in this Blog are a memorial to the more than 3 million Aussie Battlers
have been Breached. It is especially a memorial to the
(estimated) 5,000+ Aussie Battlers who did not survive being breached.)
On March 3rd, I received yet another Senate suppression order that is aimed at suppressing information about the issues raised in my previous blogs.
The misuse of Parliamentary Privilege to CENSOR issues is outrageous as the purpose of Parliamentary Privilege, since 1689 in British Crown parliaments, is to EXPOSE sensitive issues of grave concern rather than too conceal them. Such blatant POLITICALCENSORSHIP is totally unacceptable and so I have raised my voice of protest to one of the South Australian senators involved in in this vile act.
Below is a copy of the email that I sent to her and to the President of the Australian Senate.
8 March 2010
Attn: Senator Hanson-Young
Standing Committee on Environment, Communications and the Arts.
Dear Senator Hanson-Young.
This communication is in two parts. Part A is addressed to you in capacity as a member of a Senate Standing Committee whilst Part B is addressed to you as a Senator for South Australia.
NOTE: This email was posted on the web before it was posted to you and is therefore a public domain document.
Re: Complaint to the President of the Senate.
Appended is a copy of a letter that received from the Standing Committee on Environment, Communications and the Arts on Thursday.
The statement that my submission to this committee “…falls outside the scope of the inquiry” is, to put it politely, a bit fat LIE. Consequently, I have therefore filed a complaint with the President of the Senate alleging:
1. Misuse of Parliamentary Privilege;
2. Tampering with Evidence;
3. Suppression of Evidence.
Whilst you may think that the above points are over the top, I strongly recommend that you obtain and carefully study a copy of the trail transcript of Crown vs Josiah Finch, SA Supreme Court, February 2006. I cannot in all good conscience turn a blind eye to the deceitful actions of this committee, especially given that I shall shortly be taking up the issue of the “other deaths” that stemmed from a systemic failure of Due Diligence with the SAPOL Major Crimes squad.
These are deaths that are now officially a State Secret since the secret “confidential” classification of Submission 287 to the Senate inquiry into the Anti-Terrorism Bill #2 legislation. However, an unintended consequence of Tony Abbott’s “Industrial manslaughter” comment is that the report of the Standing Committee on Environment, Communications and the Arts inquiry into the Energy Efficiency Homes Package (Ceiling Insulation) will almost certainly be evidence into a criminal inquiry into the deaths of other innocent victims who died as direct consequence of failures of Due Diligence that resulted in a huge number of “Post-Breaching Terminal Outcomes”.
You may recall that in the run up to the March 2006 State Election, the Liberal Party campaigned on a “Law and Order” platform. In order to appear tough on crime, the Rann Government allowed the DPP to prosecute a teenager, Josiah Finch, for the crime of Felony Murder. The trial took place in the Supreme Court in February 2006 and in March 2006 Josiah Finch was convicted and sentenced to 14 years with 8 years non-parole.
During the trail, the Crown had readily admitted that Josiah Finch did not fire the fatal shot that killed an acquaintance. His crime was that he knew who did fire that shot and would not reveal the identity of the killer.
The deaths of Matthew Fuller and three other ceiling installation installers represented a minute fraction of the number of people who had died as a result of many other “Due Diligence” failures that have, over many years, allowed criminal activities to flourish and with its suppression order, the committee has, from a legal perspective, put itself into the same situation as Josiah Finch.
I know full well that my submission contained comments and facts that were well outside what the committee had expected; to say that they were “outside the box” is a major understatement. However, they most certainly did fit well within the committee’s Terms of Reference, e.g. “the administration of the program from a pricing, probity and efficiency” perspective. To say that my submission fits into the Part 3, “Any other matters” category is a massive understatement.
Since 1997, an awful lot of people have died because Due Diligence standards were not met. Inadequate administration, based upon a politically false belief that had placed administrative “efficiency” ahead of adequate probity, resulted in a SYSTEMIC FAILURE of Due Diligence.
In my files is a 2006 from Senator Brown which concludes with the following sentence; “As you have indicated, breaching can sometimes lead people to such despair that they sometimes take their own lives”.
Nowhere in Hansard is there a record of The Greens revealing the extent of those deaths!
As I mentioned previously, Tony Abbott’s “Industrial Manslaughter” comments have had unintended consequences. The whole inquiry was initially about ministerial accountability for 4 deaths but the committee’s remit was widened by that comment into a legal inquiry rather than a political “witch hunt” inquiry.
I am completely serious about the 3 issues of my complaint.
Misuse of Parliamentary Privilege;
As the Senate’s own website makes quite clear, the purpose of Parliamentary Privilege is to allow Parliament to function by ensuring that legally sensitive issues can be dealt with by Parliament; i.e. exposure rather than concealment is the true purpose of Parliamentary Privilege.
Tampering with Evidence and the Suppression of Evidence.
Rejecting a politically sensitive submission with evidence/information that pertains to the inquiry might be a convenient but dirty trick to pull during a politically motivated witch hunt. However, went the comments in the submission are linked to other unlawful deaths that are an official State Secret because the cumulative death toll is numbered in the thousands, you have one heck of a legal problem.
Parliamentary Privilege was never intended to cover what is tantamount to mass murder.
My suggestion is that the decision to reject my submission be reviewed and the broader issues of the Due diligence failure be incorporated into the committee’s report.
“Damned if you do and damned if don’t”.
I know that no matter what appears in the final report, the committee will be in a tight spot. Reveal the extent of the failure of Due Diligence and questions will be raised about other deaths. Conceal this information and risk running foul of criminal laws across the nation.
Since the committee’s letter is being spread around to other “wannabe” political parties and further informative details can be found at my blog site, the report may not receive the sort of reception that the instigators of the inquiry had hoped for.
PART B – To the Senator for South Australia.
To the best of my knowledge, post-breaching deaths have never been reported to Parliament. As a Senator for South Australia, you have both a professional and legal responsibility to protect the people and ensure that Parliament does nothing to endanger the health, welfare or safety of ANY of the people of South Australia. As the following points clearly indicate, you have not done a very good in regard to upholding those responsibilities.
Defamation or Truth?
Over the last 5 years I have repeatedly made the following statements:
- The worst rorter of welfare funding was the Howard Government;
- The Howard Government and the Federal Police may have done a deal, i.e. no investigation of breaching triggered deaths and other violations of Federal Laws in exchange for draconian new police powers which means that the Anti-Terrorism Bill #2 represents the proceeds of a crime;
- Every politician who voted in support of breaching legislation, voted for An Act of State Terrorism;
- Breaching legislation is unconstitutional.
I should have been buried by an avalanche of politicians and senior police officers suing me for Defamation but this has not happened. Why not? I know that you know why no such action has not occurred, however since this is a public domain document many readers, especially those in other countries, may be unaware why I have not been sued for Defamation. The most likely reason is that in Australian courts, the only defence against defamation is Truth.
Matthew Fuller died because of Inadequate Oversight of the Energy Efficiency Homes Package (Ceiling Insulation) program. That inadequate oversight resulted in a systemic lack of Due Diligence that allowed the program to be recklessly exploited and rorted. The problem is that the Inadequate Oversight/ Due diligence problems are systemic and endemic in the Australian Public Service. The problem is that over the years, this has resulted in the deaths of a very large number of South Australians.
After 7 years of trying to discover the answer to that question, to date the only outcome from my efforts is that in 2005 another Senate committee secretly classified these deaths as confidential!
Therefore, as a matter of the utmost urgency, I am requesting that you, as a Senator for South Australia, do your duty on behalf of the people of South Australia and make every possible effort to have the statistical information about how many South Australians have died after being breached made available. It is the right of South Australian to know before they vote in this up coming federal election.
Check out the appended letter from Brendan O’Connor and you will see that he “suggested” that I take up the issue of post-breaching felony murders with the SA Police. I intend to do so, perhaps even this week, but have held off for 3 months whilst waiting for Mr. O’Connor to provide the post-breaching fatalities statistics. I am still waiting; however the committee’s suppression order prohibiting me from distributing my submission was the last straw.
My complaint to the President of the Senate merely represents the first step in the process of ensuring that breaching deaths, especially breaching competition and breaching quota deaths are dealt with in accordance with due process of law. Any member of the Federal Parliament who continues to withhold the details of these deaths from parliament runs the risk of running foul of South Australia’s felony murder statutes as well as similar laws dealing with death by criminal negligence in every state and territory in the Commonwealth.
Several years ago I wrote to John Howard and the leaders of other political parties making the statement that “Breaching legislation is a poisoned chalice”. Other than my growing collection of Senate suppression orders, the previously mentioned letter from Senator Brown was the only response that I ever received from federal politicians regarding the problem of breaching triggered deaths.
“The Lost Generation” and “The Stolen Generation” are humanitarian disasters that were created and driven by misplaced political ideology. However, they were sustained by both inadequate oversight and a massive failure of due diligence. The same can be said for “The Breached Generation” with one major difference, the sheer scale of this disaster! With more than 3 million at-risk Aussie Battlers having been breached and an estimated death toll of 5,000+ that neither John Howard or Kevin Rudd have denied or refuted, the deliberate, massive humanitarian disaster caused by breaching is worthy of the title “Australia’s Second Holocaust”. (If you don’t know about the first holocaust, just talk to some of our nation’s indigenous people.)
The time is fast approaching when the political parties that have steadfastly supported breaching legislation will have to drink Breaching legislation’s poisoned chalice. As a Senator for South Australia, you must now decide where your loyalties lay. Is your loyalty to your transient peers in the Senate, or is it to the people of South Australia?
I suggest that you decide quickly for that which parliament still seeks to hide with parliamentary privilege suppression orders is already well and truly in the public domain.
If you do not believe that, just check out the following web hyper-link:
Ronald Medlicott (Christian welfare justice activist.)