WORLD WATER WARRIORS: ‘Canada a major exporter of virtual water, says new Council of Canadians report’

MEDIA RELEASE
For Immediate Release
May 25, 2011

Canada a major exporter of virtual water, says new Council of Canadians report

Ottawa – The Council of Canadians is releasing a new report today called Leaky Exports: A portrait of the virtual water trade in Canada. This report highlights the daily loss of massive amounts of the country’s fresh water used to produce commodities, minerals and energy for export. Virtual, or embedded, water is the sum of water used in the production of a good or service. Virtual water trade refers to the embedded water transferred across borders when these goods and services are internationally traded.

One of several major findings in the report is that Canada is the second net virtual water exporter in the world. Canada’s net annual virtual water exports (exports minus imports) amount to just under 60 Bm3 (billion cubic metres), which is enough to fill the Rogers Centre in Toronto 37,500 times.

“Because Canada has more abundant water supplies than some other countries, successive provincial and federal governments have built their economies on the ‘myth of abundance’ and the assumption that these supplies are unlimited,” says Council of Canadians chairperson Maude Barlow, one of the authors of the report. “Most of our provincial and federal governments depend to this day on exports that may endanger Canada’s fresh water legacy.”

The virtual water trade is now coming under close scrutiny as some impoverished and water-poor countries are depleting their water supplies in order to maintain export markets, while other, more wealthy countries import most of their “water footprint” (the total volume of water needed to produce the goods and services for their citizens) in order to protect their own limited water resources.

“While Canada is often touted as having 20 per cent of the world’s water supplies, in fact it has 6.5 per cent of the world’s renewable water,” cautions Barlow. “Many parts of Canada are facing some form of water crisis and nowhere is our groundwater properly mapped. Yet the practice of allowing almost unlimited access to our rivers, lakes and aquifers for commodity, energy and mineral production and export continues without public debate or oversight.”

Other major findings in the report include:

• The increase in virtual water exports to the U.S. is closely related to the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and NAFTA, due to the post–trade agreements’ increase in water-intensive exports to the U.S. and the integration of key parts of the North American agriculture and energy sectors.
• Agriculture consumes 70 per cent of Canada’s fresh water.

“It is our hope that the findings of this report will spark the debate and research so long overdue in Canada,” adds Barlow.

The report is available here.

-30-

For More Information:

Dylan Penner, Media Officer, Council of Canadians,             613-795-8685      , dpenner@canadians.org, Twitter: @CouncilofCDNs

____________________________

Emma Lui

National Water Campaigner

Council of Canadians

Tel: 613-233-4487 Ext. 234

Fax: 613-233-6776

Email: elui@canadians.org

www.canadians.org/water

CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY: In setback for corporate lobbyists, whistleblowers can take tips first to government investigators

Tax haven America

U.S. and its banks called “biggest tax haven” in world

Leasing mistake

Watchdog calls SEC “irresponsible” in leasing new office for $556.8 million

Blow the whistle

Your guide to Dodd-Frank law deadlines, hearing and events for the week of May 23

www.iwatchnews.org/2011/05/25/4731/setback-corporate-lobbyists-whistleblowers-can-take-tips-first-government/page/0/1

Finance : Financial Reform Watch

In setback for corporate lobbyists, whistleblowers can take tips first to government investigators

Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Schapiro, an independent, was joined by the agency’s two Democratic commissioners in a 3-2 vote finalizing rules to protect and reward whistleblowers, as required by the Dodd-Frank reform law.     Charles Dharapak/The Associated Press

SEC rules offer generous bounties to tipsters

By Michael Hudson

15 hours, 12 minutes ago

Print

E-mail

0
inShare

Summary of SEC whistleblower protections

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s new rules for corporate whistleblowers include the following key provisions:

Qualifying for a reward

* Original information about a suspected violation of securities law must be based on the whistleblower’s independent knowledge or independent analysis, not already known to the SEC, and not derived exclusively from public sources.

* The information must lead to the successful enforcement by the SEC of a federal court or administrative action by being “specific, credible and timely” to prompt the agency to open a new investigation, reopen an old one, or open a new line of inquiry in an existing one. If the matter was already under investigation by the SEC, the whistleblower’s information must significantly contribute to the success of the probe.

* The whistleblower must report original information through his or her employer’s internal procedures before or at the same time it is given to the SEC. The whistleblower’s voluntary participation in a corporate internal compliance system is a factor that can increase the amount of an award.

* The SEC must obtain monetary sanctions totaling more than $1 million in the case,

Who is ineligible

* People ineligible for whistleblower awards include those with a pre-existing legal or contractual duty to report their information to the SEC; attorneys who try to use information from clients to make whistleblower claims for themselves; foreign government officials.

* Corporate compliance and audit personnel, and public accountants are usually not eligible for awards. Exceptions include when the whistleblower believes disclosure may prevent substantial injury to the company or investors; the whistleblower believes the company is engaging in conduct that will impede an investigation; or at least 120 days have elapsed since the whistleblower reported the information to his or her supervisor or corporate audit committee, chief legal officer or chief compliance officer.

Anti-retaliation protection

* A whistleblower who gives information to the SEC is protected from employment retaliation if she or he has a reasonable belief that the information relates to a possible securities law violation that has occurred, is ongoing, or is about to occur.

Office of the Whistleblower

* The SEC recently created an Office of the Whistleblower, as required by the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, to work with tipsters and help the commission determine awards.

Top securities regulators on Wednesday said financial whistleblowers can bypass internal corporate procedures and report suspected fraud first to government investigators, a setback for big U.S. companies that lobbied hard for the agency to take the opposite approach.

The Securities and Exchange Commission decision was hailed as a “major victory” for whistleblowers and investors by one advocacy group.

The agency’s two Democratic commissioners and Chairman Mary Schapiro, an independent, voted to approve final rules on how the agency will operate the generous whistleblower bounty program created by the last year’s Dodd-Frank corporate reform act. The SEC’s two Republican commissioners voted against the rules.

Under Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers can claim big cash rewards if they provide the SEC with “original information” that leads to financial sanctions totaling $1 million or more. They are eligible to receive between 10 percent and 30 percent of the money collected by the SEC in criminal or civil cases against corporate wrongdoers.

Led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, dozens of big companies such as Google Inc. and JPMorgan Chase & Co. argued that the SEC should require bounty-seeking whistleblowers to report fraud first to their employers, rather than the government.

Schapiro said giving whistleblowers the option of coming directly to the SEC “makes sense . . . because it is the whistleblower who is in the best position to know which route is best to pursue.”

“While the SEC has a history of receiving a high volume of tips and complaints, the quality of the tips we have received has been better since Section 922 [of the Dodd-Frank act] became law. And we expect this trend to continue,” Schapiro said.

Republicans criticize final rules

Republican commissioners Troy Paredes and Kathleen Casey said they believed the rules would harm companies’ effort to police themselves by allowing whistleblowers to bypass their employers’ internal compliance systems.

Casey said the final rules package “favors a pound of cure over an ounce of prevention.” In addition to harming internal compliance efforts, she said, the rules overestimate the SEC’s ability to “triage and manage” the large volume of whistleblower tips that will be encouraged by the “very large checks” that whistleblowers might snag by reporting fraud.

The SEC’s enforcement director, Robert Khuzami, told the commissioners that it didn’t make sense to put in place a rule that would require whistleblowers in some cases to report fraud to the very corporate insiders they suspect are violating the law. Khuzami said letting whistleblowers come first to the SEC will allow the agency to build stronger cases and move quickly to head off problems, “preventing small frauds from growing into even bigger frauds.”

Stephen Kohn, executive director of the National Whistleblowers Center, said “the SEC refused to buckle under tremendous pressure from Wall Street lobbyists” who “worked overtime” in an effort to undermine the protections contained in the Dodd-Frank Act.

The Chamber of Commerce countered that “the SEC has chosen to put trial lawyer profits ahead of effective compliance and corporate governance. This rule will make it harder and slower to detect and stop corporate fraud.”

Schapiro and SEC staff said the final rules differed from the agency’s earlier proposed rules in several respects.

The final version narrows provisions that generally exclude accountants and internal compliance employees from qualifying for whistleblower awards. They may qualify for a bounty, for example, if they believe the company is impeding the investigation, or if at least 120 days have gone by since they reported possible fraud to higher ups.

Another change from the agency’s earlier proposal encourages whistleblowers to work through their employers’ internal compliance systems. While whistleblowers are not required to first report their concerns internally, the new rules provide incentives for them to do so.

For example, in determining the size of a whistleblower’s award, the SEC will consider how much the tipster participated in the company’s in-house compliance process. In addition, whistleblowers who report violations directly to their companies may still qualify for a share of the SEC’s monetary recovery, even if they never go to SEC, under the final rules.

Tougher than Sarbanes-Oxley law

The rulemaking process was an important battleground in the campaign to encourage whistleblowers to report corporate crime.

Almost a decade ago, after the Enron debacle and other multi-billion-dollar corporate scandals, Congress passed what one scholar “the most important whistleblower protection law in the world.” But as  iWatch News  has reported, the whistleblower protections included in 2002’s Sarbanes-Oxley corporate reform act largely failed to protect workers or prevent the corrupt practices that helped cause the financial meltdown of 2008.

The Dodd-Frank Act, passed last year by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama, seeks to improve on previous whistleblower laws and use financial incentives to encourage workers to report fraud.

A Senate Banking Committee report said generous rewards are needed to encourage whistleblowers to come forward, because they “often face the difficult choice between telling the truth and the risk of committing ‘career suicide.’ ” Sen. Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican who helped craft the Dodd-Frank whistleblower bounty provision, has  noted that he’s personally known many whistleblowers who were blacklisted by government agencies, hospitals, drug companies and other businesses.

After passage of Dodd-Frank, the SEC took up the task of writing the rule that would implement the law’s provisions.

The proposed rules that the SEC released last November drew criticism from a variety of sources. The proposed rules drew 240 written comments and more than 1,300 form letters.

Business lobbyists complained that the rules would hurt companies’ efforts to police themselves. “Instead of allowing companies to identify and fix problems, we are just creating a lottery,” David Hirschmann, president of the Chamber’s Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness,  said in November. “This bounty program creates incentive for employees to become amateur sleuths in search of a big payday.”

