Showing posts with label jenette fitzsimons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label jenette fitzsimons. Show all posts

Friday, November 30, 2007

Bitching and Moaning

There has been some moaning and bitching about this piece that I wrote on Political Animal and my Share Investor Blog regarding the conflict that Jeanette Fitzsimons and the Labour Government have over their championing of Windflow Technologies and a shareholding that Jeanette has in the company and her involvement in changing laws and stopping normal economic development to favour Windflow Tech.

I have been told by an anonymous individual and by someone else that calls herself Jeanette Fitzsimons that Fitzsimons no longer has shares in the company. Neither of these two persons were able to furnish any proof of such a statement.

I searched high and low to find any information to the contrary but common information from all sources on the net lead me to the same conclusion. My main source was from the Greens' Website.

Does Jeanette, a family trust or her family members own Windflow Tech shares? You would have to ask yourself this question considering her involvement in putting the brakes on oil, gas, hydro and coal energy and financially penalising those industries through her actions and those of her partner in Government, the Labour Party.

An interesting speech from Deborah Coddington related to the pecuniary interests of members of Parliament where she discusses some of the points that I have covered here and incidentally another source of little Jeanette's shareholding in Windflow Tech.


Coddington, Deborah, Standing Orders

2nd August 2005

[Volume:627;Page:22361]

DEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT) : I rise on behalf of the ACT party to oppose Government motion No. 3, which relates to the pecuniary interests of members of Parliament. What is the problem that this is trying to fix? All this will do is be a burden for the honest, who will agonise over it. It is so complicated and so badly drawn up that it is very difficult to see where to begin and where to end. It will build a climate of dishonesty. The crooks, who do not give a stuff, will just make it up anyway—and who will have the time and energy to trawl through everything and find out whether members have been honest? It is like taking the rich list at face value. The rich list does not even take into account people’s liabilities. All it can do is take into account their assets. The poor, diligent, honest MP who struggles to declare everything under this measure will possibly trip up, or by accident exclude something, and the media will pick it up, have a field day, and destroy him or her for no reason at all.

This measure would not have caught Donna Awatere Huata. We asked her time and again whether she had any interest, any personal gain, and she lied to us. She would not tell us the truth. It would not have picked her up. If this Parliament really wants to get down on corruption, why does it not take note of what Ian Ewen-Street said yesterday when he talked about the scampi inquiry and Mr Peters’ involvement with Simunovich Fisheries? That has never been fully explored. For instance, provision 4(1)(b) in new appendix B states: “the name of every other company or business entity in which the member has a pecuniary interest …”. Is that direct or indirect? What if a member had shares in something like the New Zealand Investment Trust? That is a very respectable trust. If a member had shares in it, he or she would not have a clue about all the things that trust does. How on earth would one list them? How would trusts like that be listed? Land holdings are mentioned further on in this measure. If we tried to get information from members on all the land and property they own they would probably tell us to go away and mind our own business.

I was very interested in what Rod Donald, the co-leader of the Greens, said. A moment ago he said that the Green Party stood for high standards and that it was the cleanest party in Parliament. They would have no trouble declaring their pecuniary interests. Why does Rod Donald not start by reading what we already have under Standing Order 164, which states: “A pecuniary interest is a direct financial benefit that might accrue … as a result of the outcome of the House’s consideration of a particular item of business.” The Greens have a particular interest in high electricity prices. They opposed Project Aqua. They oppose any energy projects. Why is that? Because it is in their pecuniary interests to have high electricity prices, because of their financial interests, through their taxpayer-funded superannuation fund, in establishing the commercial viability of wind energy. They should tell us these things. If they do not tell us these things we have to go into Google to find them out. This statement is from a press release in May 2001: “the Green Party’s Superannuation Fund have joined the growing list of investors in local wind power company Windflow Technology. Windflow director … said ‘We’re delighted that the Greens are going to be part of our company. Windflow Technology is both environmentally and investor friendly,’ … Rod Donald, said ‘Our superannuation fund has a policy of ethical investing.’” Why do they not declare that when they come into this House to argue against any power project or development that anyone cares to put up, whether it be State-owned, or, heaven help us, one of the few private ones? Not only that, Jeanette Fitzsimons owns 30,000 shares in the Green Party superannuation fund. She is one of the top 10 shareholders. One of the biggest shareholders is UK millionaire, Sir James Goldsmith, and US billionaire Delane Wyeross also owns shares.

But they have directly benefited also from carbon credits. A subsidiary of Windflow Technology, New Zealand Windfarms, won Government backing of up to $10 million to set up a 60-turbine wind farm in the ManawatÅ«. This was in December 2003. Members should listen to what the business development manager—[Interruption] It is not a scandal at all. I never said it was a scandal. I am just pointing out the—we are not allowed to use that word, but the term “conflict of interest” perhaps is a way to describe it when one stands up in this House and says that everyone has to declare their pecuniary interests, and everyone has to declare how much money they are owed over $50,000, and any debt over $50,000. I do not see the point in that. Why have it declared that someone owes a member of Parliament $50,000 or more?

Members will not have to declare it if it relates to a spouse, a partner, children, step-children, or foster children, so the dishonest ones will put all these things in the name of their spouses, partners, children, step-children, or foster children and get them to pay them. The very thing that should be declared, and the very thing we should be most suspicious of—that is, electoral campaign expenses that could be covered up—is excluded. The very thing we should be suspicious of—where someone wants to try to buy one’s vote—is the only thing that we should be declaring, and it is excluded.

But I go back to this Greens’ thing. The business development manager of the wind farm said that it would not have been viable without the Government’s award of carbon credits. It was one of the two firms named by the Minister of Energy, Pete Hodgson, to take a share of 4 million carbon credits designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions. I think the public should know these things. The public should know that the Greens stand up in this House and accuse every other party, except Labour, of being dishonest and bordering on the corrupt, yet the co-leader of the Greens did not declare all of these things, which anyone can get on the website. The Greens are strangely silent whenever anyone brings the matter up, and it is an example of how this legislation is just a nonsense. There is no problem here that we have to fix. In general, most people who come into this place are honest. If they are not, then the media are not doing their job properly, because it is the job of the fourth estate to find out what is going on and report it accurately. ACT will not be supporting this motion.


C Political Animal 2007



Monday, November 26, 2007

Helen Clark and Jenette Fitzsimon's in conflict with business

Helen Clark, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, continues to have a problem with separation of her job from conflicts of interest and possible conflicts of interest.

Apart from the numerous personality, and socio-political conflicts she has in her day to day activities the topic up for discussion here is her and her Government's numerous conflicts of interest with the business world.

We have had recently Clark herself, Micheal Cullen and other Government Ministers interfering in Air New Zealand by making public statements that have affected the share price of the airline, likewise she and her Ministers erred again in 2006 when making inappropriate comments, on several occasions, about Telecom New Zealand that lost shareholders 100s of millions of dollars.

Most recently we have had Winston Peters, a Labour Government partner and lapdog making inappropriate comments in the media about influences they could use to stop the Auckland International Airport from being sold.

The most glaring example and probably least known, is the conflict that arises from Jeanette Fitzsimons from the Green Party and her major shareholding in the listed NZ windfarm owner , manufacturer and developer, Windflow Technologies.

Fitzsimons is a partner to the Labour Government and drives Labour's "Green Agenda" for them. Fitzsimons has been responsible for passing law and changing rules to give companies like hers an advantage over competitors and as a result she has financially benefited directly from her activities in Parliament. Jenette has a knack of forgetting to mention her large shareholding in Windflow Technology when dealing with such matters when doing Parliamentary business.

You cant get more corrupt and conflicted than that but she has a good role model for her modus operandi in Al Gore, but that is another story.

If we get back to Clark's role in this though, not only is her Government culpable in the conflict of interest by allowing Fitzsimons to feather her own nest but she has also been directly championing the company with financial, moral and media support for Windflow Tech.

Helen Clark with Windflow Technology
head Geoff Henderson,centre, and Derek Walker,
chairman of NZ Windfarms, at the commissioning
of NZ Windfarms' turbines near Palmerston North.



This sort of Parliamentary, legislative and Prime ministerial support for Windflow Tech is clearly a huge conflict of interest that shouldn't be allowed to continue, although we shouldn't be surprised by this sort of conflict as it is apparent at most of our listed companies: Tim Saunders at Contact Energy, Lloyd Morrison at Auckland Airport and a host of other rapscallions and rascals at a whole host of other listed companies.

The shareholders at Windflow Tech should be worried too.

Government interference, as outlined above, can also change to the negative at a whim, should policy, Government or thinking change.

We have to remember, as shareholders in companies, however small or large our holding maybe, it is our personal property rights that are at issue here. Interference from individuals, entities, whether Government or private have no more rights than you or me and their influence shouldn't be able to be subscribed to the extent that they can change laws to suit their own agendas and line their own pockets.


C Political Animal 2007

Helen Clark and Jenette Fitzsimons knee deep in Windflow Technology conflict

Helen Clark, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, continues to have a problem with separation of her job from conflicts of interest and possible conflicts of interest.

Apart from the numerous personality, and socio-political conflicts she has in her day to day activities the topic up for discussion here is her and her Government's numerous conflicts of interest with the business world.

We have had recently Clark herself, Micheal Cullen and other Government Ministers interfering in Air New Zealand by making public statements that have affected the share price of the airline, likewise she and her Ministers erred again in 2006 when making inappropriate comments, on several occasions, about Telecom New Zealand that lost shareholders 100s of millions of dollars.

Most recently we have had Winston Peters, a Labour Government partner and lapdog making inappropriate comments in the media about influences they could use to stop the Auckland International Airport from being sold.

The most glaring example and probably least known, is the conflict that arises from Jeanette Fitzsimons from the Green Party and her major shareholding in the listed NZ windfarm owner , manufacturer and developer, Windflow Technologies.

Fitzsimons is a partner to the Labour Government and drives Labour's "Green Agenda" for them. Fitzsimons has been responsible for passing law and changing rules to give companies like hers an advantage over competitors and as a result she has financially benefited directly from her activities in Parliament. Jenette has a knack of forgetting to mention her large shareholding in Windflow Technology when dealing with such matters when doing Parliamentary business.

You cant get more corrupt and conflicted than that but she has a good role model for her modus operandi in Al Gore, but that is another story.

If we get back to Clark's role in this though, not only is her Government culpable in the conflict of interest by allowing Fitzsimons to feather her own nest but she has also been directly championing the company with financial, moral and media support for Windflow Tech.

Helen Clark with Windflow Technology
head Geoff Henderson,centre, and Derek Walker,
chairman of NZ Windfarms, at the commissioning
of NZ Windfarms' turbines near Palmerston North.



This sort of Parliamentary, legislative and Prime ministerial support for Windflow Tech is clearly a huge conflict of interest that shouldn't be allowed to continue, although we shouldn't be surprised by this sort of conflict as it is apparent at most of our listed companies: Tim Saunders at Contact Energy, Lloyd Morrison at Auckland Airport and a host of other rapscallions and rascals at a whole host of other listed companies.

The shareholders at Windflow Tech should be worried too.

Government interference, as outlined above, can also change to the negative at a whim, should policy, Government or thinking change.

We have to remember, as shareholders in companies, however small or large our holding maybe, it is our personal property rights that are at issue here. Interference from individuals, entities, whether Government or private have no more rights than you or me and their influence shouldn't be able to be subscribed to the extent that they can change laws to suit their own agendas and line their own pockets.


C Share Investor 2007

Sunday, October 14, 2007

Global Warming: Power to the People

The grab for more taxes by the Labour Government increased this week.

In the week where a NZ$8.7 billion dollar surplus for the last financial year was announced, it seems lunacy that the nanny state would want to steal even more of your money right out of your pocket.

But yes siree Darryl and Sharon New Zealand, you are about to be right royally frisked again because the power you are using is not "sustainable" and therefore you will be taxed to pay for the damage they say you are doing to the environment because of it.

You see the Labour Governments latest tax is being foisted upon us in the form of "fear" taxes, new taxes that will come about because of the left and Greens adherence to the lunatic man made "global warming" lie.

I'm not here to argue the merits of the man made "global warming" movement because quite frankly it has none.

The "science" on which it is based is severely flawed despite what the leftist politicians, green freaks and the self proclaimed inventor of the Internet and Nobel Prize winner, Al "I'm running for President " Gore tells you.

For goodness sake do some objective reading people!

The sinister undertone of all this green washing from the GW proponents is that it is a push for imbecile individual knuckle draggers like Gore to make money out of the fear and lies that they are spreading and for Governments around the world to raise taxes.

It just so happens that Helen Clarke, the Prime Misinster of New Zealand and her Sisterhood, through the bequest of Jenette Fitzsimons from the Green Party, because they hold the balance of power, seem to be at the vanguard of this movement to tax New Zealanders for living their normal lives.

New Zealand is going to have to rely on wind power and solar energy to power our economy, according to David Parker, the Chief idiot and slopey fore headed one charged to drive Kiwis back to the middle ages.

According to Parker, we need to be driving electric vehicles, using public transport and doing away with old appliances.

Jenette Fitzsimons goes a step further and wants the size of large screen TVs restricted.

Remember these are the people who like to tell us what to do and have changed laws to get us to eat, drink, smoke,watch and listen to what they want us to.

Restricting our right to parent by removing our ability to lightly smack indolent children its another moral crime they are guilty of.

Certainly, Jenette Fitzsimions lack of morals and boundaries also crosses into the financial sphere.

We have our very own New Zealand Al Gore in Fitzsimons.

While Gore is making hundreds of millions of dollars from his ownership of a fund that puts its money into the carbon free environment that he is slavishly advocating, our little Jenette is doing similar stuff here in NZ.

You see Fitzsimons is the 6th largest shareholder in a company called Windflow Technologies, a company that is developing the very technology that she advocates for and has changed New Zealand laws to benefit her company.

Like Gore, Fitzsimons doesn't make her biases clear when discussing the mushrooming of these visual polluters all over our countryside. We cant have Shania Twain having her house show on a ridge near Queenstown eh Jenette, but we can have these monstrosities covering the nation just so you can get rich from your shareholding in WT.

The Green taxes that Fitzsimons and the Clark sisterhood want to impinge on Kiwi individuals isn't about "saving the planet" or reducing pollution.

It is actually about wealthy green tinged individuals making money, state control and raising taxes to re-distribute them to those individuals too lazy to work and to those 3rd world countries who form a bloc in the UN, that want to lay their hands on Western nations money because they have successfully developed their economies and the 3rd world hasn't.

Aunty Helen, Fitzsimons and their lap dog David Parker clearly want to punish those individuals in society that have made a success of their lives through hard work and innovation and NZ as a whole.

Of course, that is the way of socialism an ism that they all slavishly follow.

The lack of a spiritual and religious base for these 3 collectives and their mates is being fulfilled by the new religion of worshipping at the foot of the Global Warming crusade.

Like all religions the GW movement is based on fairy tales, superstition, fear, greed and jealousy and it is going to end in confrontation.

The sensible among us mustn't be silent against the bias of left wing media that would have you believe that GW is an issue. It clearly isn't.

Let the war begin.


c Darren Rickard 2007