Dateline: 26 August 2007
To the right are pictures of Dr. Michael Cullen, Attorney General of New Zealand (far right)
and David Collins QC, Solicitor-General.  The Solicitor-General reports directly to the
Attorney General and is the chief law enforcement officer for the Crown. As
you read the letters below in the Solicitor General's own hand, keep in mind
that the Solicitor-General's overriding responsibility is to maintain the rule of
law and protect the public interest in  New Zealand.  His authority is limited to
initiating due process where he believes laws are not being followed (he
does not have the power to issue orders).  Moreover, as the S-G is relied
upon as the principle law protection officer for the Country, it is imperative
that he not only understand the laws before he acts but also careful not to  
act unlawfully himself.
What follows are two letters that David Collins recently sent out on official Crown letterhead.  It is important to note
that the kiwisfirst website he refers to in his letters has never been the subject of litigation, nor was it even contacted
or put on notice by anyone prior to him sending out these letters.  When he begins by referring to his role
"in its
broadest sense"
it is the first warning to hide the women and children ahead of the goose-steppers.  When caught
out, David's office first claimed he didn't send the first letter, then claimed these did not amount to demand letters
(remember again, he is not judge or jury).  Has David failed in his legal obligation to follow the law (which requires him
to differentiate his personal opinions from his law enforcement role as well as be specific as to the violations he
alleges in his official capacity)?  Has he been truthful?  You be the judge.  
Additional letters herewith include the Editor of Kiwisfirst's response, an acknowledgment from Michael Cullen's office
that he is essentially on top of the situation and a letter from a shareholder of the website - a letter that
Mr. Collins never bothered to respond to.

29 July 2007  

Dr. David Collins QC
Solicitor General
P.O. Box 5012

Dear Dr. Collins,

As a shareholder in the New Zealand news website, I am shocked and troubled by what I consider
your unlawful action in shutting down the site by ordering Enlighten Hosting (the web host) to do so.

Not only does your extraordinary intervention in a private business and public service appear to far exceed your legal
authority, it also tramples on absolute protections provided by New Zealand law, including the New Zealand Bill of
Rights Act.

Your explanation is required for this oppressive and damaging action taken by you without due process, as well as the
legal authority that permits you to operate in such an arbitrary and dictatorial manner.

Yours faithfully,

27 Clansman Terrace
Gulf Harbour

cc: Attorney General Michael Cullen


24 August 2007                                  *** HIGHEST PRIORITY ***

Grant Liddell
Junior Acting Deputy Solicitor General
Office of the Solicitor General                

Your ref: SOL115/1823
Rights guaranteed under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Dear Mr. Liddell,

Thank you for your letter dated 24 August 2007.  



Vince Siemer, MBA


cc: Dr. Michael Cullen
Attorney General
New Zealand



POSTED 6/8/06  
In a letter dated 28 July 2006, Metro Water Limited gave notice to water consumers that their water charges would increase
9.6%.  The notice specifically states that without a demand from the Auckland City Council, the increase would be no more than
the rate of inflation, currently less than 3%.  The remainder of the increase is due to a specific demand from the city council that
Metro Water show a $18 million dollar profit in order to pay for other city services, namely storm sewer upgrades.  Current
consumer guidelines exclude water charges paying for non-water supply expenditures.

The Metro Water notice follows an Auckland City Council meeting on 24 May 2006 where deputy mayor Bruce Hucker and
finance and corporate business committee chair Vern Walsh pushed for increased water charges to enable MetroWater to
contribute to the City's general fund.  The public were made to leave the meeting, at the request of Metro Water Chair Michael
Stiassny, when the subject of rate increases were brought up.  

Days before the notice, Vern Walsh was criticized by Mayor Dick Hubbard for spending $85,000 on a global trip for City
Councillors.  Under the new regime, the $18 million dollars that Walsh and Hucker have successfully pushed for would go into the
same general fund that paid for the $85,000 global holiday.  Mayor Hubbard was absent from the 24 May 2006 meeting.

Water Pressure Group spokesperson Penny Bright commented, "
This proves what we have been saying for the last 8 years, that
user charges are not fair and that Metro Water is being used as a cash cow by Auckland City Council to fund other expenditures
on an essential service that consumers have no choice but to pay."
  Water Pressure Group members have staged an ongoing
protest against Metro Water.  In response, Metro Water last month bankrupted a Water Pressure Group member for refusing to
pay and has targeted several others for bankruptcy action.   

Bruce Hucker could not be reached for comment but it is understood notice was served on him on Friday to appear in the
Auckland High Court on 15 August 2006 on behalf of a constituent that Metro Water is attempting to bankrupt for refusing to pay
a contested $4,490.62 bill for 15 months water service to her home.

Important public release   *********************************************************************************************************
MetroWater Limited is the water utility supplier for the Auckland city district.

Michael Stiassny is the Chairman of the Board of MetroWater Limited, as he was in 2003 and 2004
when it was uncovered through the efforts of the Water Pressure Group that the Board of Metrowater
had been misrepresenting the quality of the drinking water Metrowater was supplying consumers.

Reproduced below are:

A)  Metro Water's 'Statement of Intent', which states that Metro Water Ltd's Board of Directors is
directly accountable for the representations made by Metro Water - including the most important
representation by far,
the quality of drinking water it supplies to consumers.

B)  Chairman Michael Stiassny's (false) representation in that same document that Metro Water Ltd
was supplying 'Aa' grade water to consumers when in fact that was not the case (i.e. a significant
portion of the drinking water it was supplying was 'Ua' grade).

C)  The Commerce Commission's 27 September 2004 ruling that Metro Water likely breached the Fair
Trading Act 1986 in representing that the water it was supplying was 'Aa' grade at a time they knew,
or should have known, that it was not.  The Commerce Commission's ruling  of a
'likely' violation is
due to the law being clear that only the Courts can determine conclusively that a violation occurred
and whether the Board members are personally liable for the misrepresentation.  The 22-month
misrepresentation was corrected by Metro Water and the case was not prosecuted.

If these events were not disturbing enough, Michael Stiassny regularly insists upon giving 'confidential'
off-the-record reports to Auckland City Council proceedings on Water matters.  It is suspected that
payments of $10 Million in "charitable contributions" to Auckland City by Metro Water annually
(subsidized by water ratepayers) is suitable 'greasing of the wheels' to allow Stiassny to keep public
water matters secret.  The question is whether Auckland ratepayers can afford these secret sessions
given Mr. Stiassny's past misrepresentations?  WHY AREN'T THE MEDIA REPORTING THIS?




       COMMERCE COMMISSION                                                 J6775

27 September 2004

Anna xxxx
Meredith Connell
General Buildings
Cnr Shortland & O’Connell Streets
PO Box 2213

Dear Anna


Thank you for your comprehensive response to the Commerce Commission’s (‘the Commission)
request for information from Metro Water Ltd.

The Commission has assessed both Metro Water Ltd and Watercare Services Ltd’s responses and has
formed the opinion that Metro Water Ltd is likely to have breached the Fair Trading Acti 1986 (‘the
Act’) by representing that the water it was supplying Auckland during the period from June 2002 to
April 2004 was of ‘Aa’ grade.

The Commission has not been presented with any evidence to show that Metro Water Ltd was acting
in reliance on representations made by Watercare Services Ltd when it represented that its water was
of ‘Aa’ grade.  Nevertheless should this be raised as an issue, the Commission is of the opinion that
Metrowater Ltd, as an experienced water retailer, is unlikely to be able to avail itself of an reasonable
reliance defence in the present circumstances.

The Commission will be taking no further action in this matter at this time.  Once again thank you for
your time an effort and the detailed and informative information you have provided the Commission in
relation to this matter.

If you have any concerns or questions, please feel free to contact the writer on (04) 92 3689.

Yours sincerely

Jonathan Duffy
Fair Trading Branch
Commerce Commission

___________________________________________________ ___
Affidavit of Vince Siemer

I, Vincent Ross Siemer, of Gulf Harbour, do hereby swear:

1)        I am a Director of businesses in New Zealand and abroad and hold a Master’s degree in
Business Administration.

2)        I attended an Institute of Directors of New Zealand breakfast meeting on 19 May 2005 at the
Northern Club where I heard Michael Stiassny (Chairman of Metro Water Limited) claim that he was
personally bankrupting the Water Pressure Group members peacefully protesting against him outside
the breakfast.  He used the words “I am bankrupting (the protestors)”.

3)        Mr. Stiassny also said at this meeting that these protesters were not paying their water bills
“not because they could not afford to but because they didn’t want to”.  I wrote down these words as
he said them.

4)        If what I heard Mr. Stiassny say is true, it is inconceivable that current bankruptcy law allows
Mr. Stiassny to personally target these protesters for bankruptcy, using his Chair position as the
monopoly provider of an essential public service to do so.

5)        The written program for this meeting stated that Stiassny was a trained lawyer.

6)        On 24 May 2006, I attended the Finance and Corporate Business meeting of the Auckland
City Council held at the Council building on Greys Avenue in Auckland.  At that meeting I witnessed
Councillor Bruce Hucker ask Mr. Stiassny – in an extremely long question that included a number of
statistical references – to dispute what Mr. Hucker said was a misconception that “the $73 Million
dollar profit” MetroWater had earned “was sitting in a pot somewhere”, and to also confirm that in
order for Metro Water to continue making “charitable payments” to the Council, Metro Water would
need to “increase its debt” given its current charging structure.

7)        In response to Mr. Hucker’s question, I witnessed Mr. Stiassny say that Metro Water would
need to make ongoing “profits” for Metro Water to continue making the multi-million dollar charitable
contributions.  The topic of the meeting then turned to raising water charges to the public and Stiassny
asked that this discussion be conducted in “confidential”.  Meeting Chair Vern Walsh then ordered the
public to leave the room.

                                                             Vincent Ross Siemer,
Sworn at Auckland this                )
day of           June  2006 Before me            )       
Institute of Chartered Accountants
Serious Fraud Office
Debt collection debacle
implemented by Stiassny
at Metro Water Ltd.
(see bottom of page)