Whistleblower advocates, meanwhile, complained that the SEC’s proposed rules would spawn red tape and discourage workers from stepping forward with information about fraud.

Grassley wrote earlier this month that he was concerned that the agency

would show too much deference to companies’ own self-investigations.

In proposing preliminary whistleblower rules last year, the SEC noted that in many cases it would simply contact the company, “describe the nature of the allegations, and give the company an opportunity to investigate the matter and report back. . . . This has been the approach of the Enforcement staff in the past, and the Commission expects that it will continue in the future.”

Even if workers aren’t required to report problems first to their employers, Grassley said, this approach would expose whistleblowers and put them at risk without the benefit of a serious SEC investigation. He said “the SEC seems to think the business as usual approach will help it catch criminals and cheats while admitting that they will essentially sell whistleblowers out to the company in question at the first opportunity.”

The need for the SEC to finalize the whistleblower rules has become more urgent. Earlier this month, a federal district court in New York  issued the first decision related to the Dodd-Frank law’s whistleblower mandate.  The judge ruled that a whistleblower usually must first provide information to the SEC to pursue a claim, unless the information falls into four narrow categories. Congress “intended to encourage whistleblowers” to report securities violations to the SEC,” the judge said in the case Patrick Egan v. TradingScreen Inc.

To fund payments to whistleblowers, the SEC already has already  set aside nearly $452 million  from past civil settlements in enforcement cases and invested the money in Treasury bills until it is needed.

__________________________________________________________

Summary of SEC whistleblower protections

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s new rules for corporate whistleblowers include the following key provisions:

Qualifying for a reward

* Original information about a suspected violation of securities law must be based on the whistleblower’s independent knowledge or independent analysis, not already known to the SEC, and not derived exclusively from public sources.

* The information must lead to the successful enforcement by the SEC of a federal court or administrative action by being “specific, credible and timely” to prompt the agency to open a new investigation, reopen an old one, or open a new line of inquiry in an existing one. If the matter was already under investigation by the SEC, the whistleblower’s information must significantly contribute to the success of the probe.

* The whistleblower must report original information through his or her employer’s internal procedures before or at the same time it is given to the SEC. The whistleblower’s voluntary participation in a corporate internal compliance system is a factor that can increase the amount of an award.

* The SEC must obtain monetary sanctions totaling more than $1 million in the case,

Who is ineligible

* People ineligible for whistleblower awards include those with a pre-existing legal or contractual duty to report their information to the SEC; attorneys who try to use information from clients to make whistleblower claims for themselves; foreign government officials.

* Corporate compliance and audit personnel, and public accountants are usually not eligible for awards. Exceptions include when the whistleblower believes disclosure may prevent substantial injury to the company or investors; the whistleblower believes the company is engaging in conduct that will impede an investigation; or at least 120 days have elapsed since the whistleblower reported the information to his or her supervisor or corporate audit committee, chief legal officer or chief compliance officer.

Anti-retaliation protection

* A whistleblower who gives information to the SEC is protected from employment retaliation if she or he has a reasonable belief that the information relates to a possible securities law violation that has occurred, is ongoing, or is about to occur.

Office of the Whistleblower

* The SEC recently created an Office of the Whistleblower, as required by the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, to work with tipsters and help the commission determine awards.

URGENT REMINDER! MARCH/RALLY: Budget 2011 United Against Asset Sales/Cuts. SAT. 28 May 12 noon Auckland! DON’T CUT OUR FUTURE!

MARCH/RALLY: Budget 2011

United Against Asset Sales/Cuts.

DON’T CUT OUR FUTURE. 

12 noon, Sat 28th May, QE2 Square, Bottom of Queen St, Opposite Britomart.

please distribute to your email lists,newsletters facebook, twitter, txt and talk to your friends, groups and neighbours.

From Asset sales(electricity and more), food prices to Govt cuts.Student loans and Low wages.Civilised society is under threat.

“When good people lay idle, evil prospers”.

Stand up NZ before it’s to late!

Thanks

Coalition for Social Justice.

(members of community groups, churches, unions et al)

PRESS STATEMENT.

COALITION FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE

ph:09 8366389, 021 2106720,

Meredydd Barrar (spokesperson)

A new group has been formed called the Coalition for Social Justice. Its aim is to organise concerns within local communities around the governments Budget proposals and their implications for ordinary New Zealanders

.

Spokesperson Meredydd Barrar says, “Asset sales  cuts to working for families, Kiwi Saver, student loans and general austerity measures are not working in the interests of the majority of kiwis who are struggling to make ends meet.

.

“The Coalition is made up of members of community groups, people from religious organisations and unions. Our aim is to promote social justice.

We are organising a MOBILISATION of ordinary Kiwis on SATURDAY 28TH MAY 12pm QE2 Square, bottom of Queen st, Auckland City (see attachment). Also more action as the election campaign develops.

New Zealanders are angry about GST, milk prices and secret Trade deals, cuts to Early Childhood education and privatisation of electricity…Aswell as PPP’s for shcools and other public services.. l

Meredydd Barrar, spokesperson says, “Enough is enough. Recent government announcements about cuts and a Budget that will certainly condemn the majority of New Zealanders to relative poverty is not acceptable. Children and struggling families as well as students looking to further their higher education will be penalised”.

There is a latent anger in New Zealand at the moment. We aim to translate it into action.

Policies of cut backs and austerity measures will increase the gap between rich and poor which is already the 6th highest in the OECD. We believe this is unacceptable and uncivilised.

New Zealanders deserve better than an economic philosophy that only seems to make bankers, corporates and speculators richer.

Meredydd Barrar

Spokesperson

BREAKING NEWS! :Penny Bright, Media Spokesperson Water Pressure Group to address Watercare Board at ‘Public Forum’ Thursday 26 May 9.00am – FIRST TIME EVER!

25 May 2011

Penny Bright,  Media Spokesperson Water Pressure Group to address Watercare Board at ‘Public Forum’ Thursday 26 May 9.00am – FIRST TIME EVER!
___________________________________________________

Notice of Watercare Board meeting –

26 May 2011

Page Content

The May board meeting of Watercare Services Ltd will be held on 26 May 2011.

Time: 9am.

Venue: Hobson Room, Jubilee Building, 545 Parnell Road, Parnell, Auckland.

The meeting will be open to the public and the Chairman invites deputations.

Agenda

1.         Apologies

2.         Deputations and Public Forum

…………………….

http://www.watercare.co.nz/about-watercare/news/Pages/Notice-of-Watercare-Board-meeting—26-May2011.aspx
_____________________________________________________

25 May 2011

OPEN LETTER/ CONFIRMATION OF SUBJECT MATTER FOR THE WATER PRESSURE GROUP DEPUTATION TO THE WATERCARE SERVICES LTD BOARD MEETING 26 MAY 2011:

Dear Robert Fisher,

The subject matter for my deputation to the  Watercare ‘Public Forum’ is very similar to that for which I had been granted for  the CCO Strategy Review Committee Meeting which was held on 21 April 2011.

(Unfortunately, the scheduled time of the meeting was changed, and I didn’t get the message – so I didn’t attend.)

A) Request for a publicly-available  ‘Register of Interests’ for all Board members of Watercare and staff employed by Watercare responsible for property and procurement.

B) A request for the following details of all consultants and private contractors employed by Watercare; including the names of the consultants/contractors; scope, value and terms(length) of contracts, to be made publicly-available.

C) Clarification as to whether there is a central ‘Register of Contracts’ held by  Watercare; where is it held, and who at Auckland Council is responsible for double-checking that it is accurate and up to date.

D)The following resolution of Water Pressure Group members, was raised and passed on to the Auckland Council Governing Board meeting on Tuesday 24 May 2011:
AUCKLAND COUNCIL GOVERNING BODY MEETING 24 MAY 2011

WATER PRESSURE GROUP MEETING 23 MAY 2011:

RESOLVED:

“THAT: Water Pressure Media Spokesperson Penny Bright to raise directly with the Governing Body of Auckland Council and the Board of Watercare Services  at their upcoming meetings on 24 and 26 May 2011:

a)     The persecution and harassment of Water Pressure Group members to please cease forthwith; all outstanding disputed Metrowater bills to be waived; all court action initiated by Metrowater to cease forthwith; and all penalties such as credit restriction, charging orders over properties and the like to be lifted forthwith.

b)    Water Pressure Group members request a meeting with Mayor Len Brown to discuss these and related matters, as soon as possible. “

(Please be reminded that had it not been for Water Pressure Group members, the practice of Metrowater being used as a ca$h cow, to subsidise rates thorough the rort of  ‘charitable payments’, would not have been ruled ‘unacceptable’ by Parliament, and eventually phased out.

Our brave, internationally famous WPG members, who have been at the forefront since 1998 of the fight against the commercialisation and privatisation of Auckland water services – and user-charges, particularly for wastewater services, which have proved financially crippling for larger, poorer families – have been through enough.

The  previous ‘combative’ track record of Metrowater which included digging up the streets to permanently disconnect water supplies form the mains; attempts by Metrowater to bankrupt WPG members over disputed bills; abuse of the ‘legal system’ to intimidate, bully and harass WPG members; the singling out of a Samoan family and attempts to auction their family home over a disputed water account; the untimely deaths of two WPG members from what we believe were Metrowater stress-related heart attacks.)

E ) WPG members,  of course, are still opposed to Watercare, becoming the ‘one big Auckland water company’ – which we have been warning the public about since 1998 – because that has been the corporate agenda since the mid-1990’s, and the public have neither voted for this, nor the $upercity full stop

The model was the one used in South Australia – first ‘vertically integrate’ into ‘one big water company’ – then contract out the operation and management to United Water (100% owned by Veolia – the world’s biggest water multinational).

United Water now have seven NZ water services contracts.
But were they based on misrepresented pricing?
Did United Water put in cheaper tenders in order to get a foothold in NZ?

(Attempts to get both the NZ Parliament and the Office of the Auditor-General to investigate this matter, have to date been unsuccessful.)

