Promotion of Accounting Reform as the most effective Pathway to a Fairer Safer and more Prosperous Society. Comment and Support from all quarters is Sought to straighten out NZ's problem

To Contact Us
To page back through previous editions click here Index is in right hand column

To peruse our extensive evidence that the Feltex IPO was a Government sanctioned robbery of generally hard working but modestly educated New Zealanders to raise funds to enable the country’s athletes to cheat Olympic gold medals click here.

August 2018 Edition

We continue by relaying a further two months relevant events in the politically corrupt country that we depict.

Matt Whineray has now been officially been appointed the CEO of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund which now reports having about 40b in assets. This is dispite him having a background of employment with Credit Suisse who were in the thick of the float of the entire Feltex Carpets company in 2004, a case against who the Supreme Court has not ruled on despite hearing it in October 2017. And also the $US150 "deposit" Matt has purported made as CIO of the Fund in a privately owned Portuguese bank, BES just days after Matt became CIO of the Fund (and weeks after his brother Fraser was appointed CEO of state controlled Mighty River Power by MRP's chair and Feltex IPO director Joan Withers) and about 4 weeks before BES was euphemistically pronounced bust.

We have complained to varios authorities that it is obvious that the the bulk of this payment has obviously gone at secret Government request to corrupt officials of the NGO Transparency International to pay for NZ appearing at the top of their list of all countrys in order of how the claim impartial people perceive the level of the corruption (with the emphasis public sector) to be. They purport the least corrupt countries to be at the top of the list. One of these authorities was the Ombudsman who we assume is still thinking about whether to investigate the case. A hurdle one has to get over if one complains to the omsbudman is that one has to show that one has been hurt by the alleged improper behaviour more than the general public. We claim we are more hurt because we are trying to bring public attention to the matter and and because employers are sceptical of our claims or more likely because they don't like people who expose things, we cannot get suitable employment and remain in poverty. Well that is a good reason but does not seem to register with the Omb. He seems to say "why dont you just let the country go to the dogs like most everyone else". Anyway another consideration he brougt up was was whether we had similarly complained to perhaps more appropriate quarters. He suggested the chairwoman of the NZ Superannuation Fund and provided her postal address. After some time of thought we decided to oblige although we dont do postal correspondence any more. Caterine Savage eventually replied, clarifying the complaint very accurately, and responding "There is no basis for your complaint. Please desist from contacting us in respect of this matter."

We think an innocent party would concede far more than that. Where has our reasoning gone astray? Indeed we call for Ms Savage's resignation. Responsible investor dont suddenly think "lets put $US150m into this private Portuguese bank today. They might decide to such amounts into all European banks over a certain size which appear to be stable. Then we have the situation where NZ is kicked off a European list of 15 most trusted countries but there is virtually no change to its TI index ranking, it stays at the top. Then there are the links. It would seem entities from 4 countries have each put about $US150m into this "Oak Finance" investment. It seems Denmark and UK are two of the other countries, and each also does well on the TI index. How can Ms Savage say there is no basis for the accusation.

We rather think our life might now be on the line which is an inevitably result of a corrupting society. An actual case we think is the death of Allan Hubbard aged 83 which is purported we think to have occurred in the air in Otago in 2014. Hubbard founded and largely controlled into his old age the vast South Canterbury Finance finance company. He seemed not to have planned a successor. Governments like to have apparently genine private sector companies associated with their corrupt activities. South Canterbury subscribed $3m to the Feltex IPO. We think Hubbard would have been promised special consideration with respect to the security of his company for this "donation". The only other private company to but in money seems to be Hunter Hall who we think had a similar "arrangement" with the Australian Government. Anyway at the time of a finance crisis South Canterbury deposits received a Government guarantee. Our only criticism of this is there did not seem to be any restriction on the ammount of guaranteed deposits it could take in or the interest rate it could pay. It kept its existing rates and the money poured in although probably the opportunities to invest the money at a profit were limited. Eventually the company became insolvent, the Government had to payout big and Hubbard was charged with extensive fraud for reasons we have not tried to look into. It seems likely that in defending himself Hubbard would leak out all sorts of embarrasing peculiarities so a stop was put to it. The rear end was knocked off his yellow VW beetle travelling south on SH1 towards Oamaru. The three occupants of the two cars were taken to Oamaru hospital to have injuries attended to. It is reported that Mr Hubbard walked down to the other end of the ward he was in to to enquire of the driver of the other car how he was getting on. Hardly what one would expect that a man minutes or an hour or so away from death under reasonable medical supervision would be able to do. We fear such an end is instore us. Hopefully this might invoke some support.

We say the authorities charged with monitoring our news and information providers are not doing their job of keeping the country free of political corruption. The Media Council (formerly the Press Council, referred our complaint on a Transparency International release showing NZ at the top of its index being presented as genuine opinion when it is not; to its chair, a retired judge, who decided not to accept it. There seems to be no provision for such an action in its rules. Further on such is to come.

to top of page v