A law unto themselves.... I have just received a conflict of interest register from PGDB under a OIA request. Get this.....The chairman/overseer at my hearing is/was very, very well known to the "Impartial" investigator of the same hearing, BUT DOESN'T REGISTER HIS HIGH RANKING MEMBERSHIP OF THE SAME GAS GROUPS AS THE IMPARTIAL INVESTIGATOR OR THAT MATTER OF MY EX-BOSS.

I even showed them photos of them all together. A recent letter to Max Pederson, below, I won't be holding my breath for any justice,,,,,,probably it will be put down to yet another typo or over-sight.

I wonder why I wasn't allowed to go 100% innocent, must be nice to have a close mate oversee your trumped up prosecution. And Mr Bickers is a member of another organisation as Hammond and was on the same panel at my hearing....dodgy as.

I know people will think I should let this go....I think you should get real and see that this can happen to anyone who falls out of favour with the industrial bullies....keep an eye out for the latest threat from a very large and influential "plumber's" group, coming soon........

I was asked before by an owner of a very large firm that, "I had probably upset people with what I had to say", my responce was "do you do anything dodgy, bad work etc"........he rightly responded that he didn't and would not.........to which I asked him "then why do you live in fear of these bullies, if you do no wrong....you have nothing to fear" unless of course unless they are corrupt and vindictive.......hhhmmm? hiding from them and sucking up to them only empowers them.....





Max,

 

I am yet to get any reply, to the email below. I do not expect to meet. You must realise the immense pressure inflicted on me. I am glad and relieved that my outburst meant so little to you that you were able to laugh it off and make a joke about it at a recent meeting. This is something that I am unable to do as my life has been ruined.

 

I have tried several training providers and can find nowhere to “retrain” for my up coming licence renewal. It is not a course that is run apparently.

 

My recent out burst was after much duress and just after discovering that the Chair of my hearing (Stephen Parker) did not, according to the conflict of interest register you sent me, register the many gas groups that he was heavily involved in with the “Impartial” Investigator, Tony Hammond. I think this nullifies my hearing. I brought all this up at the impartiality hearing and in response to my concerns the Board appoint Mr Hammond's close colleague to actually oversee the proceedings, unbelievable!!!

 

If you go over all the trumped up charges against me and how they were disproved, it goes a long way to show how this one last charge has been desperately clung to by the Board for the sake of Tony Hammond's credibility, at a hearing overseen by his mate Stephen Parker, the only thing mentioned on the conflict register actually puts them on the same Kennedy Trust. A quick Google of both these people reveal a very close history. I would like to formally complain about this and ask Helen Cull QC for a legal opinion.

 

I have also been told by Helen Cull QC, that I have been disadvantaged by Kern Uren’s untrue letters sent out about me, but still no reply

 

I again accuse the Board of a cover up and corruption and ask those copied in is this acceptable. My life is in tatters for something that I tried to warn about for 6 years…… before an explosion. Then the Board appoint Mr Hammond who actually gave my ex boss (and member of the same gas groups as Mr Hammond and Mr Parker), the very guy I was warning about. his full craftsman licence. Then we have a hearing overseen by Mr Hammond's mate, Mr Parker.

 

The last certificate issued at the site of an explosion was issued by my ex boss…… the same person I had warned about for 6 years……. all copies that are available show the gas leak test results empty. And even though there is a copy on the Boards electronic website….. the Board still, to this day, deny having received it.

 

And people wonder why I let off steam…..

 

Your Sincerely Paul Gee

 

 

Linkback: https://www.plumbers.nz/pgdb-new-zealand-plumbing-gasfitting-and-drainlaying-board/30/what-is-a-conflict-of-interest/1290/

It seems the people you speak of knew each other, thats not a conflict of issue. Its where they use that knowledge in prejudice or unfairly against you that causes a conflict to have occurred. Is there evidence of favouritism?

Can I ask why I got smited for giving my viewpoint on conflict of interest? Bit rough on here for offering a point of view!

The New Zealnd Law commission in a paper,  January 2008, Wellington, New Zealand | i s s u e s P a p e r 6
Tribunals in, New Zealand. It also goes in to the role of the chair and impartiallity. You can down load a copy i would attach it but is over 5 MB

5.36 A difficulty arises here in that occupational regulatory and disciplinary bodies are
often funded by the relevant industry, which may adversely affect perceptions of
their independence. However, this funding is necessary. We suggest that it may be
acceptable for these bodies to be funded through mechanisms such as licensing fees
and industry levies provided that they are independent from industry associations
and other purely industry groups, and that other mechanisms are in place to
safeguard their independence.

Now when you read that above... have a look at how close the "Impartial" investigator and the chair/over seer/boss of my hearing

I got heaps of these, these are just examples, this is just one relationship, there are lots more relationships right across the board(excuse my pun... and my spelling, forgot to put the spell check on)

and as for the smitting, it makes me laugh....but one thing about it.....I don't believe they should be annonomus.....

Tony Hammond (the "Impartial" investigator) is very well known to and known by Stephen Parker, the chair of my hearing, regardless of current membership I think it is wrong to have people so entwined, Hammond working as a technical adviser to Parker, giving presentations together then both being at my hearing, one presenting the evidence and the other over seeing the panel who get to review that evidence, just bloody wrong. He knew him and should have walked away, I find it hard to believe that no one else knew come to that.

When you have lost what I have to these corrupt bastards, all you want is a fair go and I have never had one.