F) The Water Pressure Group still want  Watercare CEO Mark Ford, to be be instructed to answer these following questions, requested under the OIA, which have still never been answered.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/latest/DLM171875.html?search=ts_act_Local+government+Official+Information+and+Meetings+Act+1987_resel&p=1#DLM171875

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/latest/DLM172313.html?search=ts_act_Local+government+Official+Information+and+Meetings+Act+1987_resel&p=1#DLM1723

(Revised LGOIMA request to Mark Ford, CEO of Watercare Services Ltd)

1) Information which explains why you, when CEO of Watercare Services Ltd, appointed known water privatiser, ex-Mayor of Papakura, David Hawkins, to the position of Corporate Liaison Manager for Watercare Services in 2000.

2) Information which confirms that you were aware of the Report of the Office of the Auditor General (OAG), in 1998, which was critical of a number of key aspects of the ‘Papakura franchise’, signed by David Hawkins as Mayor of Papakura in April 1997:

(These shortcomings were referred to in this recent ‘Regulatory Impact Statement’

www.dia.govt.nz/Pubforms.nsf/URL/Water_RIS…/Water_RIS_2010.doc

“REMOVING BARRIERS TO WATER INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2002 – REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT:

34. A potential risk is that councils lack expertise in the area of PPPs and other concession arrangements, and that developing such arrangements requires specialist skills. This was suggested in reports by the Auditor-General on the Papakura franchise agreement and the Wellington DBMO arrangement.[1]

35. In Papakura, for example, the Auditor-General noted that:

·the Council relied on limited internal and local expertise when setting up the agreement and it was not reviewed by an external expert;

·the franchise agreement inadequately documents the franchisee’s obligations to release particular information to the Council;

·the franchise agreement focused on performance indicators relating to price and quality, but indicators for customer service and asset management and development were not well defined; and there was a lack of agreement between the parties about how the condition of the infrastructure would be measured over the duration of the franchise – no baseline was established and an asset management plan was not undertaken.

[1] Controller and Auditor-General – 2006 report, as above; plus Report on Papakura District Council:

Water and Wastewater franchise, April 1998. ”

______________________________

3) Information which explains why you, when CEO of Watercare Services Ltd, appointed Graham Wood, to the position of General Manager Operations of Watercare Services,(in or about 2007), and what steps you took to:

a) Inform all elected representatives that made up the Watercare Shareholders Representative Group (SRG), of Graham Wood’s former position as the former Managing Director of United Water South Australia,

b) Inform the public of Graham Wood’s former position as the former Managing Director of United Water South Australia.

4) Information which explains the role played by David Hawkins and/or Graham Wood (if any) whilst working for Watercare in the securing of any NZ United Water contracts.

5) Information which explains why, on the Watercare Services Ltd website, when you were CEO, there was no section which covered the Watercare Shareholders Group, to make the following information publicly available: SRG meeting minutes; SRG reports ; information about which elected representatives were actually members of the SRG, and the like.

6) Disclosure of all / any interests (if any) you had or may have, either pecuniary or non-pecuniary with:

a) United Water;
b) Veolia Water,
c) Past or current members of the World Bank, including, but not limited to David Shand, the Head of the Rates Inquiry and one of the three Commissioners on the Royal commission of Inquiry into Auckland Regional Governance

7) All/any information from  Watercare Board members, or Watercare staff in ANY capacity relating to the request for a ‘full and thorough independent investigation of the pricing practices of private water company United Water’s seven contracts’ as requested in the following:

Petition 2008/60, presented by Su’a William Sio, on

9 December 2009:

“Requesting that the House of Representatives do not implement any legislative changes to the Local Government Act 2002 which would make it easier to privatise water services via changes to ‘contracting out’, and ‘Public Private Partnership’ (PPP) provisions, until a full and thorough independent investigation of the pricing practices of private water company United Water’s seven contracts in New Zealand has been undertaken.”

and/or my request to the Office of the Auditor-General to conduct  such an inquiry/investigation.

Yours sincerely,

Penny Bright
Media spokesperson
Water Pressure Group

Judicially recognised ‘Public Watchdog’ on Metrowater, water and Auckland regional governance matters.

“Anti-corruption campaigner”

https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

KIWIBLOG ‘General Debate’ 24 May 2011: My post outlining complaint to Chief Archivist about Auckland Council’s alleged failure to maintain full and accurate contracting records + responses.

General Debate 24 May 2011

No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)

Tags: General Debate
This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 24th, 2011 at 8:10 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

1. 
   
2. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
   May 24th, 2011 at 8:25 am Good moaning ‘Kiwibloggers’!

   Yesterday, Monday 23 May 2011 I made an historic first complaint to Chief Archivist about Auckland Council’s alleged failure to maintain full and accurate ‘contracting’ records.

   I arrived at the Office of the National Archives with evidence which, in my considered opinion, proves that ‘contracting’ at Auckland Council is effectively ‘out-of-control’ and made a formal written complaint to the Chief Archivist, about an alleged breach, by Auckland Council, of s 61 (c) of the Public Records Act 2005, because the Auckland Council

   ‘(c) contravenes or fails to comply with any provision of this Act or any regulations made under it.

   (This alleged failure to comply attaches to s 17 (1) of the Public Records Act 2005:

   ‘Every public office and local authority must create and maintain full and accurate records of its offices in accordance with normal prudent business practice, including the records of any matter which is contracted out to an independent contractor.’

   (Evidence to support this complaint is provided in detail on my blog).

   I will be formally advising the Governing Body of the Auckland Council of this development, at their meeting this morning Tuesday 24 May 2011 at the former Manukau Council Chamber at 10am, where myself and fellow ‘Public Watchdog’ community activist, Lisa Prager have speaking rights.

   How can the elected representatives of the Auckland ‘$upercity’ Council support this 3.7% rate$ increase – when there cannot have been proper ‘line-by-line’ accounting because full and accurate records of contracts are not being kept in a proper way?

   In my considered opinion, if the private ‘piggies-in-the-middle’ consultants and contractors were removed from core Council services and returned to ‘in-house’ provision – there could be savings to residents and ratepayers of hundreds of millions of dollars.

   Whose interests are being served here, and where exactly are our public monies going?

   Penny Bright
   https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

3. Murray (7,635) Says:
   May 24th, 2011 at 8:30 am Piss off idiot.
4. bearhunter (849) Says:
   May 24th, 2011 at 8:39 am Murray, I see the dreadful twat (Fowler, not Bright) is saying that it wasn’t derogatory now. Perhaps he should try to substitute “Irish” for “Maori” and see how far he gets. Gobshite.
5. Nookin (843) Says:
   May 24th, 2011 at 8:40 am I think that if ACC adds a further 3% to the rates it might come close to having the resources to comply with the forms-in-triplicate mentality that seems to pervade bureaucracy throughout New Zealand. Keep it up, Penny. Once you get strict compliance you might well have added 10% to the local householder bill. Won’t they be pleased with you then? And how proud will you be?
6. 
   
7. 
   
8. 
   
9. 
   
10. 
    
11. 
    
12. 
    
13. 
    
14. 
    
15. 
    
16. 
    
17. 
    
18. 
    
19. 
    
20. 
    
21. 
    
22. 
    
23. Elaycee (195) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 12:20 pm Bugger. Post at 8.25am. The reprieve is over… the blog blight is back with more electioneering.
24. 
    
25. 
    
26. 
    
27. 
    
28. 
    
29. 
    
30. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 2:20 pm # Nookin (842) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 8:40 am

    I think that if ACC adds a further 3% to the rates it might come close to having the resources to comply with the forms-in-triplicate mentality that seems to pervade bureaucracy throughout New Zealand. Keep it up, Penny. Once you get strict compliance you might well have added 10% to the local householder bill. Won’t they be pleased with you then? And how proud will you be?”

    _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

    I prefer the bureaucracy to the ‘contractocracy’ ‘Nookin’.

    Over the last 20 years, after so much contracting out of core Council services to the supposedly more ‘efficient’ private sector – have YOUR rates gone up or down?

    Duh?

    I also support our lawful right to ‘open, transparent and democratically accountable’ local government, and have taken a step that no one else has, to help enforce the maintenance of ‘full and accurate’ records of all contract entered into with ‘independent contractors’.

    How can rates reductions be achieved by ‘line-by-line’ accounting – if the ‘accounts’ are not being kept in a proper way?

    How can Councillors from ANY political persuasion agree to ANY rates increases – if they don’t know where rates monies are being spent?

    Or ‘Nookin’ is your position on this matter that you don’t care that prudent stewardship is not being exercised over public monies, and you don’t care if rates go up?

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

31. 
    
32. Elaycee (195) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 2:25 pm @ Nookin: Please DNFTT!

    Friday will soon come around and the blog blight will be spanked again – this time courtesy of the voters within the Howick Ward.

    EEEK!

33. 
    
34. nasska (589) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 2:42 pm Elaycee

    Do you know what time Friday the results will be available to the public? I’d hate to miss a moment of the celebrations.

35. 
    
36. reid (7,386) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 3:39 pm Well I don’t know about you guys but I’m extremely concerned that ACC is clearly deliberately concealing the true and actual arrangements it has with its contractors and I think this should be investigated, were anyone actually ready and able to do it.

    This is a serious problem people, requiring some sort of public watchdog activity of the very highest and most urgent order. Alacrity is king, should be the watchword for today.

    If only someone, somewhere, could take on this utterly vital and necessary role.

    But none exist.

    Oh the humanity.

37. Elaycee (195) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 3:40 pm Nasska – Rest assured I’ll keep you in the loop. But don’t plan to attend any ‘blog blight celebration party’ any time soon…
38. 
    _
39. nasska (589) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 3:55 pm Reid

    I feel for you in your despair. With such a blatant conspiracy going on who will you turn to?

    I can only console you with the thought that cometh the hour, cometh the man (or madwoman).

40. 
    
41. 
    
42. 
    
43. 
    
44. nasska (589) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 5:12 pm Reid

    Over the past week or so I have noticed a disturbing phenomenon. Fortunately it has been confined to a very small number of commenters on Kiwiblog but I thought I should run it past you in case you consider that it should be brought to the notice of the authorities.

    There have been a couple of comments made on this blog supporting the work Water Woman is doing in opening our eyes to the incredible conspiracies going on around us. While it would be easy to dismiss these commenters as aliens or methos having a bad day there is another possibility.

