Who is JR?

Written By: - Date published: 12:30 pm, June 17th, 2010 - 53 comments
Categories: pasifika - Tags: , ,

As people try to work out exactly what is happening with the Pacific Economic Development Agency (PEDA) more information is emerging about its director Anthony Joseph Pereira (aka. JR Pereira).

According to the companies office record, Pereira only became the director of PEDA on the 24th of May this year. That’s the Monday after the Budget announced $4.8 million of funding for PEDA.

But Pereira’s connections with National and the Pacific Island Affairs ministry that is going to pay PEDA go back much further.

Pereira was formerly a regional advisor for the Ministry of Pacific Affairs and, somehow, became an unelected member of the Pacific Advisory Board to the Auckland City Council following elections that he was chosen to run (and which had plenty of candidates).

Pereira’s connections with National are shrouded in mystery. Georgina te Heuehu is implying that the connection is mainly through Bill English and, I understand, his wife Mary. Pereira met with English both before and after the election, he was involved in National’s campaign last year and is, apparently, involved in its Supercity campaign this year. We know he is tied in with Michael Jones and Inga Tuigamala, whom National wants for candidates in Rugby World Cup year.

So, here’s an organisation with no history led by a person closely tied to National that has, out of the blue, been allocated $4.8 million in the Budget without a contested budget process. Worse, the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs warned the government that PEDA is not up to doing the job.

According to papers Radio New Zealand has received, the Ministry warned te Heuheu that there are “risks and implications for ministers and government in dealing with the organisation known as PEDA”.

Te Heuheu is trying to deflect in a number of odd ways.

First, she is implicating English. Not normally a smart move for a junior minister to dump the Deputy Prime Minister into scandal.

Second, she is saying that PEDA hasn’t received any money yet. Of course it hasn’t, the 10/11 fiscal year hasn’t started yet.

Third, she is suggesting the money might not go to PEDA after all. Well, the Budget allocates the money to PEDA, which means the government is asking Parliament for permission to spend the money on PEDA. The government can’t appropriate money for one reason intending to spend it on something else, it is illegal and an insult to the Parliamentary process. Of course, te Heuheu is just running distraction.

The stink around PEDA is getting higher and the government’s refusal to give straight answers is just making the situation worse.

53 comments on “Who is JR? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. felix 1
    17 June 2010 at 12:59 pm

    The answers to questions 2 & 4 today should provide some interesting facts to compare and contrast.

    • pollywog 1.1
      17 June 2010 at 2:01 pm

      Oh yeah…gettin the 2 deputy dawgz to go at it should turn up the heat a few degrees…

      2 Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Finance: Was the Minister of Pacific Island Affairs correct when she said the Minister of Finance had met with the Pacific Economic Development Agency “on several occasions’; if so, who did he meet?

      4 SU’A WILLIAM SIO to the Minister of Pacific Island Affairs: Did she receive advice from her Ministry in relation to the Pacific Economic Development Agency proposal; if so, when?

      hmmm…so while its true Georgina Te Heu Heu may have only met JR in her dealings with PEDA.

      Bill English would probably have met the whole crew and shown them a trick or two on how to rort the system good and hard in his preliminary negotiations and advisory sessions !

      I guess they would have been hoping for the invisible Pasifikan underclass to remain silent, humble and thankful as we normally always do rather than hang our own out to dry and air their dirty laundry in public.

      Good to see more of us are calling it as we see it now.

      • Jim Nald 1.1.1
        17 June 2010 at 2:08 pm

        Flexed the double dipping muscles.
        Yee haa.

        • Jim Nald 1.1.1.1
          17 June 2010 at 2:16 pm

          Oh, wanted to say what do commenters here think about this – Would the benefit of having many hats on be that one can rort with other hats on while putting down ‘matters’ as been of ‘a range’ (ie try to pin me down la la la)?

  2. Sanctuary 2
    17 June 2010 at 1:10 pm

    Right wing troughing and a corrupt rort of the taxpayers money to line the pockets of the government’s cronies.

  3. insider 3
    17 June 2010 at 1:18 pm

    Good how Plunket this morning latched onto the link with his former colleague Tino Pereira and put GtHH on the spot over political connections. I wondered if G T HH’s dumping of Blingish was due to her floundering or Machiavellian.

    Did Blinglish say anything about GtHH in his hollow men emails as he did about Judith Collins and it’s payback time? You have to wonder how such an obvious piece of patronage was able to make it through the budget process.

  5. Pete 5
    17 June 2010 at 2:50 pm

    I know pollywog (and maybe others) have suggested that you have a look over at PacificEyeWitness to see the coverage they have up on the issues, but maybe just this one is worthwhile:
    http://pacificeyewitness.com/2010/06/02/auckland-supercity-we-have-a-government-mandate-jr-pereira/

    Sounds even more dodgy than it at first appeared (and that was bad enough)…

    • mickysavage 6.1
      17 June 2010 at 3:21 pm

      So really

      Are you going to address the issues or engage in some attempted character assassination?

      • big bruv 6.1.1
        17 June 2010 at 6:51 pm

        Ha ha, do you know how ridiculous that sounds coming from you Micky?

        • really 6.1.1.1
          17 June 2010 at 7:49 pm

          oh.I.had.not.noticed.

        • felix 6.1.1.2
          17 June 2010 at 8:16 pm

          Hi bruv.

          Paid wikileaks that $100 yet?

          • Jenny 6.1.1.2.1
            17 June 2010 at 11:16 pm

            Yeah and while we’re on it Big Bruv, what’s the name of that mythical insurance company, you claim workers are to stupid to go to to insure themselves against redundancy.

        • BLiP 6.1.1.3
          18 June 2010 at 12:53 am

          Ahhh . . . there you are big bruv. Been wondering where you got to. Have you had a chance to save up that $100 yet? Just so that no one could ever call you a welcher or draw any implications as to the worthiness of your word, I would suggest you send a copy of the email to a neutral party – lprent, for example – and he can confirm that you’ve paid your debt. Let me know if you need a little more time – I know $100 is a lot of money for many people struggling under National Ltdâ„¢. Would another week be sufficient time?

    • really 6.2
      17 June 2010 at 3:48 pm

      merely pointing out that there is more to this than simply an acute concern about ensuring the budget allocation process conformed with best practise, micky

      • mickysavage 6.2.1
        17 June 2010 at 4:00 pm

        So do you think that it is proper for the Government to set aside $4.8m contestible by one company only? If so would your view change if that company was run or owned by friends of the Government?

        • really 6.2.1.1
          17 June 2010 at 4:30 pm

          Oh look, Micky, I’m comfortable with the plan to release funding as and when concrete proposals are received.

          • mickysavage 6.2.1.1.1
            17 June 2010 at 4:35 pm

            I get the feeling I am talking to Georgina Te Heuheu.

            Do you:

            (a) think that it is proper for the Government to set aside $4.8m contestible by one company only?
            (b) If so would your view change if that company was run or owned by friends of the Government?

            • really 6.2.1.1.1.1
              17 June 2010 at 4:46 pm

              LOL.

            • big bruv 6.2.1.1.1.2
              17 June 2010 at 8:26 pm

              Such Faux outrage Micky

              Where was this concern when the Clark government was handing out favours to Labour party supporters?
              Where was this concern when Clark legislated to legalise the theft of $850,000 that she had been told time and time again was not lawful?

              • felix …
                17 June 2010 at 8:31 pm

                Speaking of money, bruv… wikileaks – you paid up yet?

                Also, I’m having trouble figuring out from your comment whether YOU are outraged about this or not.

                • big bruv …
                  17 June 2010 at 8:49 pm

                  Nothing to be outraged about yet Felix, this will turn out to be another stuff up by Labour, a bit like the H fee and the Blind trust.

                  One day Labour will realise that they lost the last election, they will stop looking for the “bomb” that Clark promised prior to the last election and get on rebuilding the party.

                  The arrogance of Labour is breathtaking, you only have to see the way so many of your MP’s have dealt with the credit card abuse.

                  You chaps should be drumming it into your MP’s, remind them that they lost and remind them that the nation is not going to wake up tomorrow morning and realise they made a mistake.

                  At the moment the Labour party are pathetic, and while a part of me enjoys that immensely it is not good for the future of NZ or good governance, we need a strong opposition, as I have said time and time again, the Nat’s (apart from Key) are a target rich environment, the trouble with Labour is they do not know what target to aim at.

                  • felix …
                    17 June 2010 at 8:51 pm

                    So that’s “no” you don’t have any concerns about it.

                    And “no” to wikileaks I presume.

                    • big bruv …
                      17 June 2010 at 8:54 pm

                      1. Correct

                      2. No..not to Wikileaks, the bet was to a charity, a charity has been paid.

                    • felix …
                      17 June 2010 at 8:57 pm

                      Charity of the winner’s choosing, bruv.

                      Remember? http://www.thestandard.org.nz/theres-such-a-thing-as-too-relaxed/#comment-219570

                      Or was that another of your “biodegradable moments”?

                    • big bruv …
                      17 June 2010 at 9:03 pm

                      Felix

                      You can take my word for it or not, I could not care less.

                      A charity has been paid (local SPCA branch)

                      Wikileaks is not a charity.

                    • felix …
                      17 June 2010 at 9:11 pm

                      Ha ha, classic.

                      First you claim to have won the bet.

                      Then you try to change the bet after you lost it.

                      And now you want to pretend you don’t remember the terms, despite me linking you to the bet several times.

                      To be honest, bruv, you’d save more face by just saying “fuck you I’m not going to pay”.

                      Just in case you’ve forgotten again already, here it is again: http://www.thestandard.org.nz/theres-such-a-thing-as-too-relaxed/#comment-219570

                    • big bruv …
                      17 June 2010 at 9:21 pm

                      Like I said Felix, you will just have to take my word for it, if that is not good enough for you then tough luck.

                      You need not worry, I am not a socialist, I keep my word and whats more, the money I used to pay the donation was mine, not the tax payers.

                      I realise that dealing with an honourable person and somebody who uses their own cash is a rarity for you, but believe me, not everybody out there is a socialist thief.

                      Anyway, $100 bucks is chicken feed, the SPCA can always do with the money, and as for the terms, I well remember them, I set the bloody things.

                      A donation to a charity was the bet, wikileaks is not a charity, you must have rocks in your head if you think I am ever going to donate my hard earned cash to a left wing website that has only a passing interest in the truth (a bit like this place really)

                      Now you must excuse me, I have animals to exercise and then I must go to bed as I have to be up and away early in the morning, gotta go and earn some more money so the bloody government can waste it on dole and DPB bludgers.

                    • felix …
                      17 June 2010 at 9:49 pm

                      But strangely you never mentioned at the time that you had no intention of paying money to wikileaks.

                      I mean that was the bet, bruv. It’s all right there: http://www.thestandard.org.nz/theres-such-a-thing-as-too-relaxed/#comment-219570

                      There are only two ways I can see to interpret this:

                      1. You didn’t know what wikileaks was and you agreed to the terms of the bet without finding out, or

                      2. You knew what wikileaks was, knew you wouldn’t ever give them money, and so made the bet with no intention of honouring it.

                      Is there another possibility I’ve missed?

                    • mickysavage …
                      17 June 2010 at 10:48 pm

                      I agree with felix. It looks like an open and shut case. Pay up BB, wikileaks could use the money.

                    • BLiP …
                      18 June 2010 at 12:57 am

                      Disappoint, I am. Surprised, not so much. The treasury benches these days are cluttered with welchers and pissant liars just like big bruv who demand this and that from those they abuse yet lack the morality to be accountable to any standards.

                    • Pete …
                      18 June 2010 at 9:34 am

                      big bruv: “must have rocks in your head if you think I am ever going to donate my hard earned cash to a left wing website that has only a passing interest in the truth”

                      lolwut?

                      What is the ‘truth’ to you bb? Is it spin, or is it documentary proof of something one way or the other (aka what Wikileaks provides a platform for)?

                      And your not paying up given the agreed terms is pathetic. You no longer have any credibility here.

  7. pollywog 7
    17 June 2010 at 3:36 pm

    Meanwhile, Radio 531 pi broadcaster Efeso Collins, a leading critic of PEDA LTD and its dodgy dealings, has been rested from presenting his Saturday morning show for reasons much like Georgina Te Heu Heus or Bill English’s in awarding 4.8 mil to PEDA LTD…ie lack of due process, a bit of cronyism and maybe a little bit of nepotism ?

    Collins states in an email posted at

    http://pacificeyewitness.com/2010/06/17/debate-silenced-at-radio-531pi-efeso-collins-abruptly-removed/

    This morning I received an email from Pere Maitai, Programming Director at Radio 531PI, informing me that ‘serious matters’ had arisen since I last spoke with him 2 weeks ago and that I would be rested as a result from presenting this weekend.

    I want you to know that up until his email, I have had no official information from him outlining any of the ‘serious matters’ he was referring to. Further, I have asked him to supply me with information on these matters and await a response.

    Funnily enough the man in charge of 531 pi is JR Pereira’s brother, Fa’amatuainu Tino Pereira, chair of the National Pacific Radio Trust.

    actually..nah this shit isn’t funny at all. It stinks !

    I don’t see the point in ‘resting’ Collins so late in the game now that the issue has gained mainstream media traction.

    • Pascal's bookie 7.1
      17 June 2010 at 3:56 pm

      Shit. Not fuckin’ about are they?

    • prism 7.2
      18 June 2010 at 10:20 am

      They are sounding as slick as Italy’s Silvio Bersconi (or whatever). He managed to get control over many important sectors. He is a prime politician, also tv magnate also etc etc.

      Perhaps this Pereira has watched John Tamihere who also would like to handle money on behalf of less financially aware brothers and sisters. The Pacific Island community is no doubt seen as ripe for some organisation by a skilled craftsman. And then there is Michael Jones and the other rugby player beloved and drawcards for a sizable and cohesive group of voters. Rich pickings all round!

  8. gobsmacked 8
    17 June 2010 at 4:15 pm

    English was floundering badly on this question in Parliament today. And that’s unusual – he’s usually pretty sharp in the House.

    Either he’s in on the dodgy dealing, or he delegated to Georgina and now wishes he hadn’t. Given the track record of John “I wasn’t there” Key, it looks like the PM will soon be ‘washing his hands’ of Minister Te Heuheu.

    He can afford to lose her. He can’t afford more trouble for his Finance Minister. He wants to put Joyce in the job after the election, not before.

  9. pollywog 9
    17 June 2010 at 4:17 pm

    Yeah PB…they certainly want the message put out there, at least in the Pasifikan community, not to fuck with the good ol’ boys network.

    I reckon it’s now a matter of saving face and avoiding shame for JR’s part. I would imagine him thinking it was a done deal as long as we all played silent house niggas to his massa and lined up dutifully up at the big house for a handout.

    Well nah sorry JR, but homeez don’t play that way no more…not for one cotton pickin minute. This aint fuckin’ Texas but the ‘all hat, no cattle’ rule still holds true.

    • Pascal's bookie 9.1
      17 June 2010 at 4:54 pm

      Are these ol’ boys or new boys tho? That’s one of the bits I don’t get.

      From reading the pacificeyewitness links I get the impression that the story is something like:

      joker(s) show up with shiny new organisation and fist full of promissory pingas from the blinglish, start throwing around the idea that they represent the people by govt edict or some such shit, and the people say “eh, who the fuck are you? I mean we know who you are, but what are you talking about?”

      Is that close?

      • pollywog 9.1.1
        17 June 2010 at 5:29 pm

        Nah PB…heres my downlow on the scenario…

        These good ol’ boys have been around for a while in local body politics and Pasifikan boards of trustees, building up networks and forging connections in business, the community and political circles.

        It just looks like they wrongfully decided, now was the right time to leverage that into a proposal to wholesale represent the Pasifikan community to the gov’t in exchange for lining their pockets as private company owners, as opposed to trustees accountable to the community for public funding.

        All the while hoping they and their business would fly under the radar, as long as the Pasifikan community kowtowed to their initiatives based on the reluctance to criticize our own in public.

        There would be alot of brown noses put out of joint in Auckland who know exactly who these guys are, what they’ve done, are trying to do and decided to take a stand in opposition. Not only cos it cuts them out of the picture and puts them in position of further subservience but also cos it’s not how it’s traditionally done.

        For everyone speaking out there’d be ten others still respecting the old ways of wanting to settle this dispute in house and desiring the community to unite in celebration that a couple of good ol brown boys can play the game just like whitey and hoping for their $upport to be rewarded when it comes time to outsource the contract for delivery.

        I would imagine there’ll be more paybacks from the PEDA camp to the outspoken in much the same way as Efeso Collins has been censured.

  10. Rosy 10
    17 June 2010 at 4:30 pm

    Is this sounding like the PEDA money was all Bill English’s idea in the first place? Georgina Te Heu Heu is simply passing on the funding message to the public and actually has nothing at all to do with its inclusion in the budget? I’m confused…

    • ianmac 10.1
      17 June 2010 at 4:42 pm

      I believe that I heard on National News at 4:30 that Bill English has said that ” the funding may become contestible.” Huh? The experts have said you can’t allocate in the Budget a specific sum for a specific body then change it after it has been authorised.

