Sirva Call In Lawyer Over Photograph Of Greymouth ACC Protest
Enquiries into the photographing of a protest outside the Greymouth ACC office by people working for SIRVA, an
international "relocation" organisation with links to governments and military, has taken a new twist with SIRVA boss
Peter Sutcliffe involving a lawyer regarding my request for a copy of the photo in question.
Previously Mr. Sutcliffe has treated the matter as a bit of a joke (in one email he asked "has our intrepid cameraman
been at it again?") but his latest action of using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut raises further questions as to why a
SIRVA employee just happened to stop opposite an ACC protest and take a photo (or photos? - I saw the camera pointed at
the group for long enough to take a number of shots).
When first questioned about SIRVA's involvement Mr. Sutcliffe responded that "two of our Pickford's Management people"
just happened to be sitting at traffic lights by the Greymouth ACC office (there are no traffic lights on the West
Coast) and took a photo because they saw a notice saying "Ben for N.Z. Idol" (the protest was in support of a West
Coaster named Ben who was trying to get his wheelchair repaired or replaced by ACC).
When asked for a copy of the photo Mr. Sutcliffe replied that he would"check with the individual tomorrow" but when I
followed this up some days later he replied, "we will make the photograph available to our lawyer" and that the lawyer
would release it to me upon receiving "substantiation of the story" or my "printed retraction" of the story. Since Mr.
Sutcliffe has already admitted "the story" happened his complete change of tack indicates there is more to all this than
meets the eye.
Which all leaves those involved in the Greymouth affair - and many other interested parties - further wondering about
the whole question of surveillance of ACC claimants. There is a widespread belief amongst some very well-informed people
that there is something distinctly fishy going on regarding these matters and SIRVA's involving a lawyer over what they
claim to be an innocently-taken photograph adds to the mystery.
David Tranter