Forensic accounting of the Church of Scientology makes me feel so good.
And it will make you feel good, too.
Do we have any examples of NZ ex's who were kicked out and/or declared SP without being able to put their case before a panel?6.2 No membership may be terminated for any such cause unless:
6.2.1 The committee first shall have given to the member full and reasonable notice of the cause.
6.2.2 The member is given reasonable opportunity to prepare a response, and to put that response to a hearing panel.
6.2.3 That panel is unbiased and otherwise acts in good faith and observes fully the requirements of natural justice.
How many ex's voted at least once per year for this committee?9.1 In and for each year, the members of the Church shall elect - in accordance with any relevant by-laws that may have been promulgated by the Church of Scientology International - a Committee which shall comprise at least three and not more than five ordained members in good standing with the Church of Scientology International.
Think I've hit goldmine.
Supporting document - Application- IRD withheld.pdf on this page: http://www.register.charities.govt.....aspx?id=5aa34fb9-cc91-dc11-98a0-0015c5f3da29
Section 22: Identify the percentage of New Zealand-sourced funds that were spent overseas in the last financial year (or if the entity has not been operating for a year, the percentage of New Zealand-sourced funds that the entity intends to spend overseas in the upcoming year.
i.e. How much does the COS intend to spend or ship overseas. They answered N/A.
So I'm sorry COS, you received a loan of $1,686,682 and then sent $3,164,889 overseas in what you claim was a loan repayment. So that includes interest of $1,478,207 (88% interest rate) which was sourced FROM NEW ZEALAND FUNDS.
Now reading through their internal charity rules. Section 6.2:
Do we have any examples of NZ ex's who were kicked out and/or declared SP without being able to put their case before a panel?According to a letter Mike Ferriss sent to my husband's school about us, which included a lot of slander and lies as you can expect, he also noted at the closing of the letter that I was 'expelled for gross unethical conduct'. I was on staff for five years in Sydney and left because they would not allow me to care for my baby and ordered me back to post. (I was a C/S). I am a declared SP and the fact that I was expelled was news to me.
I would one day like to ask Mike on camera, what I did and have him say all that he has so obviously read about me in my pc/ethics folder. I know he has because he quoted stuff out of it to me at a protest, and then claimed that I had put it on the boards. He knew just a little bit too much, though, and it made me wonder again, is this the expected behaviour of a charity?
How many ex's voted at least once per year for this committee?
Section 18 is a lot of jargon about the use of funds solely for the promotion of the COS. What were those legal fees for in 2008? Did any anons get outed or receive Cease and desist letters?
Yes, a number did. Mike Ferriss was VERY active out and about during the times of the protests and spent a lot of time finding out names and addresses of the young anons at the protests. His biggest thrill was to ring these people out of the blue at their homes and tell them who he was and that he knew who they were. They would then receive a letter from the solicitor. It was a big win for him in those days but now, as we all know, no one really cares! Is this expected behaviour from a charitable organisation?
But there will be more lawyers fees from last year as while the documentary was being filmed one of the people on it was threatened with a law suit as was the film director, and Mike went to all of the other 'fringe' religions and tried to get them on board as well. This must have cost them a bomb but the doco went ahead anyway.
Think I've hit goldmine.
Supporting document - Application- IRD withheld.pdf on this page: http://www.register.charities.govt.....aspx?id=5aa34fb9-cc91-dc11-98a0-0015c5f3da29
In light of the inquiry so far, and the failure of CCHR to get tax exempt status in NZ I would like to ask some questions about the records of AK ORG -that were submitted to the tax dept and/or the Charities Commission. Refer to attached doc at bottom of page.
http://ers.govt.nz/pay/disabled.htmlEvery employer has to pay at least the minimum wage unless an employee has a minimum wage exemption permit.
Your employer can apply to a Labour Inspector for an exemption permit if you both agree there is a good reason why you should be paid less than the minimum wage.
Labour Inspectors will issue a minimum wage exemption only if they think it is reasonable and appropriate to do so. They can refuse to issue one if they think you should be paid the minimum wage, or if the wage offered is unfair.
Before a Labour Inspector will issue a minimum wage exemption permit, they will make sure that:
· your disability really stops you from earning the minimum wage
· you have been given the opportunity to have an independent support person or advocate with you when you are talking about your wages with your employer
· the work is suitable for you and you get appropriate supervision and training
· you are offered a written employment agreement that meets all employment rights, such as paid holidays and sick leave, and adequate health and safety conditions (except minimum wage)
· the wage rate relates to your ability to do the work
· the wage is consistent with the wages paid to other people whose circumstances are similar to yours, and who have exemptions
· your employer has done everything they can reasonably be expected to do to help you do the job well.
Labour Inspectors will not issue a minimum wage exemption permit unless they are sure that the wage rate is fair and that you agree with it.
Here is a decision that NZ Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) gave on 01 June 2010 in response to a complaint from scientologist Yure Radojkovich. Yure complained about a morning TV3 item referring to the upcoming “How to Spot a Cult” documentary (which screened on NZ TV last week of Nov. 2009).
The BSA did not uphold his complaint.
http://www.bsa.govt.nz/decisions/2010/2010-039.htm
I thought it might be nice to share on this thread. Because I can. Freedom of speech and all that.
I have seen the land transfer title (I forget its correct name) on the owner of the Grafton Rd idle org. It lists the CofS NZ Inc as the owner.
If anyone wants to see NZ CofS financial statements going back to 1996 you can do so here:
http://www.business.govt.nz/companies
- “online services – do it now”
- "search other registers” (under "dashboard" on left)
- “select all” for various entities listed
Search term “scientology” and NZ CofS is easily found. The financial statements back to 1996 are all there in pdf. You will notice that the CofS is always very late in filing these statements. Legally they are meant to be filed annually - not sporadically or "when ya get around to it..."
If one spreadsheets certain key figures for the ten+ year period financial statements are available for, they paint a very very fascinating picture. Not a healthy picture either.
i have just started looking at the register, but so far found this about the (now defunct?) Christchurch mission.
Number Name Register Status
221283 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY MISSION OF CHRIST-CHURCH INCORPORATED INCSOC Struck Off
I'm wondering why they were *struck off*.
I would think that term would only be used for some dodgy behaviour. Surely the term *removed* would be used if it was simply a matter of closing/ceasing the entity?
i have just started looking at the register, but so far found this about the (now defunct?) Christchurch mission.
Number Name Register Status
221283 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY MISSION OF CHRIST-CHURCH INCORPORATED INCSOC Struck Off
I'm wondering why they were *struck off*.
I would think that term would only be used for some dodgy behaviour. Surely the term *removed* would be used if it was simply a matter of closing/ceasing the entity?