"We have maintained a silence closely resembling stupidity" - Neil Roberts

Until we have legislation adopted into law to ensure fiduciary accountability and transparency in public affairs we will continue to have human rights breached because the existing crown immunity and lack of any independent oversight invites corruption to flourish.

"Question authority, and think for yourself" - Timothy Leary

"We have maintained a silence closely resembling stupidity" - Neil Roberts

"Information is the currency of democracy" - Thomas Jefferson

‎"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever does." - Margaret Mead

"The truth is like a lion, you don't have to defend it. Let it loose, it will defend itself."

"I = m c 2 [squared] where "I" am information" - Timothy Leary

"Ring the bells that still can ring, forget your perfect offering, there's a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in." Leonard Cohen

"The internet is a TV that watches you"

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Police 'lose' request for information regarding dodgy prosecution:

 Te Ringa Mangu Mihaka v The Queen.

On 2 May 2016 Te Ringa Mangu (Dun) Mihaka and his Maori Agent delivered two documents to the Porirua Police station.  One was an authority for the Maori Agent to act and the other was a request for all information on the Police file regarding the dodgy prosecution based on a Summary of Facts which was directly contradicted by the evidence of the complainant, who said the alleged incident happened at around 7.30 in the morning as he was getting up and making a coffee, while NZ Police Summary of Facts states that the alleged incident occurred at around nine o'clock at night while everyone was going to bed.  There was never any motive put forward for the alleged incident, the element of mens rea was completely absent and the only indication of actus reus was dodgy to say the least

To add maximum insult to injury the charging document refers to "Nathan MIHAKA".

Mr Mihaka has only been telling the Police Courts of New Zealand for over fifty years, in very strong language, that he intensely dislikes being referred to as "Nathan Mihaka".  He asserts that his parents did not name him "Nathan" at all, they named him "Netana", but due to a clerical issue - ignorance basically - he, like so many other Maori, including my own family, had their names distorted - 'Anglicised' - in this way.  If it wasn't for the Crown's unreasonable insistence on charging to correct their error this would no doubt have been corrected years ago.  Nevertheless, NZ Police and the Courts are very well aware of Mr Mihaka's intense disliking for this form of address, which he considers to be deliberately and extremely offensive given the history of his attempts to be addressed by his correct name, Te Ringa Mangu Mihaka.  His books, notably "Whakapohane", describe this in great detail, and he has always maintained that "Nathan Mihaka" is not one of his aliases, it is a fiction perpetrated upon his identity and his mana by a Crown colonial system which he and his tupuna did not sign up to, as it has now been firmly established that Maori did not cede sovereignty.

Prosecutorial misconduct is out of control in New Zealand, due to a so called independent Police Conduct Authority which is more in the business of covering up and making excuses for Police misconduct and widespread dysfunction, and this appears to be another case of prosecutorial misconduct.

Apart from the major discrepancy referred to above, it is clear that there was reasonable doubt as to the complainant's story, and that the complainant was exaggerating - he couldn't hold his breath for one minute let alone two, and the decision to prosecute as well as the manner in which the prosecution was conducted warrant further scrutiny, hence the requests for the file on this matter, particularly any evidence that the defendant received any Disclosure, let alone full Disclosure, and all information held by NZ Police regarding Mr Mihaka according to the Privacy Act, the Official Information Act and the Criminal Disclosure Act, etc.

We attempted to deliver the requests etc the previous day, driving from Paraparaumu and back for the purpose of doing so, but there was a sign on the door saying "Closed due to illness".

We handed the requests to a woman who identified herself (at our request) as "Lisa", a Police Prosecutor.  There was also a Sergeant McCormick present, and we explained that our requests were somewhat urgent as Mr Mihaka requires this information as evidence in current proceedings in the Human Rights Review Tribunal - further information regarding these proceedings will be published in the next few days.

