taken in response to the fact that this matter
was brought to the attention of the Ministry in 2015?

·         All communication between Ministry staff regarding the matter of
the Minutes issued by the SSAA.

·         All information regarding the practise or policy of using fake
names for BRC members, including all information regarding discussions and
decisions about the practise.

 

The Ministry has decided to grant your request in part, however, it will
take some time to prepare this information for release. The Ministry
intends to provide you with a response by 24 June 2017.

 

The Ministry has also decided to refuse part of your request for
information under the following sections of the Official Information Act:

 

·         Some information is held in notes on individual case files. In
order to provide you with this information Ministry staff would have to
manually review hundreds of files and is refused under section 18(f) of
the Act.

·         The names of some individuals are withheld under section 9(2)(a)
of the Act in order to protect the privacy of natural persons.

·         Some information may be withheld under section 9(2)(h) of the
Act in order to maintain legal professional privilege. The greater public
interest is in ensuring that government agencies can continue to obtain
confidential legal advice.

If you wish to discuss this decision with us, please feel free to contact
[1][MSD request email]

 

If you are not satisfied with this decision, you have the right to seek an
investigation and review by the Ombudsman. Information about how to make a
complaint is available at [2]www.ombudsman.parliament.nz  or 0800 802 602.

 

Yours sincerely

Official and Parliamentary Information team   |  Ministerial and
Executive Services

Ministry of Social Development

 

Our Purpose:
We help New Zealanders to help themselves to be safe, strong and
independent
Ko ta mātou he whakamana tangata kia tū haumaru, kia tū kaha, kia tū
motuhake

 

 

 

show quoted sections

Link to this

Katherine Raue left an annotation ()

We are currently seeking legal advice regarding the response of the Ministry with a view to challenging it by way of judicial review. Every person affected by the Ministry's use of fake names in Benefit Review decisions has the right to apply for a rehearing, and to be informed that the Ministry used fake names when dealing with those clients.

We are entitled to know how many other times the Ministry communicated with Court or Tribunals "in confidence" regarding their policy of using fake names during review processes.

Taxpayer and Ministry clients are entitled to know how many times this occurred and the Ministry seems to be attempting to evade their legal obligations in order to conceal evidence of their evasion of their fiduciary obligations to their clients.

We are also complaining to the Ombudsmen regarding this decision and the delay in providing this information.

We note with interest that some of this information is now available to access on the internet. It can be accessed at the following link and is well worth reading.

It appears that the Ministry has breached its own policies - unless it has a policy of using fake names, which is entirely likely - and worse, the actions of the Ministry show a blatant contempt for New Zealand legislation as well as article 14 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights.

Link to this

Katherine Raue left an annotation ()

Link did not appear in previous annotation for some reason, posting it again:

http://sonjalawson.blogspot.co.nz/2017/0...

Link to this

Katherine Raue left an annotation ()

Complaint laid with the Office of the Ombudsmen, as follows:

On May 24th I received a delayed response from the Ministry of Social Development regarding a request under the Official Information Act. The latest response to this request is copied below:

Dear Ms Raue,
On 5 April 2017 you emailed the Ministry requesting, under the Official Information Act 1982, the following information:
· A copy of the recent "memo" from the Chief Executive's agent Mr Van Ooyen to the Social Security Appeals Authority in which Mr Van Ooyen
states that the Ministry routinely provides fake names or pseudonyms instead of the actual names of members of the BRC. I would expect all
details regarding the identity of the client to be redacted, but I request all other information contained in the memo.
· A copy of the Minutes issued by the SSAA on 8 and 9 March 2017
regarding that memo.
· How many times has the Ministry used fake names?
· What action was taken in response to the fact that this matter was brought to the attention of the Ministry in 2015?
· All communication between Ministry staff regarding the matter of the Minutes issued by the SSAA.
· All information regarding the practise or policy of using fake names for BRC members, including all information regarding discussions and decisions about the practise.

