Dear Auckland City Council,

I have been putting an extensive chronology together with regards to the animal welfare institute of New Zealand AWINZ and its existence at Waitakere city council facility at the concourse.

Council has for many years denied that AWINZ existed at the concourse , Perhaps the most conclusive documents I have found was an audit conducted in 2008 by MAF ( http://www.transparency.net.nz/wp-conten...) , if you do not accept that this document is genuine you may wish to obtain a copy of it yourself direct from MAF.

You will see that it states
1. Page 2 “it was at times difficult during the audit to distinguish where the structure of AWINZ finished and where WCC began hence it was at times difficult to separate the AWINZ organisation from that of WCC. For example AWINZ inspectors are not employed by AWINZ but are all employees of WCC”
2. page 9 “all personnel ( including the AWINZ inspectors ) based at the WCC animal accommodation facility (48 the concourse ) are employees of WCC It must be noted that AWINZ does not have any employees as such , apart from when they contract to the film industry to monitor AW issues, this did lead to some confusion regarding he demarcation between the two organisations .”
3. page 13 AWINZ inspectors use WCC database.
4. Page 14 the inspectors vehicle was inspected..
5. page 18 Location of audit WCC animal accommodation the concourse

As can be seen by the document 8 may 2000 http://www.transparency.net.nz/wp-conten...) the claim was that the concourse was rented to this private body for $1 per year and according to the letter 2 may 2000 (http://www.transparency.net.nz/wp-conten...) the council funded AWINZ

Two legal opinions were also obtained by council from Kensington Swann to enable AWINZ to persuade the minister to grant it law enforcement powers.

BY way of LGOIMA could you please provide

1. Copies of Any and all documents from council to Kensington Swann( KPMG ) in 2000 where by the council sought clarification on the law so that it could enable AWINZ to become a law enforcement authority

2. Documents from Council which approved the funding of the animal welfare institute of New Zealand through the animal welfare service.

3. Any documents which authorised the manager animal welfare to authorise the use of the council staff in the delivery of animal welfare services which were ultra vires for council at that time.

4. Any documents internal memoranda agendas etc which show that the initiative of seeking approved status for the animal welfare service as set out in the letter 13 November 2008 ( http://www.transparency.net.nz/wp-conten...) had been discussed by council .

5. Any document which authorised the manager animal welfare Waitakere Tom Didovich to enter into a contract to AWINZ for and on behalf of the council and also any council discussion documents which facilitated this MOU( http://anticorruptionnz.files.wordpress.... )

As can be seen by the audit report the AWINZ inspectors ( councils own staff) used the councils vehicles databases and compound to deliver services other than those which were the responsibility of council, I believe that these actions were being undertaken without the official knowledge and consent of council and that this has been covered up for many years.

I believe that the documents I have attached and others in my possession are conclusive proof which should be considered seriously by council and request a full investigation into the AWINZ matter.

I request this information under the urgency provisions as I require this information for court on 20 November 2012 and wish to have the information at least one week earlier so that I can put my submissions together.

Yours faithfully,

Grace Haden

Dear Auckland Council,

I received the following reply from yur solictor Wendy Brandon as shown at the bottom of this letter

I then wrote to Your CEO as follows but have seemingly been ignored.Could yuo plese respond or action my request this is a matter of corruption use of public office for private pecuniary gain my responde to Doug Mc kay on 8 November was

Good afternoon Doug

I made a LGOIMA request from Your solicitor Wendy Brandon.

I admire her efficiency as within an hour she had ascertained that the documents I requested were not available she stated “I confirm that the information you requested cannot be located and/or does not exist.’

As I cannot doubt the integrity of your lawyer , who is after all an officer of the court and expected to uphold the rule of law , and being a council employee she is bound by the provisions of the local government act with regards to transparency , I have to accept her response and apply the implications of this response to my LGOIMA request

It is not for the counsel for council to conceal corruption . She has a duty to ensure transparency and accountability and as a lawyer her honesty and therefore her word can be assured.

What transpires in applying her response to the following request brings about serious issues of concern and I ask the council to immediately investigate this in the interest of the public.

The LGOIMA request was as follows I have added under each paragraph what the logical interpretation must be given the reply of Wendy Brandon … I requested

1. documents which show that council has investigated the use of the council facilities , staff and resources by AWINZ.

a. If the information does not exist this means that the council has never investigated, this is appalling as it proves that the council is being negligent with contracts, conflicts of interest and allowing the public resources to be used for private pecuniary gain

2. Documents and policies which allow the managers of divisions such as dog and stock control to independently contract / sign agreements to third parties and the processes which need to be followed. E.g. Mr Didovich writes on behalf of Waitakere city council , what authority did he have to give these assurances on behalf of council?

a. If the information does not exist this means that the council has not got any policies for council managers and it appears to be a free for all , it must be of concern then that a council manager signed an agreement which allowed a third party to use the councils facilities, staff and vehicles for free. This would not be a wise use of councils funds.

3. Mr Wells in the guise of AWINZ also told MAF that AWINZ was going to take over the animal welfare services please provide any documentation discussion papers etc which would have given Mr Wells foundation for this statement. , see application

a. If the information does not exist this means that Mr Wells misled the minister , The council now being aware of this has a duty to ensure that the minister becomes aware that the council had no knowledge with regards to the AWINZ matter and that the parties who corresponded with him n th guise of council had no mandate to do so.