    I refer of course to a version of the “Stockholm Syndrome”. Is it possible that these sad people have worn out their scroll wheels & are now actually forced to read the cut & paste ramblings of the resident madwoman? They may have become enslaved by the wafflings of their captor & their now addled brains see her as a benign source of information.

    Your thoughts & any recommendations for appropriate therapy could help these poor souls.

45. Sofia (145) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 5:30 pm nasska –
    There have been a couple of comments made on this blog supporting the work Water Woman is doing in opening our eyes to the incredible conspiracies going on around us. While it would be easy to dismiss these commenters as aliens or methos having a bad day there is another possibility.

    This conspiracy of yours, nasska, may be supported by the comments, to which I think you refer, are not ripped to shreds by the afore mentioned Water Person.

    On the other hand –
    Your thoughts & any recommendations for appropriate therapy could help these poor souls.

    it might be that these ‘other’ comments ARE therapy.
    Or even anti-thesis, to the GAMES PEOPLE PLAY [see a synopsis of this treatise by famed Dr Eric Berne] – the game player in this case being the Water Person, a textbook case for transactional analysis.

46. Elaycee (195) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 5:31 pm @ Nasska says: “cometh the hour, cometh the man (or madwoman).”

    Wash your mouth out.

47. 
    
48. nasska (589) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 5:46 pm Sofia

    Alas, there are so many complications.

49. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 5:57 pm # Elaycee (175) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 2:25 pm

    @ Nookin: Please DNFTT!

    Friday will soon come around and the blog blight will be spanked again – this time courtesy of the voters within the Howick Ward.

    EEEK!
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Ah yes – another profound comment from the gormless , more dollars than sense ‘Elaycee’ who doesn’t care where her rate$ monies are spent and doesn’t support ‘open, transparent and democratically accountable’ local government.

    Whatever dear ……………….. (yawn…………………..)

    There are now THOUSANDS of people who live and/or travel through the Howick Ward who have seen the signs:

    “NO RATE$ INCREASE!”

    “CUT OUT THE CONTRACTOR$!”

    “SUPERCITY = SUPER RIP OFF!”

    90,000 voters have read my 150 word ‘Candidate’s Statement’ – where I have outlined my opposition to any rates increase.

    So – whatever the outcome of the election (you SILLY woman) – the message is out there (which is the main reason why I stood in the first place.)

    (Opposing rate$ increases is a message that you ‘Elaycee’ – would quite possibly support – if it were not coming from me?)

    One day, dear – when you learn the political sophistication of ‘issue by issue’ politics – you will perhaps realise how ineffective you are being?

    However – such a realisation would require a modicum of intelligence/ common sense – so unfortunately – I’m not expecting you to catch on any time soon.

    Same comment applies to ‘Nasska’ , ‘Sofia’ ‘Reid’ and ‘Nookin’?

    (Unless of course you have your own private contracting snouts in the public trough, or are connected in any way with those who have?

    PERISH THE THOUGHT!

    But, of course with your GUTLESS anonymity – there is no way of checking – is there?

    How convenient !

    (Meant of course in my customary caring way

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

50. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 6:04 pm # KH (149) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 5:37 pm

    If I had to chose between having the dodgy ‘free’ trade agreement and Pharmac
    I would choose Pharmac ”
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

    I agree KH.

    Have you seen this?

    “POSTCARDS OPPOSING TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT AVAILABLE TO SEND TO POLITICIANS

    The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) is the means to effect a Free Trade Agreement with the US.

    For full details on why this would have a very negative impact on NZ, check http://www.nznotforsale.org

    There is no bigger issue this election.

    Two versions of a postcard opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement are now available, one to be sent to PM Key, the other to an MP of the sender’s choice. Postage is free (because they’re going to Parliament).

    Here is the text (which is the same on each one).

    “Dear Prime Minister Key

    I urge the Government to withdraw from negotiations for the TPPA and instead put New Zealand’s national interest at the heart of all trade and investment negotiations, rather than the interests of transnational corporations and the US government.

    The TPPA will, among other things: undermine what little NZ has left in the way of any controls of foreign investment; institutionalise the very same horrendous financial practices which led to the global financial crisis; allow American corporations to sue the New Zealand government in private international tribunals; attack Pharmac and drive up the cost of prescription medicines; make access to digital recordings more expensive and copying more restricted; attack our GE and tobacco controls and food labeling and food and appliance safety standards; and weaken our controls of food imports where they might carry disease. The whole process is both secret and fundamentally undemocratic in the way in which it is being negotiated and then ratified by Executive decree.

    I will be voting for a party which puts our national interest first, not those of foreign corporations under a TPPA”.

    The cards are also online at http://www.box.net/shared/ju1gxifyio and people are welcome to download and print their own. Bear in mind that they are meant to be on light card, not paper’

    ____________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Cheers!

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

51. Elaycee (195) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 6:07 pm Blog Blight: Roll on Friday. It doesn’t matter what you think – the voters are the ones that matter.

    The only good thing about the election for you is that, after its all over and you are licking your wounds, you can still use your signs for firewood.

52. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 6:25 pm # Elaycee (180) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 6:07 pm

    Blog Blight: Roll on Friday. It doesn’t matter what you think – the voters are the ones that matter.

    The only good thing about the election for you is that, after its all over and you are licking your wounds, you can still use your signs for firewood.”
    __________________________________________________________________________________________________

    errrr….. ‘Elaycee’ – have you overdosed on your ‘THICK’ pills?

    HANDY HINT 101: If you are going to make a comment about someone else’s post – it does actually pay to READ it – so you don’t make a complete IDIOT of yourself?

    You seem to have missed this bit – so I’ll repeat it so you hopefully will engage your ENORMOUS brain before typing your next response?

    “There are now THOUSANDS of people who live and/or travel through the Howick Ward who have seen the signs:

    “NO RATE$ INCREASE!”

    “CUT OUT THE CONTRACTOR$!”

    “SUPERCITY = SUPER RIP OFF!”

    90,000 voters have read my 150 word ‘Candidate’s Statement’ – where I have outlined my opposition to any rates increase.

    So – whatever the outcome of the election (you SILLY woman) – the message is out there (which is the main reason why I stood in the first place.) ”

    Ok ‘Elaycee’?

    GOT IT dear?

    (I’ll be celebrating whatever the outcome of the election, and will have more signs I can use IF I decide to stand in the Epsom electorate?

    

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

53. Steve (1,506) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 6:47 pm Penny,
    The Space Station is above NZ right now, the people onboard need someone intelligent to talk to coz they are bored shitless. NZ shitstirers is on the menu of things to do today.

    It is ‘Space Station’ ok not ‘playstation’

54. 
    
55. 
    
56. 
    
57. Hurf Durf (2,727) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 7:06 pm Anyone see Ebola manage to make his crap speech about US-Irish relations all about himself? “Is feideh linn!!!” Really? Really? Piss off. Still, I got to see his car get broken by his wife’s fat arse so swings and roundabouts.

    Speaking of losers, they’ve found traces of DSK’s DNA (stop giggling in the back there) on the dress of that chambermaid. Looks like an open and shut case, Danno etc.

    Only four more days until polls close, Penny! Are you confident? I think you’ll make a great (snort) and useful (guffaw) contribution to Auckland Council. Nah, couldn’t keep a straight face. Sorry.

    Apparently even Camping might be way off. Iran has pencilled in the return of the Mahdi for the 5th June so I get to keep off doing any housework for another week and get a few more beers in. Bonzer.

58. reid (7,386) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 7:37 pm nasska your 5:12 raises an interesting, serious and critical point.

    I wonder if I shouldn’t call: The Bureau?

59. Viking2 (4,092) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 7:45 pm National’s Tau Henare has “overstepped the line” by calling Hone Harawira “so racist, he has chocolate milk in his cup of tea,” a fellow MP says.

    Henare – who has been dubbed the Minister of Twitter for his prolific use of the social networking site – posted the comment on his Twitter account earlier this afternoon.

    Labour MP Trevor Mallard, also an enthusiastic social media user, said “it’s beyond the limits.”

    “The line is drawn in a different place on Twitter, but in this case Tau has gone beyond it. It’s unlikely to upset many people, mainly because of the way that Hone is perceived by a lot of people.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/5048491/Twittering-Tau-Henare-in-chocolate-milk-racism-storm

60. Viking2 (4,092) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 7:50 pm White kiwi chick hatched
    A rarity these days a bit like virgins.

    A rare white kiwi chick has been born – the first to be hatched in captivity.

    The chick, named Manukura, is not an albino but the rare offspring of some North Island brown kiwi from Little Barrier Island.

    But wouldn’t you know it the racists manage to even claim the white one as their’s. Rangitane chief executive Jason Kerehi said tribal elders saw the white chick as a “tohu” or “sign” of new beginnings.

    Well they would given the dosh the Nats. have handed them lately.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/cutestuff/5047359/White-kiwi-chick-hatched

61. Pauleastbay (924) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 7:50 pm V2

    I would have thought asssaulting a fellow MP was pretty much “beyond the limits”, call me old fashioned

62. Elaycee (195) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 7:53 pm Ground Control to the blog blight:

    I’ve certainly received the candidate statements. My vote has already been cast. Roll on Friday.

    Hard to see how you could possibly consider a right spanking and rejection courtesy of the voters as a success. But you never know – you may even reach the dizzy heights and get 1.0% of the vote this time. Er, but then again, maybe not…

    BTW – I’ll have to take your word re the number of words in your candidate statement – I got a headache halfway through the fir$t paragraph!

    I’ve also done my bit for the community and helped track down the cats and dogs that fled the scene after they saw your picture and your hoarding in Cook St last Saturday. One of the poor dogs (a rare, Tibetan Yak Hound) nearly reached the outskirts of Hamilton before it slowed and a ranger could get a leash clipped to it’s collar. Its still shaking but the vet says its not unusual in cases of severe shock.

    Luckily, its expected to make a full recovery.

63. nasska (589) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 7:58 pm Reid

    A man such as Quiller who wouldn’t crack under torture, especially hydro-torture, might be able to infiltrate Water Woman’s extensive network of conspiracy experts. Only then could we know for certain whether any of our fellow Kiwiblog commenters have been taken captive & had their minds reprogrammed.

    We owe it to the poor bastards.

64. 
    
65. 
    
66. reid (7,386) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 8:07 pm Roger nasska, will set wheels in motion.
67. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 9:19 pm # Elaycee (184) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 7:53 pm

    Ground Control to the blog blight:

    I’ve certainly received the candidate statements. My vote has already been cast. Roll on Friday.

    Hard to see how you could possibly consider a right spanking and rejection courtesy of the voters as a success. But you never know – you may even reach the dizzy heights and get 1.0% of the vote this time. Er, but then again, maybe not…

    BTW – I’ll have to take your word re the number of words in your candidate statement – I got a headache halfway through the fir$t paragraph!

    I’ve also done my bit for the community and helped track down the cats and dogs that fled the scene after they saw your picture and your hoarding in Cook St last Saturday. One of the poor dogs (a rare, Tibetan Yak Hound) nearly reached the outskirts of Hamilton before it slowed and a ranger could get a leash clipped to it’s collar. Its still shaking but the vet says its not unusual in cases of severe shock.

    Luckily, its expected to make a full recovery.”

    _____________________________________________________________________________________________

    So ‘Elaycee’ – I see your intellectual prowess is closely matched by your wit and repartee.

    (yawn ……………)

    At least you can put a face to my name – unlike GUTLESS/anonymous ‘Kiwibloggers’ such as yourself?

    (Meant of course in a caring way, dear

    Kind regards

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

68. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 9:30 pm # nasska (586) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    Reid

    A man such as Quiller who wouldn’t crack under torture, especially hydro-torture, might be able to infiltrate Water Woman’s extensive network of conspiracy experts. Only then could we know for certain whether any of our fellow Kiwiblog commenters have been taken captive & had their minds reprogrammed.

    We owe it to the poor bastards.”
    __________________________________________________________________________________________

    Then again ‘ nasska’ – have you considered that the ‘fellow Kiwiblog commenters’ to whom you are referring, may just have a greater intellectual capacity than yourself and ‘reid’, and/or might actually (unlike yourselves) also have a better understanding of the principles and practice of ‘freedom of expression’?

    You could also start more ad hominem attacks on them, for daring to hold a point of view that is different to your own?

    (ESPECIALLY if they have the temerity to agree with me on some issues!

    Or is consistency also not one of your strong points?

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

69. reid (7,386) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 9:39 pm Quiller was dispatched from London 10 mins ago, Penny. I’d be quite worried, were I you.
70. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 9:51 am # reid (7,381) Says:
    May 24th, 2011 at 9:39 pm

    Quiller was dispatched from London 10 mins ago, Penny. I’d be quite worried, were I you.”
    _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Think I’ve got more important things to worry about ‘reid’.

    Like the total lack of transparency regarding hundreds of million$ of apparently unaccountable Auckland regional citizens and ratepayers monies which are being spent on private sector consultants and contractors.

    Happening here i(n New Zealand – ‘perceived’ to be the least corrupt country in the world (along with Singapore and Denmark according to Transparency International’s 2010 ‘Corruption Perception Index’. Pity about the REALITY!)

    No central registers of contracts?
    No ‘devilish detail’ giving the names of the contractors; scope, term and value of contracts?

    How can elected the Auckland Council elected representatives, make prudent decisions about rates, when there appears to be no basis for ‘line-by-line’ accounting?

    Why are ‘core’ Council services, such as fixing the footpaths, water pipes, roads; trimming the grass and trees, looking after parks and reserves; planning ……….. not being carried out ‘in-house’ by Council staff?

    Why have we got two lots of private ‘piggies-in-the-middle’ – private contractors who are carrying out core council work – then private consultants employed as ‘project managers’ to administer the ‘works contractors’?

    If replacing the bureaucracy with the ‘contractocracy’is SO efficient – why have Council rates continued to go up – not down?

    Unlike the whining ‘Kiwibloggers’ – who constantly attack me – at least I have a proven track record of doing something to help stop this rort.

    That’s the thing about ‘activists’.

    We may get bad press – but we do have a habit of making things happen and getting things done.

    Perhaps those who do not have their heads firmly embedded in their bottoms have a wider perspective, and are in a better position to take a more appreciative overview?

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

71. reid (7,386) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 10:04 am at least I have a proven track record of doing something to help stop this rort

    No, you don’t. You have a proven track record of raising issues that don’t matter, or if they do matter, don’t actually exist.

    Every single issue you’ve raised since you’ve chosen to inflict yourself on we here, is trivial. Just like this one is. See, just for this example, it may well be that the i’s aren’t dotted and the t’s aren’t crossed, on the ACC contractor’s records. But even if that’s the case, THIS DOES NOT MEAN SOMETHING SINISTER IS GOING ON.

    Like the mad Don Quixote however, you just can’t see that and instead, when no-one else agrees with you, you take it to mean you’re onto something quite serious indeed and you must press on regardless of the resistance.

    Now Penny, sorry, but this is mental. You’ve got some quite serious delusion going on in your head, I suggest you see a specialist in counselling people with paranoia, because you are.

    As I’ve told you before, you don’t add value because no-one here thinks you raise any serious issues whatsoever. Now it could be that we’re wrong, or it could be that you’re wrong. Have you seriously considered the latter possibility, or not really? I’ve also told you how to start adding value, but you won’t, instead you perpetuate your mad Don behaviour, daily inflicting it upon us, and then you’re surprised you get resistance.

    As I said Penny, this is mental and you need to see someone about it.

72. Elaycee (195) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 10:06 am Oh oh – the blog blight returns…

    Memo to BB: Why don’t we just let the good folk of Howick Ward decide whether they accept your views or consign them to the garbage. Your blatant electioneering is repetitive and tiresome.

    Roll on Friday.

    EEEK!

73. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 10:14 am So – obviously not going to hear a loud ‘popping’ sound anytime soon from ‘reid’ or ‘Elaycee’?

    The loud ‘popping’ sound of heads being suddenly extracted from bottoms?

    Pity.

    However – just seems to prove the point (again) that there are none so blind as those who WILL not see?

    Continue your blissful ignorance – and both of you have a LOVELY day!

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

74. Elaycee (195) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 10:31 am Blog Blight: The only popping sound will come from the champagne corks. Winners are grinners.

    EEEK!

75. reid (7,386) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 10:37 am OK Penny prove me wrong. Explain precisely what is sinister about what you’ve discovered over the ACC contractor records. Tell us exactly what the shortcomings are, and exactly why, in your opinion, this is a problem. You haven’t done this yet, BTW, if you think you have, for every single one of your posts above consists merely of your bald allegation there’s a problem with the register, but you haven’t explained the nature of the problem. Nor have you explained precisely why, in factual terms, this is a sinister issue. You’ve said that in your opinion it is, but you haven’t given any facts to back that up.

    Be really really specific and factual and don’t waste my time with your opinion, lay the facts out, as clearly as you can. Facts only, not your opinion.

    Can you do that?

    If not, why not.

76. Nookin (843) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 10:55 am Reid
    Is Jonathon Quinn coming as well?
    http://www.brettbattles.com/
77. alex Masterley (700) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:02 am As an aside the last time some-one complained about ACC contractors (the blokes who did the curbing and footpaths if i recall correctly), rudman in the herald i think, an audit was done on the contractors works and who owed what to whom. Banksie got all hot under the collar about it too.
    Rudman suggested the contractor owed the council money.
    However when the dust settled the audit showed the council actually owed the contractor more money than was thought.
    Red faces all round.
78. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:02 am Ok ‘reid’ – here is the FACTUAL EVIDENCE which you have requested:

    (Apologies folks for the length of this post – but it contains the FULL OIA reply – and ‘reid’ has ‘asked for it’ (as it were
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    I made a formal written complaint to the Chief Archivist, (Monday 23 May 2011) about an alleged breach, by Auckland Council, of s 61 (c) of the Public Records Act 2005, because the Auckland Council

    ‘(c) contravenes or fails to comply with any provision of this Act or any regulations made under it.

    (This alleged failure to comply attaches to s 17 (1) of the Public Records Act 2005:

    ‘Every public office and local authority must create and maintain full and accurate records of its offices in accordance with normal prudent business practice, including the records of any matter which is contracted out to an independent contractor.’ ) ”

    The evidence to support this complaint, included the following items of correspondence:

    1) 10 March 2011: ‘Open Letter/ Local Government and Official Information Act (LGOIMA) request to the CEO of Auckland Council.

    2) 26 April 2011: Reply from Bruce Thomas ‘Public Information Manager’ Auckland Council, including copies of transfers for information to the 7 Auckland Council CCO’s (and Council Organisation).

    3) 16 May 2011: LGOIMA reply from the Regional Facilities Auckland CCO.

    4) 11 March 2011″ Acknowledgment by Ministerial Secretary Jess Van Harlem (Office of Minister of Local Government Rodney Hide) of my originating ‘Open Letter/LGOIMA request of 10 March 2011.

    _________________________________________________________________________________________________

    THIS IS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF EVIDENCE:

    It comprises of my questions and the replies from Bruce Thomas ‘Public Information Manager’ Auckland Council, as follows:

    2) 26 April 2011: Reply from Bruce Thomas ‘Public Information Manager’ Auckland Council

    (Official Information Request No. 9000108231)

    26 April 2011

    Dear Ms Bright

    Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987
    Re: requests for evidence of record

    I refer to your email dated 10 March 2011, which we received on 11 March 2011, requesting information about records relating to independent contractors.

    As a general comment, we note that section 17(1) of the Public Records Act 2005 to which you refer does not establish an obligation to create and maintain a register of contracts and nor is there any other statutory obligation to do so. Nonetheless, the Council is currently in the process of developing such a register. Even once it is established, the information contained in the register is unlikely to be disclosed on the grounds that to do so would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information. Of course, any requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

    Please note that Council Controlled Organisations are independent entities separate from the Auckland Council.
    They have their own obligations to respond to requests under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act.

    Regarding your request, we have responded to your questions in the order in which they were raised.

    1) The information which confirms that prior to amalgamation under the Auckland Council, each of the following local authorities had created and maintained a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ for any matter which was contracted out to an independent contractor:

    a) Auckland Regional Council (ARC)
    b) Auckland City Council
    c) Manukau City Council
    d) Waitakere City Council
    e) North Shore City Council
    f) Rodney District Council
    g) Papakura District Council
    h) Franklin District Council

    2) Please provide the information which confirms that prior to amalgamation under the Auckland Council, how many Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) operated under each of the following local authorities:

    a) Auckland Regional Council (ARC)
    b) Auckland City Council
    c) Manukau City Council
    d) Waitakere City Council
    e) North Shore City Council
    f) Rodney District Council
    g) Papakura District Council
    h) Franklin District Council

    Your request is refused under section 17(f) of the Act on the basis that the information requested, to the extent it may exist or be held by the Auckland Council, cannot be made available without substantial collation or research.

    17. Refusal of requests

    A request made in accordance with section 10 of this Act may be refused only for one or more of the following reasons, namely:

    (f) That the information requested cannot be made available without substantial collation or research.

    3) Please provide the information which confirms that prior to amalgamation under the Auckland Council, that each ‘Council Controlled Organisation’ (CCO) operating under each of the above-mentioned local authorities had created and maintained a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ for any matter which was contracted out to an independent contractor.

    4) Please provide the information which confirms that for the time that the Auckland Transition Agency (A.T.A.) was operating, that they had created and maintained a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ for any matter which was contracted out to an independent contractor.

    Your request is refused under section 17(g)(i) of the Act on the basis that the information requested is not held by the local authority and we have no grounds for believing that the information is held by another organisation. Alternatively, your request is refused under section 17(f) on the basis cannot be made available without substantial research.

    17. Refusal of requests.

    A request made in accordance with section 10 of this Act may be refused only for one or more of the following reasons, namely:

    (g) That the information requested is not held by the local authority and the person dealing with the request has no grounds for believing that the information is either-

    (i) Held by another local authority or a Department or Minister of the Crown or organisation;

    5) Please provide the information which confirms that for the time the Auckland Council has been operating, there has been created and maintained a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ established for for any matter which has been contracted out to an independent contractor.

    7) Please provide the information which confirms that in each of the above-mentioned categories, auditors responsible to the Office of the Auditor-General, have double-checked that a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ has been created and maintained.

    Please provide the information which confirms that in accordance with normal prudent business practice, Auckland Council has now ‘amalgamated’, created and maintains full and accurate records of any matter which has been contracted out to an independent contractor, including the above-mentioned Auckland Council ‘Council Controlled Organistions’ (CCOs); Council organisations and ‘statutory entities’.

    As mentioned at the beginning of this letter, this information does not yet exist and your request is therefore refused under section 17 (e) of the Act.

    17. Refusal of requests

    A refusal made in accordance with section 10 of this Act may be refused only for one or more of the following reasons, namely:

    (e) That the document alleged to contain the information requested does not exist or cannot be found.

    6) Please provide the information which confirms that for the time the each of the following Auckland Council ‘Council Controlled Organistions’ (CCOs); Council organisations and ‘statutory entities’ has been operating, there has been created and maintained a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ established for for any matter which was contracted out to an independent contractor.

    a) Auckland Council Investments (ACIC)
    b) Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development (TEED)
    c) Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA)
    d) Auckland Council Property Ltd (ACPL)
    e) Auckland Waterfront Development Agency (AWDA)
    f) Watercare Services Ltd
    g) Auckland Transport

    The information, to the extent it may exist, is not held by the Auckland Council and your request has been transferred to the organisations listed above. A copy of our letter of transfer is attached for your information.

    9) Please provide the name and position of the Auckland Council employee who is ultimately responsible for the creation and maintenance of records of any matter which is contracted out to an independent contractor, as defined in s17 of the Public Records Act 2001, and would bear ultimate responsibility for any of the following offences:

    61 Offences
    Every person commits an offence who wilfully or negligently—
    (a) damages a public record; or
    (b) disposes of or destroys a public record otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act; or
    (c) contravenes or fails to comply with any provision of this Act or any regulations made under it.

    The Auckland Council has a corporate responsibility to comply with the Public Records Act 2005.

    You have the right in accordance with section 27(3) of the LGOIMA to make a complaint to the Office of the Ombudsman regarding council’s refusal to release any information under this letter and for the delay in getting this response to you.

    If you have any further queries please contact me on
    (09) 301 0101, quoting Official Information Request No. 90000108231

    Yours sincerely

    pp (? not legible)

    Bruce Thomas
    Public Information Manager
    Democracy Services

    _________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Hope this helps ‘reid’.

    Kind regards

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

79. Manolo (4,214) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:03 am Nutter alert, nutter alert.
80. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:16 am # alex Masterley (700) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:02 am

    As an aside the last time some-one complained about ACC contractors (the blokes who did the curbing and footpaths if i recall correctly), rudman in the herald i think, an audit was done on the contractors works and who owed what to whom. Banksie got all hot under the collar about it too.
    Rudman suggested the contractor owed the council money.
    However when the dust settled the audit showed the council actually owed the contractor more money than was thought.
    Red faces all round.”
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Why are core Council services, such as footpaths construction, repairs and maintenance being contracted out to the private sector in the first place?

    Where is the ‘cost-benefit’ analysis which PROVES that this is a more ‘cost-effective’ use of residents and ratepayers monies than when such services were provided ‘in-house’?

    How much private profit have those with Council footpath contracts made since the contracting-out of this core Council services began?

    How is the use by Councils of this ‘business’ model serving the interests of anyone other than those who get this Council ‘business’?

    Who is checking for conflicts of interest between those who give out the contracts and those who receive the contracts?

    There is NO publicly-available ‘Register of Interests’ for either elected representatives, or council staff/ consultants who sign off these contracts.

    How can ‘conflicts of interest’ be prevented, if interests are not ‘declared’ in the first place?

    (This principle equally applies to NZ Judges).

    To rely on the integrity of elected representatives or staff to just ‘put their hand up’, and declare an interest at the time of a potential conflict does NOT work for me.

    Not good enough.

    How can you double-check ‘interests’ – which are only known to the person concerned (ie: inside their head)?

    Honestly – how ON EARTH can NZ be perceived to be the ‘least corrupt country in the world’ when we have so little genuine transparency?

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

81. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:18 am # Manolo (4,214) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:03 am

    Nutter alert, nutter alert.”
    ________________________________________________________________________________________________

    It’s ok ‘Manolo’.

    We’re used to you and accept you for what you are.

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

82. reid (7,386) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:22 am Yes Manolo I thought I’d wait till this was yesterday’s GD out of deference to those who couldn’t be arsed with what this is going to become.

    Penny what precisely does this establish, in anyway? What sinister secret is lurking beneath this “evidence?” You haven’t explained that. All you’ve said is some of them do have a register and some of them don’t, and the reply says we note that section 17(1) of the Public Records Act 2005 to which you refer does not establish an obligation to create and maintain a register of contracts and nor is there any other statutory obligation to do so.

    What about that, don’t you understand.

    In other words, so fucking what, if there is, or isn’t, any register? S-o f-u-c-k-i-n-g w-h-a-t?

    What your “evidence” establishes Penny is precisely what I said above, about your tilting at windmills. You pick on some trivial issue like the lack of a contractor’s register, then somehow, somewhere, over the rainbow, make a leap of logic that this means something sinister is going on. Newsflash Penny, it doesn’t look like it, to us, it never did and this “evidence” does nothing to establish that one way or the other. In other words, it doesn’t mean there is, and it doesn’t mean there isn’t. Now you clearly think there is something going on, and that might be because you have got some paranoid delusion about how the world works, that the rest of us don’t have. Now on the basis of probabilities, do you think there is any chance that if most of the world thinks one thing about something, and one or two people think another thing, who do you think might be correct, on the basis of probability, given there is no evidence, one way or the other.

    If this is all you’ve got, it just proves what I said Penny. You think otherwise, then spell it out. Tell me exactly what is wrong in that reply, from specific excerpts. I’ve highlighted a few myself, which I think are reasonable responses to an unreasonable question.

    THIS IS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF EVIDENCE:

    It comprises of my questions and the replies from Bruce Thomas ‘Public Information Manager’ Auckland Council, as follows:

    2) 26 April 2011: Reply from Bruce Thomas ‘Public Information Manager’ Auckland Council

    (Official Information Request No. 9000108231)

    26 April 2011

    Dear Ms Bright

    Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987
    Re: requests for evidence of record

    I refer to your email dated 10 March 2011, which we received on 11 March 2011, requesting information about records relating to independent contractors.

    As a general comment, we note that section 17(1) of the Public Records Act 2005 to which you refer does not establish an obligation to create and maintain a register of contracts and nor is there any other statutory obligation to do so. Nonetheless, the Council is currently in the process of developing such a register. Even once it is established, the information contained in the register is unlikely to be disclosed on the grounds that to do so would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information. Of course, any requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

    Please note that Council Controlled Organisations are independent entities separate from the Auckland Council.
    They have their own obligations to respond to requests under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act.

    Regarding your request, we have responded to your questions in the order in which they were raised.

    1) The information which confirms that prior to amalgamation under the Auckland Council, each of the following local authorities had created and maintained a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ for any matter which was contracted out to an independent contractor:

    a) Auckland Regional Council (ARC)
    b) Auckland City Council
    c) Manukau City Council
    d) Waitakere City Council
    e) North Shore City Council
    f) Rodney District Council
    g) Papakura District Council
    h) Franklin District Council

    2) Please provide the information which confirms that prior to amalgamation under the Auckland Council, how many Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) operated under each of the following local authorities:

    a) Auckland Regional Council (ARC)
    b) Auckland City Council
    c) Manukau City Council
    d) Waitakere City Council
    e) North Shore City Council
    f) Rodney District Council
    g) Papakura District Council
    h) Franklin District Council

    Your request is refused under section 17(f) of the Act on the basis that the information requested, to the extent it may exist or be held by the Auckland Council, cannot be made available without substantial collation or research.

    17. Refusal of requests

    A request made in accordance with section 10 of this Act may be refused only for one or more of the following reasons, namely:

    (f) That the information requested cannot be made available without substantial collation or research.

    3) Please provide the information which confirms that prior to amalgamation under the Auckland Council, that each ‘Council Controlled Organisation’ (CCO) operating under each of the above-mentioned local authorities had created and maintained a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ for any matter which was contracted out to an independent contractor.

    4) Please provide the information which confirms that for the time that the Auckland Transition Agency (A.T.A.) was operating, that they had created and maintained a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ for any matter which was contracted out to an independent contractor.

    Your request is refused under section 17(g)(i) of the Act on the basis that the information requested is not held by the local authority and we have no grounds for believing that the information is held by another organisation. Alternatively, your request is refused under section 17(f) on the basis cannot be made available without substantial research.

    17. Refusal of requests.

    A request made in accordance with section 10 of this Act may be refused only for one or more of the following reasons, namely:

    (g) That the information requested is not held by the local authority and the person dealing with the request has no grounds for believing that the information is either-

    (i) Held by another local authority or a Department or Minister of the Crown or organisation;

    5) Please provide the information which confirms that for the time the Auckland Council has been operating, there has been created and maintained a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ established for for any matter which has been contracted out to an independent contractor.

    7) Please provide the information which confirms that in each of the above-mentioned categories, auditors responsible to the Office of the Auditor-General, have double-checked that a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ has been created and maintained.

    Please provide the information which confirms that in accordance with normal prudent business practice, Auckland Council has now ‘amalgamated’, created and maintains full and accurate records of any matter which has been contracted out to an independent contractor, including the above-mentioned Auckland Council ‘Council Controlled Organistions’ (CCOs); Council organisations and ‘statutory entities’.

    As mentioned at the beginning of this letter, this information does not yet exist and your request is therefore refused under section 17 (e) of the Act.

    17. Refusal of requests

    A refusal made in accordance with section 10 of this Act may be refused only for one or more of the following reasons, namely:

    (e) That the document alleged to contain the information requested does not exist or cannot be found.

    6) Please provide the information which confirms that for the time the each of the following Auckland Council ‘Council Controlled Organistions’ (CCOs); Council organisations and ‘statutory entities’ has been operating, there has been created and maintained a (central) ‘Register of Contracts’ established for for any matter which was contracted out to an independent contractor.

    a) Auckland Council Investments (ACIC)
    b) Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development (TEED)
    c) Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA)
    d) Auckland Council Property Ltd (ACPL)
    e) Auckland Waterfront Development Agency (AWDA)
    f) Watercare Services Ltd
    g) Auckland Transport

    The information, to the extent it may exist, is not held by the Auckland Council and your request has been transferred to the organisations listed above. A copy of our letter of transfer is attached for your information.

    9) Please provide the name and position of the Auckland Council employee who is ultimately responsible for the creation and maintenance of records of any matter which is contracted out to an independent contractor, as defined in s17 of the Public Records Act 2001, and would bear ultimate responsibility for any of the following offences:

    61 Offences
    Every person commits an offence who wilfully or negligently—
    (a) damages a public record; or
    (b) disposes of or destroys a public record otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act; or
    (c) contravenes or fails to comply with any provision of this Act or any regulations made under it.

    The Auckland Council has a corporate responsibility to comply with the Public Records Act 2005.

    You have the right in accordance with section 27(3) of the LGOIMA to make a complaint to the Office of the Ombudsman regarding council’s refusal to release any information under this letter and for the delay in getting this response to you.

    If you have any further queries please contact me on
    (09) 301 0101 , quoting Official Information Request No. 90000108231

    Yours sincerely

    pp (? not legible)

    Bruce Thomas
    Public Information Manager
    Democracy Services

83. Elaycee (195) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:28 am Blog Blight says: “it’s ok ‘Manolo’. We’re used to you and accept you for what you are. Kind regards, Penny Bright”:

    Well, Penny, must admit that its not so easy as far as you’re concerned – you’re on a mission to a planet no-one knows and this mission seems hell bent on exposing conspiracy theories that only a very few within your lunatic fringe can decipher.

    The good news for us on planet Earth is that the election is only 2 sleeps away.

    EEEK!

84. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:56 am # Elaycee (195) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 11:28 am

    Blog Blight says: “it’s ok ‘Manolo’. We’re used to you and accept you for what you are. Kind regards, Penny Bright”:

    Well, Penny, must admit that its not so easy as far as you’re concerned – you’re on a mission to a planet no-one knows and this mission seems hell bent on exposing conspiracy theories that only a very few within your lunatic fringe can decipher.

    The good news for us on planet Earth is that the election is only 2 sleeps away.

    EEEK!”
    _______________________________________________________________________________________________

    errr….. what is ‘conspiratorial’ about an Official Information REPLY from Auckland Council, consistently GORMLESS
    ‘Elaycee’?

    hmmm…. I think you are going to end up in a form of ‘Kiwiblog solitary confinement’ yourself dear, as others, (albeit belatedly) eventually realise that my concerns have a sound evidential basis?

    Hopefully we’ll all hear soon a LOUD ‘popping’ noise from your ‘end’ (as it were?

    Kind regards dear.

    You have a LOVELY day

    Penny Bright
    https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

85. reid (7,386) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 12:11 pm Penny what precisely does this establish, in anyway? What sinister secret is lurking beneath this “evidence?”
86. publicwatchdog (635) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 12:21 pm

    reid (7,386) Says:
    May 25th, 2011 at 12:11 pm

    Penny what precisely does this establish, in anyway? What sinister secret is lurking beneath this “evidence?”
    __________________________________________________________________________________________________

    errr….’reid’ – have you been using some of ‘Elaycee’s THICK pills?

    If ‘full and accurate’ records of contracts are NOT being kept – then how can either Council staff or elected representatives, thoroughly, on a ‘line-by-line’ accounting basis – check EXACTLY where resident’s and ratepayers’ monies are been spent, in order to look at where costs can be cut back, in order to prevent rate increases?

    I you can’t get THAT – then I don’t know that there is much more I can do to help explain the situation?

    I’ve done what I can.

    You stated:

    “..you haven’t explained the nature of the problem. Nor have you explained precisely why, in factual terms, this is a sinister issue. You’ve said that in your opinion it is, but you haven’t given any facts to back that up.”

    Ok – well now I have.

    And I’m also EXTREMELY busy.

    So – can I respectfully suggest that you take your time and SLOWLY and CAREFULLY read (again?) the information which I have provided, as you requested.

    Hopefully then – you will ‘get it’?

    Kind regards

JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT:’ THE TIME HAS COME TO CALL THE ECB’S BLUFF AND END THIS EURO PONZI SCHEME’

THE TIME HAS COME TO CALL THE ECB’S BLUFF AND END THIS EURO PONZI SCHEME

The ECB is threatening to cut liquidity off to banks and wreck financial mayhem in the event that Greece defaults or restructures its debt. This in spite of the fact that Greece is set to run out of cash on July 18^th and is sliding into lawlessness because of the very austerity measures which the ECB is advocating yet more of.

The time has come to call the ECB’s bluff. The ECB has much more to lose by a default and by cutting off liquidity to banks than the people of Greece or Europe. It would mean the moment when the criminal actions of the ECB — which has been hiding 100s of billions of euros of worthless loans on its books to milk taxpayers — would become apparent to everyone and so spell the political end of the ECB chiefs and the public-sector  Ponzi scheme they have been running with the euro currency. 

A change to the ECB’s operational rule to authorise the bank to give liquidity directly to governments and banks at no interest and without booking a corresponding debt n the balance sheet is all that is needed to resolve this eurozone debt crisis. Once the ECB chiefs are removed, the rebooting of the eurozone economy could start immediately. The Greek and other governments could be given liquidity from the ECB directly to allow managed insolvencies and fund a Marshall Plan for economic growth.

ECB chiefs appear to be terrified of a Greek default for purely personal reasons.

They know that if Greece defaults or restructures its debt, then hundreds of billions of euros of worthless loans that the ECB should never have made in the first place will have to be placed on its books and the tax payers of Europe will wake up to the fact they  are the ones expected to pay, and there will be political mayhem. Their role in this crime puts them at the front of the firing line.

The ECB clearly hopes that it can keep up the illusion that it will get the money it loaned to Greece, Ireland and Portugal back and the country’s are illiquid and not insolvent until the new eurozone fund comes into place in 2013 to provide a mechanism to suck yet more money from the tax payers as part of this historical Ponzi scheme as Mario Blejer called it.

If the ECB has to put the losses onto its books before then, then the ECB debts will have to be paid up by national governments. Tax payers will feel the huge bill fast, and they will be very angry. Credit rating agencies could even start to downgrade Germany, the main paymaster, when it becomes clear that not even Germany can manage the outstanding ECB debt let alone the whole eurozone debt when this Ponzi scheme has run its course.

The turmoil caused by the ECB and banks wrecking financial mayhem now in the event of a Greek default when they can easily supply liquidity — making it absolutely clear that this is blackmail — will be far less than the total economic, financial, social and political breakdown of the eurozone in a year, and it will put an end to the Ponzi scheme once and for all.

The ECB is already the biggest holder of Greek souvereign debt but its share of worthless souvereign debt is growing all the time and it is set to take on Irish and Portuguese debt. No one seems to know just how much debt the ECB has put on the shoulders of tax payers.

The ECB has„”skeleton” risks on ECB’s balance sheet amounting to several hundreds of billions of euros, reported Der Spiegel this weekend.

ECB has been giving money to banks in return for collateral asset-backed securities that low or non-existent debt ratings, knowing the tax payer will have to pick up the huge bil.

The illusion that Greece can meet its debt obligations and is only illiquid would be destroyed as soon as the country defaults.  Greece would have to be put into a managed insolvency as would Ireland and Portugal because they are also insolvent.  It is clear that Grece is going to have to default very soon anyway.

A year after Greece got a €110-billion ($159-billion) bailout from its euro partners and the IMF, it is clear to everyone that the tax hikes, public spending cuts have pushed the country deeper into debt while the bailouts have generated astronomical profits for the banks.

The ECB has been lending the banks money to buy Greek bonds at 0% interest.

Thanks to the penal EU/IMF bailout interest rates, banks have seen a steady return of tax payer money of about 6% on those bonds that cost them nothing to buy – and so been able to loot hundreds of billions from tax payers with the complicity of the ECB and governments. The ECB’s role in triggering Greek souvereign debt crisis also needs to be examined.

The ECB is now demanding that the Greeks sell billions in state assets but it is clear to everyone that the country is completely broke and according to German media, Greece has only got enough money to pay ist bills until July 18th.

Simply taking over the country to force sales as Jean Claude Juncker advocates is unacceptable politically and will only postpone the inevitable default and make it worse.

The FT reports that even hospitals are no longer able to pay their medicines bills.

“The pharmaceutical industry says only 30 per cent of €1.2bn in payments owed by public hospitals since the start of last year have been made. Of debt due from the start of 2011, just 1 per cent has so far been paid.,” writes the FT.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a81b7130-8498-11e0-afcb-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=rss#axzz1NAjup1to

The army is set to be deployed in Athens for the first time since military rule ended in 1974, according to Greek media, as the country slides into lawlessness.

The country is already slipping into anarchy and civil war and a failure to stop this development will lead to a political emergency in the eurozone to match the financial crisis. The country is insolvent. The looting must be stopped. The ECB must be stopped.

http://info.kopp-verlag.de/hintergruende/europa/udo-ulfkotte/griechenland-athen-bereitet-armeeeinsatz-in-der-hauptstadt-vor.html

A default by Greece would force the ECB to acknowledge that it will never get the money back, and compell it to put the losses on its books. The euro “public sector” Ponzi scheme which is based on the narrative that Greece, Ireland and Portugal are only being loaned money by the ECB and the tax payers will never have to pay would come to a shuddering halt before more damage is done.

The ECB is behaving like a street criminal pulling out a switch knife to rob a victim by threatening to cut off liquidity to banks and create financial mayhem.

The ECB can give banks as much liquidity as they need – and it can also give governments as much liquidity as they need at no interest. It is profitable for the banks for the ECB to give them money to loan to governments. But it is ruinous for the people.

All that is needed to reboot the eurozone economy is a change in the operational rules to allow the ECB to give liquidity to governments and banks at zero interest rate and without booking a debt.

The gigantic euro debt crisis is an illusion, a swindle. There is no crisis. It is artificially created by the ECB and the banks and governments. It can be solved immediately by changing the liquidity rules to include governments.

The euro zone could switch over to the Chinese way of printing money without creating debt and enjoy a similar boom.

There is nothing to be gained by allowing this Ponzi scheme to continue. The ECB’s bluff should be called. Let it cut ff liquidity – and pay the political price, which will be the end of the ECB and the banker puppet masters.

It is unacceptable for the people of Europe to be looted by the ECB and a criminal underbelly in governments.

Is this what Europe is all about? Oppression under the bankers? Open looting and the jackboot?

Are the tanks going to be sent in to mow millions down?

The time is rapidly approaching when all of Europe will be engulfed in civil war. And there will not be enough tanks in the world to contain the anger of the people when the ECB and their politicians loot their last euro on behalf of the bankers.

Look at the anger Spain. Look at the anger in Ireland. Look at the anger in Greece.

The people have had enough.

They want a return to law and order. They want sound money and an end to the looting by bankers and complicit politicians, the finance ministers, central bankers.

The time to act is now. Greece has to go into default. If the ECB cuts off liquidity, then the chiefs are removed pending trial and the operational rules changed to reboot the liquidity including liquidity to governments.

The solution is crystal clear and very simple. All that is lacking is the political will.

We, the people, have the will to end this looting.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Discontent in Greece grows over cuts for banks
• Lame Irish government bowed to ECB, says Peter Mathews
• German Finance Minister muzzled critics of Greece euro entry in 2000, knew …

JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘Manifesto of Spanish revolutionary movement against bankers and politicans and for real democracy’

Watch occupation of Madrid square by protestors on livestream: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/motionlook

Check out the video in English on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZ55PC-ElSE&feature=player_embedded

Manifesto (English)

http://democraciarealya.es/?page_id=814

We are ordinary people. We are like you: people, who get up every morning to study, work or find a job, people who have family and friends. People, who work hard every day to provide a better future for those around us.
Some of us consider ourselves progressive, others conservative. Some of us are believers, some not. Some of us have clearly defined ideologies, others are apolitical, but we are all concerned and angry about the political, economic, and social outlook which we see around us: corruption among politicians, businessmen, bankers, leaving us helpless, without a voice.
This situation has become normal, a daily suffering, without hope. But if we join forces, we can change it. It’s time to change things, time to build a better society together. Therefore, we strongly argue that:

• The priorities of any advanced society must be equality, progress, solidarity, freedom of culture, sustainability and development, welfare and people’s happiness.
• These are inalienable truths that we should abide by in our society: the right to housing, employment, culture, health, education, political participation, free personal development, and consumer rights for a healthy and happy life.
• The current status of our government and economic system does not take care of these rights, and in many ways is an obstacle to human progress.
• Democracy belongs to the people (demos = people, krátos = government) which means that government is made of every one of us. However, in Spain most of the political class does not even listen to us. Politicians should be bringing our voice to the institutions, facilitating the political participation of citizens through direct channels that provide the greatest benefit to the wider society, not to get rich and prosper at our expense, attending only to the dictatorship of major economic powers and holding them in power through a bipartidism headed by the immovable acronym PP & PSOE.
• Lust for power and its accumulation in only a few; create inequality, tension and injustice, which leads to violence, which we reject. The obsolete and unnatural economic model fuels the social machinery in a growing spiral that consumes itself by enriching a few and sends into poverty the rest. Until the collapse.
• The will and purpose of the current system is the accumulation of money, not regarding efficiency and the welfare of society. Wasting resources, destroying the planet, creating unemployment and unhappy consumers.
• Citizens are the gears of a machine designed to enrich a minority which does not regard our needs. We are anonymous, but without us none of this would exist, because we move the world.
• If as a society we learn to not trust our future to an abstract economy, which never returns benefits for the most, we can eliminate the abuse that we are all suffering.
• We need an ethical revolution. Instead of placing money above human beings, we shall put it back to our service. We are people, not products. I am not a product of what I buy, why I buy and who I buy from.

For all of the above, I am outraged.
I think I can change it.
I think I can help.
I know that together we can.I think I can help.

I know that together we can.

JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘SPANISH REVOLUTION CONTINUES IN SPITE OF GOVERNMENT BAN’

SPANISH REVOLUTION CONTINUES IN SPITE OF GOVERNMENT BAN

Spanish Revolution live tv

http://www.tvspain.tv/blog/?p=3026

Tens of thousands young Spaniards throughout the country, resist an official ban on gatherings ahead of this Sunday’s municipal elections and keep their street  protest.

“Spanish Revolution” spreading via Twitter and Facebook. It is reminiscent of the 1968 French student movement, which caused  an unprecedented social and moral overhaul in Europe and throughout the world. Some commentators say the Arab Spring has arrived in Spain

15-M movement – the name referring to the day protesters start occupying Plaza del Sol in Madrid, – is calling for political and economic reform in Spain and has spread to 166 Spanish cities (Madrid, Barcelona, Cordoba, Murcia, Valencia, Zaragoza, Tarragona, Salamanca, Sevilla, Malaga, Cadiz, Oviedo, Santander and Bilbao to name a few) and to other parts of Europe. Similar plaza takeovers have been organized through online social networks in Italy and Argentina.

At more than 21 percent, Spain has Europe’s highest unemployment rate and is also suffering from its worst economic crisis in decades, compounded by a series of draconian austerity measures. One of every two people of working age under 25 is jobless in Spain. They are called “the lost generation”. Young Spaniards are fleeing to other European capitals to find work. Experts, though, say this movement is not just about work, but about feeling alienated and misrepresented.

Leaders of the Popular Party, who expect to win the Sunday’s elections leading to the victory  in the 2012 general elections, have criticized the movement, while the government and Socialist Party have tried to capitalize on the resentment – although apparently without much success.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Guardian promotes irresponsible “bank run”, only 30,000 have joined fac…
• DTT Spanish government has approved the allocation of frequencies

JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘Spain’s austerity measures trigger election upheaval’

Spain’s austerity measures trigger election upheaval

Spain’s Socialist party suffered a historical defeat the polls as voters reject the austerity measures for the benefit of the bankers. Let’s hope they have more luck than the Irish, who voted out one set of banker puppets only to get the next set cheerfully breaking every election promise and carrying on with the looting.

UPDATE 1-Spanish Socialists suffer big defeat in local pollsMon May 23, 2011 5:09am EDT, Reuters

* Socialists score worst municipal results since Franco

* PM Zapatero vows to hang on until March 2012

* Centre-right Popular Party takes 10 point lead nationwide

By Judy Macinnes and Fiona Ortiz, Reuters.

MADRID, May 23 (Reuters) – Spain’s ruling Socialists reeled on Monday from stinging losses in local elections and now have to balance voter anger over high unemployment and investor demands for austerity measures.

A week of protests by Spaniards fed up with the stagnant economy and the EU’s highest jobless rate preceded Sunday’s elections, which left the Socialists out of power in most of the country’s cities and almost all of its 17 autonomous regions.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Italians march against budget cuts to fund payments to banks
• Spanish “debt crisis” could push euro over the brink, predicts NYT
• Video: Workers of Spain riot on the streets against austerity measures
• Europe’s coming summer of discontent

JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘ECB has put 100s of billions of euros of worthless debt on its books which tax payers will have to pay for, reports Der Spiegel’

ECB has put 100s of billions of euros of worthless debt on its books which tax payers will have to pay for, reports Der Spiegel

From CNBC

The European Central Bank is facing a potential crisis of its own because of “skeleton” risks amounting to several hundreds of billions of euros on its balance sheet, Dow Jones reported quoting Der Spiegel magazine.

The bailed out countries of Greece, Ireland and Portugal but Spain as well have provided as collateral asset-backed securities that are unfit for central bank loans because they have such low or non-existent debt ratings, according to the report.

Providing the collateral allowed the countries to receive more financial support, Dow Jones said the magazine reported in the preview of an article due for publication later Monday.

The ECB had no comment, Dow Jones reported.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/43130926

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• France to slash 100 billion euros from budget to give money to banks
• Some excellent data visualisation of the current economic crisis (especiall…
• Amadeus seeks up to 1.3 billion euros in record listing