The Ministry has decided to grant your request in part, however, it will take some time to prepare this information for release. The Ministry intends to provide you with a response by 24 June 2017.
The Ministry has also decided to refuse part of your request for information under the following sections of the Official Information Act:
· Some information is held in notes on individual case files. In order to provide you with this information Ministry staff would have to manually review hundreds of files and is refused under section 18(f) of the Act.
· The names of some individuals are withheld under section 9(2)(a) of the Act in order to protect the privacy of natural persons.
· Some information may be withheld under section 9(2)(h) of the Act in order to maintain legal professional privilege. The greater public interest is in ensuring that government agencies can continue to obtain confidential legal advice.
If you are not satisfied with this decision, you have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman. Information about how to make a complaint is available at [2]www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or 0800 802 602.
Yours sincerely
Official and Parliamentary Information team | Ministerial and Executive Services
Ministry of Social Development
Our Purpose:
We help New Zealanders to help themselves to be safe, strong and independent
Ko ta mātou he whakamana tangata kia tū haumaru, kia tū kaha, kia tū motuhake

This is a formal complaint about that response. Evidence strongly indicates that the Ministry acted against legal advice, and it is in the public interest that the legal advice is provided - the response is a mockery of section 9(2)(h) of the Act! The government represents the people, and the people are entitled to know if the government acts against the people and against legal advice - providing the information requested would in no way prevent obtaining confidential legal advice in the future - confidential until a request is made anyway. It is in the public interest to provide the legal advice because it is clear that the Ministry acted against legal advice!

As for the excuse regarding section 16(f) - this excuse is totally rejected - everyone affected by the practise of using fake names is entitled to know that, and entitled to complain about it, and needs to be advised of it - the actions are in direct breach of article 14 of the international Covenant of Civil and Political Rights!
This is a complaint regarding the actions of the Ministry as well as the delayed response to the OIA request.
Katherine Raue.

Link to this

Christopher Arnesen left an annotation ()

MSD was supposed to reply by June 24th. Has the Ministry done so, and will that reply be posted in such a manner that anyone can see it?

Not only has MSD been accused of using fake names and pseudonyms for BRC members, it is also being accused of deceiving a United Nations investigation into New Zealand's treatment of legitimately earned overseas contributory pensions.

Link to this

From: OIA_Requests (MSD)
Ministry of Social Development

Good afternoon Ms Raue

 

This email is to advise you that your request for information is in the
final stages of sign out and will be provided to you once the
documentation has been approved for release.

 

I would like to thank you for your patience as the collation of the
information took longer than expected.

 

Kind regards

 

Official and Parliamentary Information team   |  Ministerial and
Executive Services

Ministry of Social Development

 

Our Purpose:
We help New Zealanders to help themselves to be safe, strong and
independent
Ko ta mātou he whakamana tangata kia tū haumaru, kia tū kaha, kia tū
motuhake

 

 

From: OIA_Requests (MSD)
Sent: Wednesday, 24 May 2017 10:16 a.m.
To: 'Katherine Raue'
Cc: OIA_Requests (MSD)
Subject: RE: 20170407 OIA Request RAUE

 

Dear Ms Raue

On 5 April 2017 you emailed the Ministry requesting, under the Official
Information Act 1982, the following information:

·         A copy of the recent "memo" from the Chief Executive's agent Mr
Van Ooyen to the Social Security Appeals Authority in which Mr Van Ooyen
states that the Ministry routinely provides fake names or pseudonyms
instead of the actual names of members of the BRC.  I would expect all
details regarding the identity of the client to be redacted, but I request
all other information contained in the memo.

·         A copy of the Minutes issued by the SSAA on 8 and 9 March 2017
regarding that memo.

·         How many times has the Ministry used fake names?

·         What action was taken in response to the fact that this matter
was brought to the attention of the Ministry in 2015?

·         All communication between Ministry staff regarding the matter of
the Minutes issued by the SSAA.

·         All information regarding the practise or policy of using fake
names for BRC members, including all information regarding discussions and
decisions about the practise.

 

The Ministry has decided to grant your request in part, however, it will
take some time to prepare this information for release. The Ministry
intends to provide you with a response by 24 June 2017.

 

The Ministry has also decided to refuse part of your request for
information under the following sections of the Official Information Act:

 

·         Some information is held in notes on individual case files. In
order to provide you with this information Ministry staff would have to
manually review hundreds of files and is refused under section 18(f) of
the Act.

·         The names of some individuals are withheld under section 9(2)(a)
of the Act in order to protect the privacy of natural persons.

·         Some information may be withheld under section 9(2)(h) of the
Act in order to maintain legal professional privilege. The greater public
interest is in ensuring that government agencies can continue to obtain
confidential legal advice.

If you wish to discuss this decision with us, please feel free to contact
[1][MSD request email]

 

If you are not satisfied with this decision, you have the right to seek an
investigation and review by the Ombudsman. Information about how to make a
complaint is available at [2]www.ombudsman.parliament.nz  or 0800 802 602.

 

Yours sincerely

Official and Parliamentary Information team   |  Ministerial and
Executive Services

Ministry of Social Development

 

Our Purpose:
We help New Zealanders to help themselves to be safe, strong and
independent
Ko ta mātou he whakamana tangata kia tū haumaru, kia tū kaha, kia tū
motuhake

 

 

 

show quoted sections

Link to this

Katherine Raue left an annotation ()

How ironic. Received today, a letter from the Manager at the "Early Resolution Team".

It can be read at this link, and it demonstrates why the current system is such an utter waste of time:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-Evc9...

This is an insult to taxpayers, we're simply funding a huge 'complaints industry' in which people like Rachel are paid tax payers' money to fob us off with this ineffectual nonsense while the Ministry tries to weasel out of this.

I note that the person who is the catalyst for this request has been targeted by the Ministry as a whistleblower - they wasted no time in pursuing her in a manner which a High Court Judge deemed "disturbing":

http://kate-raue.blogspot.co.nz/2003/12/...

Of course, the Ministry has a quota to fill, and vulnerable women are an easy target:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard...

Another commentator mentions misleading the UN inquiry. Might as well read about that while we wait - links to some information regarding that are as follows - but get in quick, the Herald in particular and media in general are removing 'news' articles from their websites fast these days:

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/3...

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/articl...

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9351235...

Link to this

Miss Sonja Marie Lawson left an annotation ()

I find the Ministry of Social Development is using excuses not to release information. MSD has stated they would have to manually review hundreds of files regarding the use of false names. This is simply not true as there are only 90 clients of the Remote Client Unit. Of these 90 not all would have been to a District Benefit Review Committee hearing as well a number of RCU clients have had multiple reviews. Therefore I would have thought MSD would have a list of the RCU clients who have been to a hearing and how many have been held. This information could be retrieved simply by the RCU staff printing a list of their clients for MSD to peruse and provide the information requested. As RCU client information can only be accessed by RCU staff it would not take much for RCU staff to provide this information as there are only 2 RCU case managers and one RCU manager. I am sure these staff members would have a record of which of their clients have been to a DBRC hearing and how many have been heard by the DBRC members. It is of note I can confirm the RCU told my lawyer I have had multiple reviews where false names were used. Also I know of at least two other RCU clients that have had multiple reviews where false names were used. Of note George Van Ooyen swore on oath at the Social Security Appeal Authority recently that MSD hold a record of the list of the real names of both the RCU staff and DBRC members as well as their false names. I see no reason why the information cannot be released as MSD were asked for the number of times false names have been used and not the real names of the DBRC members. This aspect of the ongoing use of false names is currently being prepared to be lodged very shortly in a court of law as it is illegal to use false names in legal proceedings.

Link to this

Miss Sonja Marie Lawson left an annotation ()

I would also like to add that when I was placed with the Remote Client Unit in 2010 I did not meet any of the criteria. Even if a WINZ client does meet the criteria the RCU does not have to accept the referral.

I was placed with the RCU merely to discredit me as I stood up against government departments and been targeted to try and shut me up as they do not want the truth coming out.

I am an innocent person that WINZ have targeted maliciously and relentlessly. What people are unaware of is two people that have caused me no end of grief with my health case got the sack from the Taranaki District Health Board and the NZ Police.

Both these people went to work for WINZ one as Regional Director for WINZ in Taranaki and the other became a WINZ investigator in Taranaki. There is your answer.

Within a few weeks of my health case ready to be filed in 2010 not only was I wrongfully and maliciously charged with 15 counts of benefit fraud but I was also placed with the Remote Client Unit despite not meeting any of criteria including the main criteria point (WINZ client must be trespassed).

Of note I was not trespassed and did not meet any of the other criteria either. There are also certain documents that must be attached to the referral to the RCU. Not one document was attached and of note the Regional Director for WINZ in Taranaki approved the referral.

The other person who became a WINZ investigator was the WINZ employee assigned to pursue a wrongful, malicious persecution and prosecution for benefit fraud. I did not defraud WINZ and this WINZ investigator went out of their way to set me up including obtaining false statements from witnesses and hiding thousands of pages of evidence that proved I was innocent.

Link to this

From: OIA_Requests (MSD)
Ministry of Social Development


Attachment 20170809 Response RAUE.pdf
3.0M Download View as HTML


Tēnā koe Katherine Raue,

Please find attached the Ministry’s response to your Official Information Act request.
 

Nā mātou noa, nā

Official and Parliamentary Information team   |  Ministerial and Executive Services
Ministry of Social Development

Our Purpose:
We help New Zealanders to help themselves to be safe, strong and independent
Ko ta mātou he whakamana tangata kia tū haumaru, kia tū kaha, kia tū motuhake

show quoted sections

Link to this

Katherine Raue left an annotation ()

We have requested a copy of the entire RCU Business Process document, which was provided with substantial redactions - on the grounds that it was allegedly "out of scope" of the request.

A link to the document will be added via annotation to this request when it is provided. If it is provided.

The request is at this link:
https://fyi.org.nz/request/6382-request-...

Link to this

Miss Sonja Marie Lawson left an annotation ()

The letter and attachments dated 9 Aug 2017 written by MSD to Katherine Raue contains incorrect and misleading information. The criteria for a WINZ client to be accepted by the Remote Client Unit is the main criteria is a client must be trespassed from WINZ.

A client must also meet at least one or more of the other criteria such as known convictions for violence or have a history of violent or aggressive behaviour.

There is no reason why MSD cannot release the entry criteria for the Remote Client Unit as the criteria has remained the same since the RCU was set up so it is not under active consideration.

I also wish to correct MSD on writing in a memo dated 31 October 2016 by George Van Ooyen that it is too high a risk to staff members to disclose the real names of those who have dealt with me. Of note when I was placed with the RCU in 2010 I did not meet any of the criteria including the main criteria that must be met.

I was not trespassed! I also did not meet any of the other criteria. I did not have convictions for violence. I did not have a history of violent or aggressive behaviour. I had not made previous threats to WINZ. I had not intimidated staff members.

Even if a client meets the criteria the referral may not be accepted. Despite not meeting any criteria and no documents attached to the referral I was placed with the RCU. Also of note my case manager at the RCU in 2011 wrote a letter recommending I be transferred back to WINZ in Taranaki. My case manager stated I did not meet the criteria and I was not a threat.

Link to this

Miss Sonja Marie Lawson left an annotation ()

The Ministry of Social Development have continued to victimise me and target me by spreading around incorrect, incomplete, out of date, misleading and irrelevant information about me. MSD falsely accused me of benefit fraud and also allege I owe in excess of $25,000 to WINZ. Both statements are downright lies.

I have never had mental, psychological or psychiatric illness in my life. I have requested multiple times that MSD correct their records that not only have I never suffered from mental illness but I have multiple physical medical conditions including Myalgic Encephalomyelitis. Despite multiple requests MSD have refused to remove the incorrect references to mental illness and also refuse to place must view notes on my file so my statements of corrections are read when my file is accessed.

I find being placed with the Remote Client Unit for no reason other than to discredit me is completely against my basic rights as a WINZ client to be accommodated. Not only are RCU staff using false names they also are the only MSD staff that can access a RCU client's file. I find this very offensive not knowing who is accessing and reading my private information including a lot of health information.

Also another breach of a WINZ client's basic right to access their information RCU clients have their files locked so we cannot even ring up the 0800 number for WINZ to enquire about our benefit. RCU clients also cannot access their community services card or ring CSC centre as our file is locked plus MSD refuse to put the correct postal address which they have as the address of the RCU in Lower Hutt.

RCU clients can also not access their information on the MSD website outside of the RCU hours of Monday to Friday 8.30am to 4.30pm therefore we are being denied access to our information.

MSD have not only distributed false and malicious comments and statements in public they have also committed perjury in legal proceedings. MSD told lies knowing they were not telling the truth. MSD also misled the court and they knew it would have a detrimental effect on the outcome of proceedings.

Recently MSD submitted information to the high court which clearly contained incorrect information in an attempt to discredit me as well as mislead the judge. MSD stated I had been convicted of assault. I have never been convicted of assault.

I have also never been arrested or charged with assault. I am not a violent person and I have not done the things alleged by MSD. MSD also stated I had lost a job as a result of the assault conviction. As is evident I did not lose a job as a result of an assault conviction because I do not have an assault conviction!

Link to this

Miss Sonja Marie Lawson left an annotation ()

The letter MSD wrote to Katherine Raue contains incorrect information regarding Social Security Appeal Authority proceedings being prohibited to be published is simply not true. SSAA proceedings including decisions, minutes and decisions are published on the internet.

Names are removed but there is nothing stopping an applicant from releasing information pertaining to themselves or proceedings they are involved in. I most certainly do not want my details hidden including my name as I want the truth in public.

I have no issue with putting my name to proceedings, minutes and decisions that pertain to my interactions and involvement against MSD in reviews and hearings. I have nothing to hide and want the truth in public for all to see.

I am interested to know why MSD feel the need to use false names in legal proceedings and hide the real identity of MSD staff yet expect beneficiaries to have to provide all their personal details including their real name and address. MSD must have something to hide.

Of note I am on the unpublished electoral role and I have had MSD staff deliberately breach my privacy and disclose my physical address and other details to third parties. Yet no action has been taken against these staff members.

Link to this

Miss Sonja Marie Lawson left an annotation ()

Update the Social Security Appeal Authority has made a decision that it has dismissed the Ministry of Social Development's application to use fake names in proceedings.

It was also confirmed that I am not a threat to WINZ. Also confirmed by the NZ Police.

Link to this

Gregory Soar left an annotation ()

WINZ MSD today admitted this to me.
Fake names.
Crimes Act makes that a false document and the production of it was forgery...three yrpears jail.

I am angry..winz now stalling...making it difficult,,..
Can we sue them for criminal action? Perhaps a simple complaint of forgery to police?

Link to this

Katherine Raue left an annotation ()

It's SEVEN years for conspiring to pervert the course of justice Gregory. The answer to your question is yes. Please email me at kateraue@gmail.com if you are interested in pursuing this course of action.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/publi...

Link to this

Miss Sonja Marie Lawson left an annotation ()

I am pursuing criminal charges against WINZ. There are a number of charges that can be laid regarding the use of fake names and signatures.

Link to this

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
Ministry of Social Development only: