Tuesday 7th December 1999
This on-line paper is now archived for perpetuity in the National Library of Australia
Tuesday
7th December 1999
This on-line paper is now archived for perpetuity in the
National Library
of Australia
Subscriber's password
check (have your subscription number handy).
Recent stories exclusive to (how to) subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day now at the bottom of this page.
Current topical links (available to all readers):
[Links to the MAI]
[Australian Daily
Issues Paper]
HAVE YOU ORDERED:
[MURDER BY MEDIA, DEATH OF DEMOCRACY
IN AUSTRALIA]
[ONE VOICE, MANY ISSUES -
Released May 1999]
October 1995
A twist which would normally be found in the most riveting of Agatha Christie's novels will come to light this Friday.
Yesterday I emailed a draft press release to the lawyers acting for me in my court case. I am appearing this Friday on the charge that I named a Queensland MP facing about fifty child sex charges (including rape). I have pleaded not guilty.
The press release will blow the lid on an extraordinary set of events which will become the focus of my new book "Battles with the media barons". It will be published in full on the @notd on Friday after the Court hearing.
One thing I can assure @notd readers is the fact that young Lachlan Murdoch and daddy will not be amused but then who gives a stuff and who the hell is this young upstart anyway?
For the intellectual prostitutes who serve their young master's best interests it is time to start bed wetting and having cold sweats in the wee hours of the morning.... the clock is now definitely ticking... tick, tock, tick, tock.
For the rest of the media - be there after the court case and this well-documented press release is yours to make hay with and, believe me, the harvest will be big.
An electronic David will, I believe, fell an ugly Goliath that has choked the lucky country..... the wonders of the Internet, freedom of speech in action... a dying democratic right in Australia are now finally coming home to roost.
One of the world's wealthiest and most powerful businessmen, Mr Rupert Murdoch, extracted up to $107 million worth of concessions from the NSW Government in 1995 for his $430 million Fox Studios development in Sydney.
A NSW Auditor-General's report into the development outlined how the Murdoch-owned Fox Studios Australia - which subsequently entered a 50-50 joint venture with Lend Lease - played hard-ball with the Fahey and Carr governments to obtain the concessions.
These included a 40-year lease over the prime Sydney Showground site at nearly half the rental forecasts of the Valuer-General, State tax concessions worth $7.6 million (including the payment of payroll tax and land tax for Fox until 2005, and payment of stamp duty and legal costs on leases), State infrastructure works worth $24.4 million (including payment to remediate and clean up the aging, asbestos-riddled site), and a rent discount of $18.1 million.
Despite the huge subsidy, Fox faced virtually no penalties if it failed to proceed with aspects of the film studio/family entertainment centre.
Federal taxpayers also contributed $32 million, of which $25 million was for the relocation of the Royal Agricultural Society to Homebush Bay and $7 million for studio infrastructure costs and improvements.
Overall, the report found the subsidy - secured after Fox considered taking the development to Melbourne, Queensland and even New Zealand - amounted to between $84.8 million and $106.8 million in net present value terms.
The NSW Treasurer, Mr Egan, disputed this, saying the subsidy amounted to ''only'' $25 million and that the Auditor-General's report itself calculated the project would deliver an up-front net economic benefit to the State of $381 million and a value of $2.5 billion over the life of the deal.
Fox Studios has also consistently rejected the Auditor-General's analysis, which News Ltd's chairman and chief executive, Mr Lachlan Murdoch, attacked on its release.
The studios' CEO, Mr Kim Williams, last week described the report as ''grotesquely inaccurate'' and ''unusually adventurous'' in its analysis of the project.
He says the Auditor-General included substantial costs that were not linked directly to the studio project and that the true figure is closer to $30 million - a deal he said was reached after ''long and arduous negotiation'' with the NSW Government.
The financial aspects of the deal were kept secret by the NSW Government, which fought hard to avoid their release.
The NSW Opposition spent thousands of dollars on Freedom of Information requests, which the Government rejected on grounds of commercial confidentiality until the Legislative Council forced its hand.
It forced Mr Egan to release some documents and subsequently ordered the Auditor-General's inquiry.
Kerry Packer as a member of the SOCOG Committee (not associated with Labor, or his staffer Graham Richardson (Richo) you understand) will get free tickets to the Olympic Games.
Packer resigned from the SOCOG Committee in 1995 after two years in his dubious role - his position being taken by Richo. His resignation followed complaints that he did not attend meetings.
Meanwhile a European-based television crew are preparing an extraordinary expose into the tax avoidance schemes used by the Packer family. The programme will go to air in the new year and is expected to blow Packer's reputation to smithereens in Europe.
Don't expect the programme to be televised here in Australia - censorship is alive and well here and, of course, there is the rich man's trump card "defamation".
I was happy to assist the, Melbourne-based, producers of the show a few weeks ago when contacted by them. Their particular interest was "gambling".
Now that they have left for safer shores the Packer family can just stew while they await this telling expose.
An Indonesian fishing boat carrying up to 120 illegal immigrants has been intercepted near Ashmore Reef off north-west Australia.
Customs vessel Botany Bay would escort the motorised boat into a lagoon at the Ashmore Islands later today, when firm numbers would be determined, Customs Minister Amanda Vanstone said.
"It is expected that officials from the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs will process the people once they arrive on the mainland," Senator Vanstone said in a statement.
"Arrangements for the people's removal from Ashmore have yet to be finalised."
It is the second group of boat people detected in Australia this month, following last month's record influx of 1,247 people aboard 14 boats.
The recent Sydney Hail storm
Image right - picture taken during the storm that devastated areas of Sydney
last month.
Making the
news" -
Scott, Good luck this Friday........
Trevor
The two Davids would have you believe the party would fall apart without them. Well Iv'e got news for them, it has fallen apart with them.
The consumate politician and the master fund raiser, according to their own testimonials. Unfortunately they have not lived up to their own high opinions of themselves. How much money has the great fund raiser brought in so far not counting membership dues? The consumate politician has done no better job than Len Harris or the five Queensland MP's. Even though you don't like to think so you two fellows are very much dispensible.
You two have not got the first clue about how to get this party into power . The juggernaut has floundered and you have not got the answer.
Does everyone remember when Hawke and Keating fell out and Keating went to the back benches. The economy slowed down, unemployment went up and dear old Hawkey had no idea what to do, not long after that Keating deposed him.
This is where the 2D's find themselves today, no idea. When things were barrelling along it really had nothing to do with them, it was purely circumstances sweeping things along and now that things have changed there is not a single original idea to be had.
When Hawkey could not deliver he was deposed. The party cannot afford the cost of people at the top who cannot get results. If we are not ambitious we will never ever be successful.
People being blindly loyal to the Liberal and Labor party have got this country into a hell of a mess.
Step aside (2D's) think of the party first instead of yourselves and give someone else a go, this could be the greatest thing you could do for Australia be Patriotic.
Kevin Booker
Sth Australia
The ordinary members of Pauline Hanson's One Nation Members Inc (PHONM Inc) do have rights of access to financial details and membership registers.
PHONM Inc (ACN 079 352 819) is a body incorporated under the Associations Incorporations Act 1981 and registered with the Office of Fair Trading in Queensland. If financial members are having any difficulty accessing information through normal party channels they could make their initial enquires to that office.
PHONM Inc is also a registrable Australian body under the Corporations Law which is administered by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC). This was a legal requirement if the organisation was to operate in states in addition to Queensland.
For those wishing to get a copy of PHONM Inc Constitution they should apply to their nearest ASIC office for a Form 412, Document No 011889678, which is 16 pages in length and will cost $31.00. I would suggest they also obtain a copy of the Historical Company Extract, which gives directors details and changes of directors etc for a further cost of $17.00.
Sections of the Corporations Law that might be of interest to oppressed members are:-
I attempted to get copies of the 1997 and 1998 financial returns of Pauline Hanson's One Nation Ltd (ACN 079 986 913) "the company" from ASIC but was told they have not been lodged. I was told the 1997 return should have been lodged no later than the 15/4/99.
The person I spoke to was adamant that the 1997 financial return was outstanding and that I should write a letter of complaint to the ASIC if I wanted to pursue the matter.
As a suggestion it might be an idea to have the PHONM Inc Constitution available on this site so everyone is aware of their rights, if any.
Please remember I have no legal qualifications and I am offering this information in good faith.
Ken Hunter
Ken
Could the missing 1997 return just be another example of incompetence at Manly?
Editor
Dear Scott
Well, you have got my attention - I will keep my eyes peeled on your daily news to see what is about to happen. You have got some good stuff on there but I still fear that the whole thing will fall to bits and we will be left with nothing but a shell of something that could have been great. You know that my loyalty lies with the true and original goals of the party - I just wish we could get back to that and that all these gut wrenching actions would be over with. I don't know how many more body blows we can stand. Must agree that Len and his team are great - I feel for them, trying to do a damm hard job and we should and could be helping, but while all this goes on we are focusing on the troubles (sounds like Ireland) and doing nothing to help Len.
Cheers for now
Beth
Hi Scott,
I have always appreciated the good work you have done with GWB keeping the One Nation people informed on important events, Globalism/Immigration/New World Order/IMF/Nationalism around the world.
These are the subjects that concern us and this is a forum where we can share our concerns.
This is also a forum where the truth will eventully come out. There has been a lot of interesting stories lately, we now seem to be getting the other side of the story. It puts a whole new complexion on issues, dont you think.
How Bill Clinton hates the internet it is always catching him out.
The two Davids are now also starting to hate the internet it is not now telling their sanitised stories.
A very dangerous thing this internet the truth has a bad habit of getting out.
The Monica story would never have broken without it.
It was used widely to defeat the referendum on the rebublic.
It is now used to tell the other side of the story straight from the horses mouth.
Power to the people.
Reg
Hi Scott,
I suggest the formation of an organisation to be called "The One Nation Reform League"
The main item of reform being to sack the 2 davids and introduce genuine democracy and accountability to One Nation. Eventually, the reform league would be merged in with One Nation.
A similar thing was done some years back by a south australian politician, Steele Hall, a liberal who was unhappy with the liberal party. His group was called the liberal reform league.They stood their own candidates at elections . I assume it eventually got the reforms it sought and was then merged in with the liberals.
The One Nation Reform League would be registered as a political party, establish its own branches, and stand candidates in elections.
The ON whiteants all seem to be capable people and would make excellent officeholders for the league.The league would aim to keep Pauline Hanson as the ON leader in some form.
As other readers have pointed out, there are still many enthusiastic ON types out there, wondering what to do next.Graham Campbell'sAustralia First, a party with similar ideas to ON, doesn't seem to be much of an alternative. Australia First is very thin on the ground with a severe lack of members and money. Campbell is said to be growing tired.The Australia First party structure is said to be under attack from various groups who want to take it over and use it for their own purposes.
Arthur.
There may not be real leaders, but there are real supporters.
Glen
The reason One Nation is not moving forward in leaps and bounds is because the 2D's (deadheads) are focused on consolidating their own power rather than focusing on getting One Nation into power. Most autocratic dictators will not take any input from the masses and in so doing, rob themselves of an enormous pool of talent and energy.
We have problems, such as the mainstream media ignoring us unless there is some bad publicity to be had. But there is no problem that cannot be overcome or turned around to our advantage with the right people at the helm. Churchill to his great credit kept sacking Generals till he ended up with Generals who could win battles. With the same troops one general would lose a battle and yet another with exactly the same soldiers would win. One Nation Members cannot afford the luxury of Generals who are losing the battle and in so doing, are losing the war.
We must now surround the enemy (Manly) for a final assault on the Old Losing Order. When the battle is won we will re-group for the real war at the ballot box in the next election.
Keith Jackson
what is the real scenario with the monsanto food ...one of my nepheus is a first class diabettic he previosly last season played 1st grade rugby league his age 23 as of tuesday this week sorry about the spelling i am passionate about this however first graders take a lot of knocks one drug they take regularly is growth hormone is there a connection ...reason apparently no test to detect this hormone
Omega
Talks to establish a new "Milennium Round" of trade discussions have failed. The breakdown in talks shows that WTO members need to fundamentally rethink how the WTO conducts its business.
The delegates of developing nations said after the talks broke up that the process had not been fair and did not address their concerns. There had been tension building for several days, with African nations being particularly vocal about their interests being locked out.
Industry and Government tried to say that the protests in Seattle had not affected the outcome. Australian industry seemed to blame President Clinton, the Europeans, and that time ran out.
However, it is clear that these talks failed because of the way the WTO does its business. The protestor's messages about the WTO's processes were very similar to the messages of the developing nations - trade talks that are neither equitable nor directly address public concerns can no longer succeed!
The WTO needs to reform its processes so that trade policy is made in a way that is transparent, fair and balanced.
More work will need to be done over the next few years to reform the existing problems with the WTO's processes and rules.
Anna Reynolds
G'Day Scott,
Bravo! to all the legitimate protesters in Seattle.
BUT!!! Who were the idiots that went around smashing shop fronts and looting private property from hard working small businesses? This did the cause great harm in the eyes of the world.
BUT!!!! I wonder if they were hangers-on who could see the ideal opportunity to cause mayhem and make an easy buck? It would not surprise me to find out that the WTO paid for these thugs to deflect some sympathy their way. They have been known to stoop very low. As Greame Richarson says "What ever it takes!"
Brian
Dear Editor,
On the front page of the 5 Dec 99 Washington Times was a masterpiece of the millennium - a photo of WTO Director-General Mike Moore, International Bureaucrat, ex-Prime Minister of New Zealand - with his head in his hands; over this caption,
"WTO Director-General Mike Moore's countenance reflects the mood of officials after the Seattle session failed."
john hamilton - USA
To THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
Police Headquarters
Brisbane
Peter Gargan
12A Traders Lane
117 Anderson St
Cairns 4870.
6th December 1999.
Dear Sir,
It is a popular belief in the community at large and in certain quarters that the Police Service is acting oppressively and an animosity has grown up between a section of the community and the Police Service which is evidenced by the publication, in newspapers, such as the Courier Mail , of articles critical of the service and the way it operates.
Unfortunately, some of this criticism is legitimate, and it is a real pity that this is so.
In truth, in the scheme of things which we as a society have established for the purpose of governing ourselves, there is no more important and essential institution than the Police Service.
I say this because in 1899, in his wisdom, the then Queensland Attorney General, Sir Samuel Griffiths, persuaded the Queensland Parliament to enact the Criminal Code Act 1899. In 1900 the Constitution came into force, and two of its provisions which are binding upon everyone are sections 117 and 118. Those sections are given the total force of law, throughout Australia as the States and Territories recognition of laws Act 1901. (CTH)
The Constitution is an agreement in writing between the people of Australia and their Queen, is a statute, and is binding upon everyone and enforceable against everyone as a contract. Like every contract it is made in the legal environment existing at the time, and was made subject to certain conditions precedent. Both it and its conditions precedent are binding upon the courts judges, and people of every state by reference to Section 5 of the first part of the preamble to that Act.
The Constitution and any of the conditions precedent may only be changed by a referendum, such as we have just had, for to change the Conditions precedent to the Constitution is to change the Constitution. The Colonial Laws Validity Act 1868, in section 2, sets out the effect of legislation which is repugnant, or invalid, because it offends one of these conditions precedent.
The Queensland Police Service, is more than a group of people designated by the State Government to enforce its laws and collect its fines. It is the ultimate arm of the State holding upon trust, the rights of the citizens of the state to insist upon obedience to the Constitution, its conditions precedent and the laws legally made under it.
There has, with the increase in the overall education of the population at large, come into being a class of people who believe they have the inalienable right to govern, and obey only those laws they think they should have apply to them. Most of these people have been trained in the Universities of the World, and they are taught not to question their masters upon pain of failing to be granted a certificate or degree that will entitle them to earn lots of lovely money. A goodly number of these people have found their way into the Parliaments of the Commonwealth and States, where they have used party discipline and self interest to inflict upon the population at large the will of their philosophies, by passing Acts of Parliament.
Some of those Acts of Parliament are illegal, and passed without meeting the criteria which governs the right of Parliaments to pass laws. The Federal Parliament may, for example only pass laws authorised to be made by it under the Constitution. The Queensland Parliament may only make laws which do not conflict with the Constitution of Queensland and the Colonial Laws binding upon it, when at Federation, the people of Queensland covenanted and agreed that this Constitution shall only be changed by a referendum in Section 128.
Since about 1960, in Queensland, and probably Australia as a whole, the university trained elite have set about subverting the Constitution and perverting the time honoured safeguards against State oppression and guarantees of freedom which were in place at Federation.
Those elites, represented by the likes of Whitlam, Fraser, Hawk and Howard, and Goss and to a lesser extent Beattie, and even Joh Bjellke-Petersen, in his later years when he surrounded himself with advisers , whose common denominator is not membership of a party but a university degree and to a greater extent, the High Court, have been systematically dismantling the system we had in place when I was being taught civil responsibility, in 1955.
Then, Police did not need a pistol to be respected. The Magna Carta was taught in school, and we were taught that we could not be sent to prison without a jury trial on a serious matter. Anything that carried a penalty of less than three months, was regarded as a trivial matter, and a person, could, by election consent to be tried by a Police magistrate in a summary manner, with the right to be tried on indictment if the person so desired.
The Magna Carta is a condition precedent to all deliberations of the Parliament, both State and federal, and to remove all doubt, the Imperial Acts Application Act 1984, was enacted as a declaratory Act, reaffirming its application. Failure to obey its statutory command is a criminal offence, and it is a matter for the Police, not a judge.
The arrest and detention of fine defaulters on an order of the SETONS Court is an act repugnant to the Magna Carta, unlawful, and by Section 2 Colonial Laws Validity Act 1868 cannot confer a lawful power upon a Police Officer who has taken an Oath. That Act binds the Queen and because it binds her, it binds each and every Police Officer who has sworn allegiance to Her. The case is raised in the Sunday Mail ( 5th December) where a person was arrested , strip searched, and detained for 7 hours, upon an order of the SETONS court, without being given an opportunity to give a full and complete account of the circumstances he alleges gave rise to the fine.
No doubt you will point to Sections 247 to 255 of the Criminal Code Act 1899 as justifying the actions of the Police Officer in the case I raise. If you accept you are bound, as an Australian to obey the Constitution and laws made under it, then there is a conflict between the State law and the Federal safeguards to liberty. The Federal law must prevail, and under article 9 subsection 4 and 5 of the ICCPR the man detained and strip searched is entitled to compensation for the unlawful Act of the Police Officer reported in the paper.
A Police Officer has the power, and always had the power not to enforce an Act that is of doubtful validity. If the validity of an Act is in doubt, there is a mechanism provided by the Criminal Code Act 1899, and the Constitution which is a complete answer to any directive given to a Police Officer by a Politician or Act of Parliament. In effect, if it is shown to the satisfaction of a Police Officer who is charged with carrying out the order of a Court, made without a jury, that the order is suspect, the Police Officer has the duty not to enforce it, but to refer it back to the Court making the Order, with a directive that the matter be prosecuted on indictment, under section 204 Criminal Code Act 1899, Failure to obey a statute.
The accused person can consent to the matter being dealt with summarily, but in the case of the young man strip searched, he obviously had a defence on the merits, and his civil rights were severely abused by the arresting officers.
If an Act of Parliament is suspected of being illegal, a jury may refuse to convict upon it. This has always been the case since 1667 when William Penn used the jury system, in England, to resist the attempt by the then King to use the criminal justice system to welch upon a loan. William Penn’s father was a Welsh nobleman who had loaned the King about a four hundred thousand pounds, to fight a war with France. (wages at the time were about sixpence a week).
William Penn was a Quaker and it was illegal by Statute for Quakers to preach. Penn was preaching in the Streets of London and was arrested and charged. If convicted, his property would have been forfeit, but the jury, despite being locked up for two days without food and water in order to coerce them into convicting him, refused to do so.
To pay his debt, the King was then forced to grant Penn lands in America and he was the first landowner in Pennsylvania and its Governor until he died many years later. This right is enshrined in every American Constitution and ours also.
Our Constitution, in Part 5 and Section 109 provides that where a Commonwealth law deals with a matter, and the Commonwealth law is enacted, that law prevails over the relevant State Law.
I draw your attention to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Act 1986 with particular attention to the Schedule 2. There are in place Commonwealth and State Acts entitled Acts Interpretation Acts. In the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), it is enacted, and it is an indictable offence to disobey that Act by reference to Section 204 Criminal Code Act 1899, that a schedule to an Act is part of an Act and substantive law.
Schedule 2 is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and is enacted into Australian domestic law. That law, which the state of Queensland accepts as valid, and which they have assisted and clarified in some respects with the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991, declares the rights of every citizen in a free society.
Article 26. One of those covenants is that every person shall be equal before the law and entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. . It is absolutely essential that no one should be subject to an order unless they had the opportunity to be present and heard.
That clause has wide ranging effects. It means that when a person disagrees with a Police Officer on the side of the road, about the order the Police Officer is trying to enforce, then that person is of equal legal status as the person who made the order and the dispute is one which should be tried between the parties. He can be summonsed, but unless the Police Officer suspects on reasonable grounds, the onus of proving which falls upon the Police officer by Section 200 Criminal Code Act 1899, that the person is or has committed an indictable offence, then no person should be so arrested.
Likewise, whenever a person comes before a magistrate, and the person refuses to acknowledge that the magistrate has jurisdiction to judge him, then the magistrate does not have jurisdiction to judge him, and he must be indicted. There is no doubt a jury has the power to make judgments. The same must apply to all judges, both State and Federal. That must include the judges of even the High Court, because the law says, all persons are equal before the law, the right to be adjudged by ones peers was a condition precedent to the Constitution. Just as a person may challenge an array in a jury trial, any person may refuse to be judged by a judge alone.
It is enacted into Statute by section 51, Supreme Court Act 1995 and the duties of judge and jury are enacted in Section 259, that a judge may try questions of fact, only after consent in writing. That applies to all civil proceedings. Any judgment so made or obtained can have no basis in law, as it is repugnant to the law giving jurisdiction to a court, and should not have to be obeyed. It certainly should not be enforced by Police Officers.
In Australia, unlike the USA, civil courts are in the habit of imposing costs orders against unsuccessful litigants. The awarding of costs orders are not lawful, because they discriminate against persons who cannot afford to pay costs orders. If a jury were to award damages equal to the cost of litigation to a successful party, they would be legal, but the awarding of costs by a judge who has no consent from the party to make them, must constitute a breach of the Covenant and be illegal.
In the same vein, the making of Clause 11 in the Australia Act 1986 as worded, must be illegal, because that Act takes away the right of every citizen to appeal to the Queen in Council. That was a condition precedent to the Constitution. It cannot be taken away without a referendum. Having said that, the insertion of the words of the United Kingdom into that Act would make it lawful, as there is a Queen in Council in every Australian state and the Commonwealth.
The question is, How do we fix up this monumental tidal wave of lawlessness sweeping our proud land. I say it is in your hands. Every citizen under Commonwealth law has the right to take a proceeding for the commitment to trial of any offender against the laws of the Commonwealth by reference to section 13 Crimes Act 1914.
With the passage of the States and Territories recognition of laws Act 1901, the Criminal Code Act 1899 became federal law. Whenever a citizen sees a law that is being broken, no matter by whom, he has the right under the law to see that person prosecuted.
In the event that a citizen feels so strongly about a law, which he believes has been or is being broken, that he believes it should be prosecuted, then there is provision that the citizen may swear a complaint on oath. Upon delivery of such a complaint to a Police Station, or Police Officer, it is the public duty of the Police Officer to do one of two things.
If the complaint is of a frivolous nature, the Police Officer has a duty to indict the complainant, under the Oaths Act 1868, and have him committed for trial for putting the Judicial power of the state in motion, upon a false oath. A jury will then decide, and if the complainant is being a nuisance, he can have some time in one of Her Majesty’s gaols to consider his position.
If the complaint is one which is not of a frivolous nature, but raises a justiciable dispute which requires resolution then it is the duty, of the Police Officer, if everyone is to be treated equally, to accord the citizen the respect due to him as one of Her Majesty’s subjects and have a summons issued in Her Majesty’s name, to have the accused answer the charge. In no case should a Police Officer make a preliminary judgment, prejudicial to any citizen.
I have left out reference to the word vexatious, much beloved of judges and lawmakers, because all prosecutions are vexatious to someone, especially lawbreakers.
Minorities and special interest groups can and do, from time to time get to hold a gun to the heads of governments, and governments, for expediency sometimes grant requests for regulations and Orders in council, or pass Acts, to benefit a special group that may be prejudicial to one section of the community and advantage another. That is the situation which a fair, impartial and independent Police Service is designed to prevent arising, and provide a fair and inexpensive remedy for, when it does.
When a minority is oppressed by a law, and that law is seen by them to be unjust, and no way is seen by the minority to get justice, then the natural instincts of almost every person in the world is to take whatever action is necessary to get justice. In the Family Court it extended, for a while to dynamite. In every case, it leads to disturbances of the peace. Anything that tends to disturb the quiet enjoyment of the peace by all citizens, is a Police matter.
I think it can be fairly said, in the light of the contents of this letter, that you, and the Police Force as a whole, are without a doubt the most important and essential element in this democracy we enjoy. You are charged, under the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 1990 with the responsibility of enforcing the Criminal Code Act 1899 and the law generally. I would be delighted if it were to come to pass that the Police regained the total respect of the Community at large to such an extent that it was no longer necessary for them to wear guns.
You can do this by requiring everyone who makes a complaint to you, to make the complaint on Oath, swearing to its honesty and accuracy, and enforcing that honesty, and prosecuting, one way or another every complaint sworn and presented to you, irrespective of the merits you see in the case. You must, after all be seen as impartial, and absolutely free from prejudice. To his credit, your minister expressed his opinion to me that this is no less than what he expects from the Queensland Police service.
Violence usually only erupts because there is seen to be no way other than fists or guns to get justice.
Kind Regards
Peter Alexander Gargan.
Copies to
Chairman The CJC, Chairperson CJC Committee, Queensland Parliament
Liz Cunningham MLA , Peter Wellington MLA, Shaun Nelson MLA
Senator Leonard Harris
The Honourable Tom Barton MLA.
The Courier mail.
The Cairns Post
from the global office:
Another perfect day in paradise.
Have a good one.
exclusive to
(how to)
subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day:
News of the Day
hacked - 3rd December 1999
Balson's trip to
Sydney - 26th to 29th November 1999
Whiteside calls
for a Royal Commission into One Nation - 25th November 1999
The One Nation
Appeal - 23rd November 1999
Ettridge's
Whiteant list and
Whiteant
Alan Esson speaks out - 20th November 1999
Balson banned from
One Nation meetings in New South Wales - 15th November 1999
Balson resigns
as One Nation Web Master - 5th November 1999
Is David Oldfield
fair dinkum? - 3rd November 1999
The Courier-Mail's
lies - 1st November 1999
The Republic
Debate - 10th October 1999
The National Young Writer's
Festival - Newcastle - 30th September to 4th October
The Patriotic Movement
forum - 26th September 1999
The Multilateral Farce
- DFAT and WTO - 22nd September 1999
The Victorian
State Elections - 18th September 1999
1999 One Nation
Queensland State AGM - 4/5 September 1999
Return to Australian
Daily Issues paper