Surprise, surprise.  NZ Police appear to have lost the request and want another copy of it.  This email was received today from Sgt McCormick in response to my request for an indication of when the information would be available:

As per our discussion on 16th May I left a message on the cell phone you provided me (027 4210645) @ 02:27pm stating that Wellington District Official Information Requests advised that they did not receive a copy of the request I scanned through to them. In the phone message I asked if you could provided a copy of the stamped request that I scanned through to them when you called on 16th May.  I apologise for this delay but assumed that you had received the message I left for you.

If you can scan a copy of that request back to me to enable me to fwd it them them.

Steve McCormick
Station Sergeant : Kapiti-Mana
027 4210645 is not my phone number and I certainly did not provide this number to Police - no wonder I didn't get the message.

Mr Mihaka's Maori Agent responded:

"Tena koe Sgt,

It seems that you didn't record my phone number accurately which is why I would not have received your message.

Mr Mihaka and I lack the resources to scan and resend this information - where are the original documents we delivered to 'Lisa' at Porirua Police Station???

We wish to make a formal complaint regarding the "loss" of the request which we delivered, and the manner in which our enquiries have been dealt with, please arrange for the information to be made available urgently and treat this as a formal complaint - Mr Mihaka was required to have this information in to the HRRT by 13 May 2016, some of it is well overdue - he should have been provided with initial disclosure and full disclosure before his trial.

I felt that 'Lisa' was dismissive and somewhat offensive in the manner in which she dealt with our request and this latest message is unacceptable.  You and 'Lisa' both witnessed me deliver the request and it is entirely unacceptable that you appear to have lost it.  Mr Mihaka and I went to considerable trouble and expense to make the request and as stated we lack the resources to repeat the request and we both feel we shouldn't have to.

What exactly happened to the request and authorisation we delivered to 'Lisa' - what action did she take and what exactly did she do with those documents?

Mr Mihaka and I are both shocked to read this message and learn that no action whatsoever has apparently been taken by your staff in response to our request, and that after having to endure the dismissive and offensive verbal response from 'Lisa' it now seems that she didn't even bother to file the documents let alone forward them to the correct Police department, and they have apparently disappeared."
This site will be updated shortly with further information regarding the claim filed by lawyer Nathan Bourke on behalf of Te Ringa Mangu Mihaka in the Human Rights Review Tribunal. 

Monday, May 16, 2016

Ken Shirley's racist rant:

Ken Shirley wrote a rather racist rant published in the NZ Herald - who were only too happy to publish it of course.

In a snide aside to 'Washday at the pa', Ken attempts to cast an allegory with the introduction: "Graduation day at Te Wananga.  Soon after the Labour Government came to office it started showering money on all things Maori."

What follows can only be described as the racist rant of a person with little insight into the history of this country, the relevance of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, among other things.

So who is Ken Shirley?

Party positions held:
Government appointments:
Statements on Maori:

Graduation day at Te Wananga. Soon after the Labour Government came to office it started showering money on all things Maori. ” – NZ Herald

Soon after the Labour Government came to office, ushering in its flagship ‘Closing the Gaps’ programmes. It started showering money on all things Maori. ” – Ibid

Out of this Te Wananga o Aotearoa pocketed $5.8 million and said that would go a long way towards providing for its growth. ” – Ibid

But the Government went further. Closing the Gaps demanded even more taxpayer money be thrown at Maori. ” – Ibid

Despite its apparent concern, it has continued to shovel huge sums of taxpayer money to this institution – all in the name of the treaty. ” – Ibid

The Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commissioners have foreshadowed that the decision to allow the Maori Land Court to hear iwi claims to the foreshore and seabed of the Marlborough Sounds opens the way for similar claims around the country” ACT New Zealand Deputy Leader Ken Shirley said today.

I now call upon Prime Minister Helen Clark to act consistently, and to declare such claims off limits -as she recently did in the case of the claim for oil and gas reserves. In this instance, it was made quite clear that oil, gas and mineral reserves were vested in the Crown by legislation in 1937.”Press releases on Court of Appeal decision on foreshores and seabed, Recreation Access

I am again calling on the Labour Government to act decisively. It must spell out the bounds to claims – in order to prevent undue anxiety for tens of thousands of New Zealanders, and to ensure that iwi don’t waste any more time and money pursuing claims that should be off limits.” – Ibid

Hopefully Mr Shirley’s anti-Treaty and knee-jerk anti-Maori  beliefs will not be carried over to the Human Rights Review Tribunal.  I'm not holding my breath.

Most folk won’t remember who Ken Shirley was, prior to his current ‘gig’ as  CEO of the Road Transport Forum (RTF), representing road transport interests since July 2010.
From 1984 to 1990, Shirley was nominally a Labour Party MP. He was closely aligned with the likes of Roger Douglas, Richard Prebble, and other right-wingers who had seized control of the party during the 1980s.
From 1996 to 2005, Shirley was an ACT Party MP. As such, he was an acolyte of  the neo-liberal school of economics and a strong adherent of free market forces. Part of ACT’s policies is to scrap the minimum wage.
Indeed, to under-score ACT’s abhorrence of the minimum wage, ACT’s current leader (and sole MP), David Seymour, condemned a recent rise in minimum wage levels. On 26 February this year, Seymour was scathing;
“The new $15.25 minimum wage will hit regional employers especially hard… In Auckland, $15.25 might not sound like much, but small businesses in the regions who generally charge less will struggle to bear the cost. Hikes to the minimum wage will discourage new employment, and lead to more lay-offs and business failures.
The first employees to suffer will be young, low-skilled workers who won’t be offered a chance to prove their worth. Pulling up the jobs ladder will only add to poverty in low-income areas.
This is a wage set for the distorted Auckland economy. Why should the rest of the country have to bear the same costs?”
[Fun Fact: As a Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Seymour is currently a taxpayer-funded beneficiary on a salary of $185,098 p.a. – which equates to nearly $89 per hour. One wonders if “small businesses in the regions who generally charge less will struggle to bear the cost” of Seymour’s salary?]
But returning to Ken Shirley; as an ex-ACT member of Parliament he is still most likely an  advocate for the abolition of the minimum wage.
On 5 May, Shirley was invited to be a commentator on Radio NZ’s afternoon Panel, hosted by Jim Mora;
 “Ken Shirley of the Road Transport Forum discusses what’s behind logging truck crashes and what needs to be done.”
At one point in the discussion, a suggestion was made that low wages in the trucking industry is not attracting the most highly-skilled and experienced workers;
@ 7.50
Jim Mora: “How bad do you think, Ken, is this situation with truck driving?”
Ken Shirley: “Oh, the spate we’ve had in Northland is just unacceptable. There’s no excuse for roll-over[s]. We know we have some difficult roads in New Zealand with topography, Northland’s is particularly difficult.
But there’s an obligation on the drivers and the forestry companies who hire the drivers to make sure they drive to the conditions. That’s the obligation on all drivers, and the spate we’ve had is just unacceptable, and I think inevitably it seems it’s not mechanical failure, it is driver error.
Whether it’s speed, inattention, or fatigue.”
Jim Mora: “So, it’s a…what, is it a hiring of drivers problem, hiring the wrong drivers, or is it a keeping-costs down problem, Ken? What do you think?”
Ken Shirley: “Well, the two are related of course. We have a chronic shortage of H5 drivers in New Zealand. That’s the heavy combination driver, the truck and trailer. It’s a global problem, but it’s particularly severe in New Zealand at this time. We’ve had it for many years, but with the activity in the economy now, that we are currently having, there is a chronic shortage of drivers.