    • felix 10.2
      17 June 2010 at 6:06 pm

      “Georgina Te Heu Heu is simply passing on the funding message to the public and actually has nothing at all to do with its inclusion in the budget?”

      That wouldn’t be unusual for this Govt. Most of the ministers are figureheads, charged with delivering press releases while the decisions are made and micromanaged by the 3 or 4 at the heart of the cabinet.

  11. Adrian 11
    17 June 2010 at 6:00 pm

    Weren’t Jones and Tuigamala on the board of PEDA and bailed when questions started being asked. They are that old celebrity stalker Key’s Best Friends Forever and this doesn’t sound like a Blinglish deal, giving away that amount of money to anyone, so how about this for a scenario, J and T do a deal with a smitten Key for a bit of mana enhancement and Key puts the hard word on Blinglish and when it starts to pong the minders tell J and T to keep a low profile. Remember English was pissed off about having to find money for the Cycleway To Nowhere, I bet he’s really pissed off now. This is going to be fun to watch.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 11.1
      17 June 2010 at 6:20 pm

      Dont forget English was the conduit for Donna Awatere getting her no questions asked funding for ‘her ‘ foundation.
      The Auditor General found there werent the normal processes for the Cabinet approval done, English was finance minister in the dying days of the Shipley govt, Awateres vote helped them stagger along to the election , along with Alamein Kopu who got funding for pet projects

      • ianmac 11.1.1
        17 June 2010 at 6:36 pm

        Perhaps there is value for Key in undermining English. “Tut tut Bill. Another stuff up. So after the next election if we get in I’m afraid Bill….”
        Will Key front up to explain? I await with bated breath.

  12. gobsmacked 12
    17 June 2010 at 6:36 pm

    English was finance minister in the dying days of the Shipley govt

    Look into my eyes … you are feeling very sleepy …

    There was no such government … there were no such Ministers … their names were not English, McCully, Williamson, Ryall, Smith … they did not have credit cards … they did not spend taxpayers’ money … you do not want to ask them any questions … when I snap my fingers, you will wake up …

    … and join the Parliamentary Press Gallery.

  13. Anne 13
    17 June 2010 at 7:22 pm

    Brilliant gobsmacked!
    Best laugh I’ve had in a week 😀

  14. Jum 14
    17 June 2010 at 8:28 pm

    Isn’t Michael Jones that nice Christian man who lives by bread alone? What’s he doing mixed up in this chicanery? Surely he wouldn’t lie about PEDA… Does he know the truth about Key and Pereira? Will he lend his name to National knowing that they’re involved in a pay back agreement for favours done in the 2008 election?

    Did Nicky Hager miss this one?

  15. George.com 15
    17 June 2010 at 10:51 pm

    Listening to Georgina Te HeuHeu on the radio, it sounds like the government is very keen (even desperate perhaps) to give money to this particular outfit (for whatever reason) but is particularly mindful of a need to closely monitor and manage this group. Odd. Pick a group who has significant risk attached to it, give it a decent slice of money (for whatever reason), and then try to find ways to manage as much as possible the performance of the group. If nothing else, it seems a very odd way of allocating tax payers money to community organisations.

  16. pollywog 16
    18 June 2010 at 9:47 am

    It’s NOT a community organisation.and thats what pisses the Pasifikan community off.

    It’s a privately owned business with one shareholder…JR PEREIRA.

    The business has within the last 2 months, essentially gone from sole trader with no real product or track record in anything and working out of the owner’s house, to multi million dollar turnover company responsible for delivering education and employment opportunities to the entire Auckland Pasifikan community in one stroke of Bill Englishs pen.

    And if the community hadn’t kicked up a fuss about this, English and Te Heu Heu probably wouldn’t have bothered trying to manage the performance of the group at all.

    For all Englishs talk of shitty Pasifikan employment stats, theres no guarantee whatsoever that this company can deliver anything in the way of jobs.

    Gifting his mates or rellies significant taxpayer money just cos they got the gumption to put some badly worked proposal on paper and then expecting real results is straight up bullshit.

    He knows it, Georgie knows it, Labour knows it and the entire Pasifikan community in Auckland knows it.