4. Invoices for the payment of Kensington swan for all legal opinions requested by council or by Dog and stock control for the legal opinions in 2000 which persuaded the Minister to give approval to AWINZ as an approved Organisation links to the legal opinion are here initial opinion Draft final

a. If the information does not exist this means that the council manager involved engaged Kensington swan in his professional capacity and the council should make urgent enquiries as to who did pay for the services.

5. Why council continued to push for AWINZ to be approved when crown law said that it was ultra Vires and any minutes of any council meetings which gave a mandate for this use of council funds.- plus any documentation which considered the cost benefit analysis of this action.

a. If the information does not exist this means that the council was not involved in the animal welfare aspects of the dog control section and that tis now calls for an urgent investigation in view of the statements from MAF which recorded that AWINZ did operate from council premises.

6. What was Lesley Wears position with council and was the question raised in the fax located here addressed please provide a copy of the response

a. It therefore appears that Lesley Wear never received a response , I would however have thought that council might have known who she was since she was employed by council, perhaps this was overlooked by Ms Brandon, after all it was a lot of information that she got through in one hour.

7. In an email Neil Wells states “while that could have been answered immediately by the council legal section , council decided to obtain independent legal opinion from Kensington Swann that opinion has now come to hand this week and confirms the previous legal opinion sent to MAF policy in past years " Please provide all council documents which supports this statement and who in Waitakere city was waiting for directions as to where the Kensington swan letter should be sent to .

a. If the information does not exist this means that the council lawyer was circumvented and that the legal opinion which was obtained was not one which the council had requested or authorised , but had instead been requested by Mr Wells for his own purposes and apparently paid for by council. The legal opinion swayed the minister as he believed that the legal opinion came at the request of council. If this is not the case then it is important and the minister should be advised immediately that he has been misled.

8. All documents after 2000 relating to animal welfare were not made available to me, I request that these be made available for my perusal and copies as required arising from that.

a. If these documents are still missing then Council should be asking questions as to why all documents relating to the dog and stock control division are missing, MR Wells the manager appears to have an issue with losing vital documents, the governance documents for AWINZ were missing, the trust deed was lost more than once despite there being two copies and now it transpires that he somehow lost/ misplaced all the animal welfare documents for council, I would have thought that losing all the documents for an entire department would have been a matter of concern. I now of three persons who were sacked by council for a lot less .

Corruption is a serious matter Doug. This matter has been swept under the carpet for the past 6 ½ years , Your counsel in looking for this information and discovering that it is all missing must be seeing the red flags of fraud. May I suggest that the council calls in the police or serious fraud office.

I can assist I have a chronology of documents to simplify the matter, I am a licenced private investigator and can tell you that those documents disclose the fact that council premises were being used by a fictitious organisation called Animal welfare institute of New Zealand and that Mr Didovich and Mr Wells colluded together to use the council resources for private pecuniary gain.

My summary is below, the hyperlinks open the documents shown .

This letter will also be on Transparency.net.nz so that those who are following this matter can be kept in the loop.

I would imagine that in view of the information which Ms Brandon has given me that it would be negligent of council not to investigate.

I am certain that this is the tip of the ice berg in council corruption and you will no doubt uncover more and thereby save rate payers millions.

As ever I am happy to assist.

Yours sincerely,

Grace Haden

From: Wendy Brandon [mailto:[email address]]
Sent: Wednesday, 7 November 2012 2:53 p.m.

Dear Ms Haden

As advised in my reply to your most recent requests for information, if you wish to make a complaint about Council's response, you must direct that complaint to the Office of the Ombudsman.

However, I confirm that the information you requested cannot be located and/or does not exist.

As to the remaining allegations, Council must obey the law. There is currently an injunction in place prohibiting you from making any statements or allegations "reviling or denigrating Mr Wells". This latest round of emails and other correspondence contain statements that clearly fall within the terms of the orders being the same or similar to those that gave rise to the granting of injunctive relief. Unless or until the injunction is dismissed, I am unable to take any further action.

Kind regards
Wendy

Dear Auckland City Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Auckland City Council's handling of my FOI request 'Animal welfare instituteof New Zealand's use of council resources'.

This is a matter involving serious corruption wihtin council.

It has been ignored for 6 years and no one has ever looked at the incident.

I have information which proves that the council lawyer is not being truthful and is fobbing me off.

The CEO will not respond. it is in the public interst that the corrupt use of council facilities and resources is exposed.

Council should not be concealing corruption raher exposing it there by ensuring that corruption does not flourish.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address:
http://fyi.org.nz/request/animal_welfare...

Yours faithfully,

Grace Haden

Dear Auckland City Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Auckland City Council's handling of my FOI request 'Animal welfare instituteof New Zealand's use of council resources'.

Wendy brandon appears to be obstructing the transparency whihc councils are supposed to have.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address:
http://fyi.org.nz/request/animal_welfare...

Yours faithfully,

Grace Haden

Dear Auckland City Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Auckland City Council's handling of my FOI request 'Animal welfare institute of New Zealand's use of council resources'.

My requests appear to be ignored please respond urgently

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address:
http://fyi.org.nz/request/animal_welfare...

Yours faithfully,

Grace Haden

Dear Auckland Council,

You know that you are covering up corruption.

Wendy Brandon has no doubt told you to ignore me because that is what we do with whistle blowers.

I would appear that Auckland council condones the use of the public resources fro private pecuniary gain .. is that why our rates are through the roof.

please respond to my request 7 years is far too long to wait for information and action.

Yours faithfully,

Grace Haden

Dear Auckland Council,

My request appears to overdue

Please respond to it

Yours faithfully,

Grace Haden