Many of our members throughout the country are just saying they simply cannot get drivers. And I guess inevitably, you can, in that situation, such a tight situation, out of desperation, you can perhaps hire someone who’s not as skilled as you would like or need, out of sheer necessity. But at the end of the day, there’s no excuse. This should not be happening. We’re taking it very seriously.
We’ve actually instigated a series of roll-over prevention seminars in conjunction with NZTA around the country. They started some six weeks back. And these are actually very good seminars. But we have to educate the drivers, the loaders, the dispatchers, the transport operators themselves, but we must not have this level of roll-over.”
Jim Mora: “Ken, is it the… what is it deep down? Is it the meager wages paid, as some people are saying? You’re just not attracting the skills to the industry?”
Ken Shirley: “Ah, no, you do, it’s, you know, you can have a driver error. But it’s, it’s… you have to have better training, better awareness, that has to be the answer.”
Jim Mora: “So, there was this work-force development strategy, wasn’t there, ah, put into place a wee while back to try and try to entice more people to become truck drivers because of that shortage. But what is the point of a work-force development strategy if we know what the problem basically is, which I’m interpreting as maybe a lack of training and a lack of procedures put in place in the industry – [garbled].”
After a further exchange between Jim More, Peter Elliot (one of the panelists), and Ken Shirley, the host returned the discussion to the matter of wage rates;
Jim Mora: “It does seem though, with the wage rates that we see talked about, that you might not be getting the optimum recruits for the job? Is that a fair criticism, or not?”
Ken Shirley: “Well we know that the skilled labour market across the economy, whether it’s a diesel mechanic, a skilled driver, all of of those industries are, are, reporting severe chronic shortages. And because they are so highly skilled, reliant on a high level of, of, of, experience, when there is a chronic shortage, there is a temptation to often, out of desperation [to] take what you can get. And, and, that’s, that’s when you start to get into issues that like we are seeing and that’s when you start introducing potential road safety problems.”
Jim Mora: “I understand, but would you solve your chronic shortage if you paid higher wage rates?”
Ken Shirley: “Well, indeed, and all the members I speak to want to, but there’s been a race to the bottom, it’s –
[panelist scoffing (?) noise]
such a fiercely competive industry…”
Shirley’s admissions are astounding.
His comments appear to be a frank admission that the free market has experienced a spectacular  failure on a key point in the Northland logging industry;  that if there is a shortage of  skilled labour, the price of that labour (heavy-truck drivers in this case) should rise – not fall – to attract skilled labour. That is a basic tenet of supply and demand in the free market system.
As the guru of free market economics, Milton Friedman put it;
“But when workers get higher wages and better working conditions through the free market, when they get raises by firm[s] competing with one another for the best workers, by workers competing with one another for the best jobs, those higher wages are at nobody’s expense. “
And Investopedia described a free labour market thusly;
Assuming there are a large number of employers in a region, or that workers are highly mobile geographically, the wages that a company will pay workers is dependent on the competitive market wage for a given skill set. This means that any company is a wage taker, which is simply another way of saying companies must pay competitive wages in order to obtain workers.
None of which seems to be happening in Northland at present.
To the contrary, logging companies – according to their own spokesperson, Ken Shirley – are engaged in a “a race to the bottom” with drivers’ wages.

To compound the problem, in April of this year, Shirley specifically opposed and condemned outright any attempt to increase the wages of drivers;
“The link between remuneration and road safety is highly questionable and as a recent PWC report highlights, the system will result in a net cost to the Australian economy of more than A$2 billion over 15 years.
It is therefore very concerning that the Labour Party here advocated for the same policy and campaigned on it during the last election.”
National awards and government-imposed orders are not the way to lift industry wage rates or make the industry safer. All they do is saddle the industry with inflexible and time-consuming obligations and additional costs.
Let’s not repeat Australia’s mistake in New Zealand. It has been proven that national awards burden the economy and cost jobs and I hope that Labour and other political parties here will accept that reality and ditch the concept once and for all.”
Shirley’s comments last month are in stark contrast to his public lamentations on Radio NZ.
Not only has the free market failed in one of it’s key tenets – but Shirley is actively opposed to raising wages by any means necessary, to attract skilled, experienced truck drivers.

This should serve as a clear lesson that the innate contradictions of the free market ideology – many of which are little more than articles of faith – will eventually become more and more apparent.

Unfortunately, knowing how the system operates  in this country,  it will takes catastrophic events with several tragic deaths, before the government acts on this growing problem.
That’s how we roll in New Zealand.

Over bodies.
Tourist dies in logging truck crash near Matamata.

(Acknowledgement: Frankly Speaking, David M. and Tumeke)

Wikipedia: Ken Shirley
ACT NZ: Welfare and family
ACT NZ: Minimum wage hike whacks regional employers
Parliament: Current MPs – David Seymour
Parliament: Salaries payable under section 8 of Members of Parliament
Radio NZ: The Panel with Peter Elliott and Susan Guthrie
Good Reads: Milton Friedman
Investopedia: Breaking down ‘Demand For Labor’
Scoop media: Government imposed remuneration orders have no place in NZ
NZ Herald: Tourist dies in logging truck crash near Matamata
Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal: About road safety remuneration orders

Saturday, May 14, 2016

Te Tou Rongo-nui-o-te-Ao, Te Ringa Mangu v HNZC and NZ Police State

Behold - the work of the NZ Police Prosecution Service.  Police information sharing is characterised by Police sharing all the wrong information with all the wrong people.

- Note the time of the alleged commission of the crime, namely "at about 9 pm on Monday 30th June 2014", as the alleged 'victim' "informed the Defendant that he was going to bed."  According to the Police:

This is further stated in HNZC's Request for Termination of a Tenancy - this says the alleged incident happened "on Monday evening (30/06/2014)."

Now compare this with the evidence given on oath by the complainant, and note the time the alleged offence was allegedly committed - some 14 hours difference, and a very serious fundamental discrepancy in the case for the prosecution:

"He was amiable."

Mr Dickie is clearly exaggerating.  He is very unfit and in poor health, and couldn't hold his breath for one minute let alone two.

No motive was ever put forward in support of this unsubstantiated allegation.  The element of mens rea was completely missing and any suggestion of actus reus is highly questionable as the transcript shows.  The transcript also shows that Mr Dickie responded to the majority of the questions with "I can't recall".

"I don't know with any clarity, I just can't recall that" responds the complainant.

The plot thickens.

On 21 April 2015 Naomi Davies of Housing New Zealand Corporation recorded the following outrageous, slanderous and defamatory breach of privacy:

Mr Mihaka has specifically asked Police where they "heard" this damning and untrue allegation.

Police, funnily enough, have denied telling Housing New Zealand Corporation any such thing.

Here is evidence that Constable Tahere is the likely suspect regarding the "information sharing" with Naomi Davies:

Now let's have a look at the notebook of Constable Saunders - who had obviously made up his mind to arrest Mr Mihaka before he even knocked on the door, and who told Mr Mihaka he was charged with an offence that allegedly happened not on 30th June at all - Saunders told Mr Mihaka the alleged crime he was charged with and being arrested for was supposed to have happened on the 1st of July!:

So here we have it, the problem, in a nutshell, is the Police State information sharing policies and procedures, and systems of governance - to which, of course, the Maori people did not sign up to in the first place.  Sharing all the wrong information with all the wrong people.  Shoddy, slaphappy, incompetent, negligent, biased.

The writer has been contacted by several people who know Mr Dickie and Mr Mihaka, these people all claim that although Mr Mihaka is no angel, Mr Dickie is a racist and a bully.  The EVIDENCE speaks for itself - Mr Dickie assaulted Mr Mihaka, not the other way around.  Mr Dickie moved, thus ending HNZC's problem, but HNZC is pursuing a malicious vendetta against Mr Mihaka, like the Police and others associated with the colonial "justice system".  Mr Dickie droned on drunkenly with his patronising and racist views, then touched Mr Mihaka inappropriately while he was asleep - THAT is when the assault took place, as page 2 of Mr Dickie's statement makes perfectly clear: