Friday 17th December 1999
This on-line paper is now archived for perpetuity in the National Library of Australia
Friday
17th 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
The most extraordinary paradox in modern Australian political history has got to be the structure, financial control and management of Pauline Hanson's One Nation Limited - the body which controls Pauline Hanson's One Nation - a party presented as the "people's party".
The people's party, which never was, has only ever had three members. A nice, cosy little clique master minded by a man, David Ettridge, who has had questionable business dealings in the past. All this is on the public record - so there is certainly no attempt at "manufacturing the truth" when I say this.
The management of the "people's party" has been quite simple. The high and popular profile of Pauline Hanson has been effectively used time and time again to drown out any complaints or concerns about the management by Manly during a time of rising discontent. All she has to say is "I completely trust the two Davids" and the members were expected to go back into their corners and tear up their burning questions.
A strategy which was so simple yet so successful.
Many wonderful people have come and gone - lost to the cause... the people's cause - while the flawed and exclusive domain within the boundaries of the company has remained like a fortress against all sensible argument and falling credibility. The remaining five Queensland MPs being the latest to fall on the sword of the unbending Manly autocracy.
I confess, like so many I was completely sucked into the time and motion of the mood that was presented. Maybe it was Pauline Hanson rightfully complaining about the media that acted as such an effective blindfold... I don't know - but all the while the two Davids sat quietly in the background like hit men protecting their prize... the people's voice.
The people's voice which many now believe is captive, for reasons yet unknown, within the secretive world of Pauline Hanson's One Nation Limited. If that is the case, which I now accept it is, Hanson is no longer the voice of the people and, sadly, never was.
Those who have spoken out about the fears and worries that so many party members feel are exterminated like white ants by expulsion and, where required, a letter of ridicule from the pen of David Ettridge to the confidential membership list - a list which is not even provided to certain state executives in Australia.
Behind these secretive walls in Manly lies another more sinister murky world which, to me, symbolises why this people's party never was.
Money.
Millions of dollars have gone through the books at Manly. We know for a fact that Champions Magazine Pty Ltd, David Ettridge's management company, has made a proverbial killing when it comes to money received.
When I joined this people's party the last thing in my mind was the desire to get rich off the back of it. I worked tirelessly for the cause - not because of Hanson but because of what she stood for - the issues.
As one of ten members of the 500 Club launched at the first birthday party in April 1998 - I and nine others freely gave $500. I handed over $5,000, largely in cash, to Ettridge not because we were feeling generous but because we believed so strongly in the cause - I had been told by Ettridge earlier that the event was a financial disaster and that Manly would have problems paying the bills. (I instigated the club on the spur of the moment).
About half of the members of the 500 Club are now "white ants" according to Ettridge. People like Helen Dodd, Barbara Hazelton and Colene Hughes who dug deep, like me, to help the party. I have got to tell you that I could not afford the donation but I gave because I believed.
Just hours later Ettridge asked me to witness a most numbing event. He handed over hundred dollar bills in cash - without getting a receipt from a representative of the band. Some $1,500 in notes originating from the 500 Club. In my naivety I never thought that the process was a trifle irregular - it is only now that I reflect on what took place and think.... here is a man who has questionable business practices - as determined by the Supreme Court - who I had just handed thousands of dollars in cash who now let the money go without first putting it through the books.
Interestingly, one of the ten members of the 500 Club, Jack Struber, complained to me many months later because he was unable to get a receipt from Manly for the money that he had so freely handed over that day. It was only eight or nine months later - after the Federal Election - that I eventually got a receipt.
So while the "white ants" were freely giving Ettridge's Champions was freely taking..... and now the books are a closed shop with members not allowed to know the truth.
For God's sake wake up! How can this be a people's party when you have this sort of management of funds, finances and people going on?
I suggest that the Mackay's, Zarths's and Lebedinsky's of this world recognise that we all sit on the same side of the fence when it comes to issues but when it comes to the dictatorship called One Nation that is a completely different issue.
One Nation never has been a people's party and unless the 2D Factor is removed and the structure changed it never will be.
While the Queensland MPs have a big job ahead of them there is no doubt that most of the people have woken up and will follow this party where true democracy will flourish.
COMPERE: In Queensland the new rebel One Nation Party will face its first electoral test sooner than anyone imagined. The resignation of Labor's Tourism Minister, Bob Gibbs, late yesterday has forced a by-election in his State seat of Bundama near Ipswich.
It has sparked speculation of a showdown between two of Ipswich's most prominent citizens, Pauline Hanson and Heather Hill who will now represent opposite sides of a divided One Nation party.
From Brisbane Gerald Tooth reports.
GERALD TOOTH: The Seat of Bundama is based on the urban corridor between Brisbane and Ipswich. It's up for grabs after Labor's Tourism Minister, Bob Gibbs, resigned to take up a posting as Queensland's North American Trade Commissioner.
The move eliminates Peter Beattie's one seat majority. Technically returning his administration to minority government until the yet to be announced date of the by-election. And, as ALP State Secretary Mike Kaiser points out, the result is by no means a certainty.
MIKE KAISER: This is a seat where One Nation got 44% of the two party preferred vote only 18 months ago. The Labor Party can't take this by-election for granted. It's got to work hard and we've got to get onto the ground quickly.
GERALD TOOTH: What is certain is that the State Branch of One Nation is looking prophetic this morning. On Monday its five Queensland MPs announced a party name change to overcome their court ordered de-registration so they could compete in possible forthcoming by-elections under a common banner. On Tuesday the Government announced the by-election. It's enough to make one suspicious of a conspiracy.
One Nation Queensland Leader, Bill Feldman.
BILL FELDMAN: Well, we got wind that there's going to be at least three by-elections coming up within the next three months. And we knew that we had to move and had to move quickly.
GERALD TOOTH: Will you be running a candidate in Bob Gibb's old seat of Bundama?
BILL FELDMAN: Well, it's certainly going to be our intention, Gerald, to run somebody in that seat. We would love to run them under the banner of One Nation Queensland, and take the fight up as One Nation. But if we're going to find that our national executive are going to appeal against us using that name, it's going to be obvious that we're probably going to have to look at perhaps registering another name so that we can take up the fight in that electorate.
GERALD TOOTH: So with the holy water not even dry on the head of the newly christened One Nation Queensland, it's already destined to grow up with another name. National Director of Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party, David Ettridge, is promising there will be legal action against the current title.
DAVID ETTRIDGE: It is an infringement of trade mark and there are a lot of commercial remedies available to us, or legal remedies. The other one is that they would be passing off themselves to be One Nation and they would seek to trade on the goodwill and established reputation in that name that One Nation has. They'd be very foolish to embark on that course.
COMPERE: David Ettridge of the original One Nation.
Making the
news" -
Scott, just for the record. I wrote EVERY word of THE maiden speech and the details are well covered in my book (Pauline Hanson, by the man who knows) - Chapter 17, P 93, "The Maiden Speech - Conception and Gestation." There were 5 drafts on floppy discs 1-5 and these are in my possession along with briefing notes and some handwritten notes from Pauline containing points that she wished to have included in the speech and most of them were included.
All this material will end up in the Canberra Archives. You may wish to archive chapter 17 for easy reference.
John Pasquarelli
John
Your comments have been added to the maiden speech in my archives.
Editor
A 16th Century proverb says: "Like mother, like daughter."
The message from Heather's mum, Joyce to her daughter just proves those words.
Obviously, they share many of the same qualities.
"The deepest relationship of all is that which exists between mother and
child. It is the most fundamental of all human bonds."
It saddened me, and I'm sure many others, to read that Pauline spoke to Heather in such a fashion. Regrettably, I must say that I am not entirely surprised that Pauline 'lost it.'
Heather is standing by her beliefs and the people she has faith in. For that fact alone, she certainly has my respect.
Shon
Hi Scott,
Mrs Rafe's letter yesterday shocked me. I am so amazed that Pauline could treat Heather so appallingly. Pauline and Heather have been close friends for a long time, for Pauline to take David Oldfield's word alone and not give Heather a fair hearing is incredible.
It is so similar to the treatment Brett Hocking received from Len Harris. It seems, Oldfield's conduct towards decent people is rubbing off.
When it's the 2 Davids turn, to go, I can only pray the treatment they receive will be just as vicious. But this time, it will have been deserved.
Robyn M
This is my reply to all the letters on @notd 16/10/99
My Reply to the Mysterious "RTW",
One Nation accounts are for members only, @notd is not the proper forum for them to be displayed, I don't see any other party publicly advertising there Profit & Loss Statements. Even if I had a personal copy, I wouldn't send them to Scott Balson, he is no longer a member. If you are a current financial member of Pauline Hanson's One Nation, all you need to do is contact the National Office and ask. This is not a difficult thing, and I'm sure you'll find that the QLD Office would have a copy.
As for my Email address, I still have my zarth@starplace.com address, but I now have my own domain so it's only fitting that I use it's email address, email me at either address if you wish. And No! I'm not hiding, Scott knows it, that's why my email address is the only one on display in the letters to the editor, Scott doesn't want to have that level of credibility in his gutter trash mag. Hackers? what does an email address have to do with Hackers? please tell me, it sounds interesting.....
Reply to Alex Littlemore Fact # 1, I have never met David Oldfield other than at a One Nation Fund Raising Function, I have never seen his Office, I don't even know where he lives.
Fact # 2, The Profit & Loss Statements have already been scrutinised by the Australian Electoral Commission, if you personally want it scrutinised again, are you prepared to pay for qualified auditors to go through it all again.
If you have read my previous letters to @notd, you would see that I myself state that Oldfield is not perfect, and everybody makes mistakes. And yes I have sprung to his defence several times, because @notd has been publishing crap and you've believed it.
Brian Zarth
Hacking
For the record Brian Zarth is the only person who has ever had access to the password on my earlier @notd web site at gwbnews.com.au. I gave it to him on the basis that if I was unable to update the news another regular @notd correspondent would forward him material which he would put up.
We, in fact, trialled this successfully on more than one ocassion.
I have absolutely no doubt that Zarth was involved in the hacking on this page. The comments made by him or by others on the 3rd December this year - which he put up on the @notd - reflect a sick, twisted mind. They included confidential details about my company's contract fee paid by Manly. Information released by Manly. Why can't Manly use the same open book approach on payments made to Chanpions Magazine?
I am challenging Zarth to refute with a clear conscience that he had nothing to do with this sick attempt of intimidation.
I call a spade a spade and you, Brian, are sick - and this letter from the Federal Police reveals that you are not off the hook yet.
Editor
Hi Scott, and Len (who I called at office and mobile, but left messages)
When you wrote "This is democracy gone mad", it implied democracy was used to fire Heather Hill (and Brett).
My push for democracy (and secret ballots) is because it is the proven way to get difficult decisions WITHOUT such harm as you describe. If some version of democracy was used to fire Heather Hill and Brett, I, and no doubt others, would like to know how, and what went wrong?
Even if democracy was NOT used to fire them, then we can all learn the lessons, and apply them to make the difficult decisions which lie ahead. This includes reviving our subverted federal democracy, which is hurting many Australians so much. Broadcasting is a key element of this. Hence my attached e-mail to Justin at Channel 10.
Last month I wrote that I believe you hold one of the keys to re-building of a 'white-ant free' democratic movement in Queensland, and that the others are held by Bill and Len. It can still be true if democracy is used not abused by leaders (like you, Bill and Len), to make the difficult decisions which lie ahead for Queensland supporters. As the Democrats know this is not easy, and you may be widely criticized if you try, and look like succeeding. Which brings me back to my push for democracy and secret ballots.
Regards, and looking forward to either of your replies - by phone is fine
Jim Stewart
This is a line from @not that was disturbing me all day long. Now I know why. I believe that while Heather Hill was busy fighting her good friend Chuck in courts, a number of One Nation members rightly supported Heather with donations to help cover her legal expences. It is just possible that this sum of money is now used against One Nation, by the many practising accontants on this forum,as being unaccounted for or "missing". In the interest of fair play could we find from Heather what was the amount Heather recieved from those supporters and members. Who knows, maybe it is the "missing millions"?
Martin Lebedinsky
Bruce -
you are in for a big let down the second time. Do you seriously think you can separare Pauline Hanson from the two Davids. Time for a reality check Bruce. Pauline Hanson has left a trail of devastation where she did not stand up for people she should have stood up for. She has delivered proxy votes and destoyed people at the behest of the 2Ds. You yourself didn't fare too well. She has backed Oldfield and Ettridge when she knew they were wrong . She has witnessed branch closures when she knew damn well what the issues were about. She has remained silent when people have unfairly been labelled white ants. She must know only too well what our financial situation is and that people want to see the books. She is complicit in the three tier structure of the party and the $80.000 constitution. I could go on and on.
Bruce I know you would like to turn the clock back with Pauline and your support movement, but time does not stand still. Pauline has changed and Austalia has changed. The people you mentioned are most certainly not carpetbaggers they are the best Aussies you will ever find, dinkum to the core.
Heather Hill has guts like Hanson used to, Heather Hill is honest, Heather Hill has integrity. Our party is full of top talent who are being kept down because of the structure and paranoia. Anyway, there is no going back to the past because the past is just that. It's not there anymore. We have to move on to the future. We have some fantastic people waiting to come up through the ranks and sweep us into power.
Eric
Peter in your defence of Len Harris it must be said no matter how you found him his treatment of Brett Hocking was not in line with your description of him.
First the fellow was accused of wrong doing and then not allowd to know what it was about so that he could answer in his own defence. Peter it sounds like a denial of natural justice, what do you think.
I, like you was very impressed by Len in Parliament and his Christian stance on some issues and I'm sure you were impressed when you met him on a personal basis. But Peter his treatment of Brett Hocking may give you a more candid view of the inner workings of the man.
Maybe Peter you would like to investigate more in the Brett Hocking affair and give us a report after speaking to both Len and Brett and Heather and any other staff that doesn't feel intmidated or threatened.
Ron Taylor
Peter McKay, erstwhile Canberra correspondent, wrote(amongst other things)in yesterday's @notd:
>But over the last few weeks I have been
>appalled at the direction you have taken.
>Rather than provide the independent views I
>value, you are now trying to make the news
>rather than report it.
@notd is all about free speech. The letters stand or fall by the arguments therein. People should be able to judge these things on their own merits. This notwithstanding, Scott has provided a plethora of material over the last couple of months outlining the 2D crisis. I can't recall you taking issue with any of this before. Or don't you like people calling a spade a backhoe? You could, for instance, start with the letter in yesterday's @notd from Arthur, of Victoria, outlining the atrocious situation pre- and post- the Victorian election. Can you dispute any of his claims? Or are you just going to take issue with his 'language'?
>Some of the comments you make and especially
>the letters you give exposure to are the purest
>and most spiteful rubbish that would be better
>off in the Courier Mail or the Green Left
>Weekly.
That's a laugh! It is doubtful if any of the people who regularly write to @notd would qualify for a mention in those Marxist, globalist rags! In case you hadn't noticed, there is such a thing as _media bias_ in this country....as outlined by Scott in his book, 'Murder by Media'.
>I have worked with Len Harris and Heather Hill
>and I admire and respect both of them
>immensely. Heather made a difficult choice and
>I for one will not criticise her for doing so.
>She is a courageous and lovely lady, and I
>know that she has the best interests of
>Australia at heart.My heart goes out to her
>for all that she has suffered over the last
>year or so.
Most, if not all, of the @notd readers support Heather 100% too and are pained by the outrageous shenanigans she has had to endure courtesy of the scum of the Laboral Party . So what?
>But I cannot listen to some of the ignorant
>criticism directed at Senator Len Harris. Len
>is an honest man, a true Christian, a tireless
>worker, and above all, a man of the utmost
>integrity. I am sure that the decision to let
>Heather go was made after days of soul
>searching and attempts to find a compromise,
>but in the end he could not employ a political
>advisor from what was now a different
>political party.
Have you got any proof of how or why he made this decision? Perhaps we should be hearing from the gentleman in question on this? He may be well be a Christian, and this may bear directly on his honesty and integrity. However, it says nothing about whether or not he can or cannot be duped,misled or tricked by others of lesser integrity and honesty.
>As ever, I judge a situation by the level of
>argument used by both sides, and the views of
>many supporting the new party are full of
>hatred, spite and downright lies. Not all,
>but many. I know some of the behind the scenes
>details and I find that you are participating
>in misrepresenting the true situation. I
>cannot willingly be a party to this deception.
If you know the behind-the-scenes details: let's have them. If you're able to refute some or all of the material Scott has posted up on this matter: do it! Put up or shut up!
>Please remove my name from your website as
>your Canberra Correspondent. I have been
>honoured to be part of News of the Day in the
>past, but no longer.
Deary, teary me! How sensitive we are! You have just as much right as anyone else to be heard in this forum: no more, no less. I can't recall seeing you refute any of the (well substantiated) allegations that Scott has made over the last several weeks. Why is that, Peter? Please explain!
**I _can_ recall, however, from some of your debates on aus.politics., of you being wonky on a N0 of issues, that would seem to put you out-of-kilter with a large % of the ONP support base (past and current).
One that springs readily to mind is: firearms. I distinctly remember a N0 of non-ONP contributors to that forum wondering aloud if you were _in fact_ an ONP supporter, considering your pretty virulent anti-gun attitude and support of Johnny Coward's Gun Grab. I also seem to recall that when people started posting material from reputable academic sources that refuted most, if not all, of the anti-gun loons' arguments, you bowed out of the debate. Needless to say, the anti-gun loons are also anti- most, if not all, ONP policies. You should be more careful of the company you keep. People may get the wrong idea!**
----
cheers!
(jimbo)
As a reader of your column and other letters published on @notd it saddens me to read your letter of resignation.
Without sounding too patronising I can truthfully say I have enjoyed reading your articles and respected your opinions on a range of issues.
We appear to have reached some sort of intellectual watershed where previously like minded individuals have arrived at a distinct parting of the ways in their opinions and perceptions. How can some of us think we are so right, when others think we are so wrong?
It puts me in mind of a management seminar I attended years ago. I was to burst into the conference room wearing a mask and wielding an iron bar shouting a given line, "Give me the money!!!…Give me the money!!!". The plan was to repeat the demand twice, stand still for five seconds and then bolt out of the room.
Each member in the room was then interviewed separately and asked to give a written account of what took place. These were reasonably intelligent people, and it was nothing short of amazing to be shown how much their versions of events varied. From my physical description, the colour of my clothes, the weapon I was carrying, to the words I actually shouted.
The point I am making is that all the members present genuinely believed their version of events was the correct one. However without exception all members got at least part of their statement wrong, a lot got it completely wrong. When they were presented with the original script (the facts) they had to grudgingly admit they were mistaken. It is simply a matter of perception.
I would have believed on the evidence before the Supreme court alone, anybody capable of rational thought would have seen there is something seriously amiss, not only with the administration of the party, but with the highly questionable agenda of the national executive.
It is obvious you don't agree, so who is right and who is wrong?
Only time, and a lot more research will tell.
Ken Hunter
Hi Scott,
Well it seems to me like I overestimated you Scott. I think you need a holiday. It is quite plain to me from today's press and from what I've so far read of today's @notd that Pauline wishes to keep her present party intact. So be it. I am a Pauline Hanson supporter, and will wait and watch to see who "She" says is a white ant thankyou very much.
You said that you and Pauline remained friends. Well friends talk to each other, so why don't 'you' speak to her before you further stray from the path of reason.
Try and Have a Nice Day Anyway.
David Morgan.
Many contributors including Scott forgot that the
party is
1. Pauline Hanson's One Nation party
2. Pauline Hanson's One Nation is the owner of the name "One Nation" (as we know channel 9 tried to register that name long time ago without success)
3. All the candidates were elected on the back of a maiden speech made by Pauline Hanson and those include Heather Hill, David Oldfield, Len Harris
4. Only David Oldfield and Len Harris still remember fact 3.
5. It was David Oldfield's pre-election strategy that resulted in 11 Queenslanders being elected to Queensland Parliament under the banner Pauline Hanson's One Nation
What happened to those eleven people's memory? Sorry, ten people's memory?
Martin Lebedinsky
One thing you can say about Scott Balson is that he prints the good with the bad. He will print an article if it disagrees with him or tips the bucket over him.
In contrast, Manly is right into censorship big time. Articles not being allowed to be printed in local branch newsletters. Newsletters to be sent to Manly for supression of freedom of expression. People labelled whiteants for having a point of view that differs from that of the Dictatorship.When Manly wants to put forward some of their propaganda on Scott's web site he allows it, even when it is an attack on him. The 2d hypocrites don't reciprocate. They either refuse legitimate expression in newsletters, ban people from meetings, threaten or intimidate.
Membership lists are withheld from state executive membership. Financial records are withheld or released in part (not the Part you want). In short, they expect what they don't give. These guys are not fair dinkum. They are not about democracy or accountabilty, transparency, freedom of speech, freedom of association and the equality of all. You can see what they are about, just watch them.
Bryson
Hi Scott,
Pauline Hanson has lost my support. After what she did to Robyn Spencer and now Heather Hill, has put her right down in my estimations. Her policies might be OK but her integrity is seriously in question.
I dont want to vote for someone who might sell us out if we got into government. Look at what Meg Lees did with the GST. Hanson's not standing up to the two Davids has shown her duplicity or weakness. Both of which is unacceptable as Party Leader.
Pauline has walked down the wrong track and is so deeply entrenched with the 2D's there is no saving her. To have said that three weeks ago was unthinkable but she have now been judged by her actions.
Adam
Scott,
In a letter that David Ettridge wrote recently he said One Nation was formed to give effect to the will of the Australian people.
Well the will of the people at the state branch meeting at Lake Eppalock Vic was to vote in Robyn Spencer. Now Pauline Hanson and David Ettridge don't believe in the will of the people as was shown by the use of their proxy votes to overturn the will of the people and sack Robyn.
Pauline Hanson, David O and David E have no honour or decency. People are just there to be used and thrown aside when it does not suit their ruthless ambitions. How much evidence do the blind biased apologists want, it is their blinkered support that has let them get away with this. It is they who have sold the party out. It is people like that, that have let the Liberal and Labor Party get away with their outrageous sham for years. No matter what they did the blinkered party loyals would defend them .
Blind loyalty is what political parties have been exploiting this for years.
What a powerful weapon this has been for them. It is the number one cause of why we are where we are today. It makes me sick.
Cyril
Pauline Hanson is paid by Manly Head Office which is supposed to be very short of Members funds. Was Heather Hill sacked so that Pauline Hanson could be put on the Government payroll as part of Len Harris's staff? I will bet anything that's where Pauline will go.
This Party seems to be a business for their individual benefit, three very power hungery individuals. The Party would impload without them - what a load of rubbish.
Ed Baker
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:
Hill and Hocking
sacked by Senator Harris - 14th December 1999
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
The meeting of
Paff's members in Ipswich West - breaking news of the new party - 21st
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
