by CAA | Oct 27, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
27th October 2021
The latest Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission (IBAC) Special Report of Operation Turon into the activities of former Assistant Police Commissioner Brett Guerin is an extraordinary paradox.
Operation Turon lives up to its name, ‘Sliced bananas or other fruit rolled in a thin layer of pastry and deep-fried, served as a dessert or snack’ an apt description of the outcome of this investigation as far as Guerin is concerned, but leaves the victims wondering, ‘what does somebody have to do to be held to account?’
In his response to the IBAC report, Guerin showed little contrition for his behaviour. Throughout the report, as in his response, the Victims of this despicable behaviour did not receive any acknowledgement, let alone an apology from IBAC or, more pointedly, the Victoria Police.
That no criminal charges were laid is very concerning. At the time of his worst trolling, he was the Assistant Commissioner in charge of the Police Professional Standards Command (PSC) responsible for Police internal investigation. This certainly aggravated the behaviour substantially.
At the very least, a clear-cut breach of
Section 474.17(1) of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) (“the Code”), a person commits an offence if they use a carriage service in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, menacing, harassing or offensive. The “service” can include a fixed or mobile telephone service, an internet service, or an intranet service.
Additionally, there would seem to be another clear-cut case of,
Misconduct in Public Office applicable to at least the first reported complaint.
But of gravest concern to the CAA is the apparent lack of application of investigative skills to this Operation that is neither explained nor addressed. And the continued references to Assistant Commissioner Brett Guerin throughout the report is disingenuous.
Guerin lost his title the day he resigned. It is clear he would rather resign than face the humiliation he deserved. He ran to avoid accountability, and he should never have been allowed to retire.
It’s probably more interesting to look at what the investigation did not discover or what was not reported.
Guerin’s behaviour came to official notice when a complaint was lodged with VicPol and referred to IBAC in 2017.
We understand that a complaint was made by a Blogger who had identified the ISP numbers from a number of trolls by the Guerin pseudonym Vernon Demerest.
The blogger had identified one of the numbers as registered to Victoria Police Centre (VPC) and the other to a private address we presume to be Guerin’s.
VicPol, in the referral to IBAC, would indeed have included this information, or did they? Surely competent investigators would have spoken to all complainants and discovered the ISP addresses, if not passed on, or did they?
However, instead of investigating the matter, IBAC referred the case back to VicPol and surprise, surprise, it was referred to the then Assistant Commissioner Guerin, the head of Police Professional Standards (PSC). He could then investigate himself.
A response was sent to the complainant that there are hundreds of computers in VPC, and it would be impossible to identify who uses which computer.
That little gem we would have thought crossed the line into criminality, Misconduct in Public Office by Guerin, but not according to IBAC.
The not insignificant point that all police computers have to be logged on with a user ID escaped the detecting minds of those charged with that responsibility.
That IBAC did not find evidence that Guerin’s trolling and the vile racist, homophobic, etcetera trolls affected his decision making is extraordinary; obviously, they didn’t look too hard.
Reference was made to an incident that severe racially motivated rants at a police station abusing a senior sergeant’s ethnicity was somehow okay because Guerin said that it was. Guerin said it was taken out of context.
Somehow self-serving statements by a perpetrator are acceptable to be reported and relied upon – IBAC was conned.
That incident ended up with a substantial civil settlement to the Senior Sergeant.
Reading the report, other omissions are unbelievable.
There was the matter of a venue operator of ethnic heritage who was publicly shamed and libelled by Guerin on mainstream media. A Court in that case found in favour of the venue operator against the State (Guerin).
CAA is also aware of another settlement where racism was alleged by an applicant before a selection panel where Guerin was the convenor. Evidence was forwarded to VicPol that showed dishonesty and unprofessionalism by Guerin in the conduct of the selection. A human rights complaint was made. Again, this resulted in a significant settlement that VicPol had to pay.
So, there we have three non-Anglo’s suffering at the hands of Guerin’s decision making, coincidence? I don’t think so. It is a pattern of demonstrated criminal behaviour obviously ignored by IBAC.
The involvement of the CAA in this matter was that we identified the troll as Guerin. Not IBAC or VicPol.
Pilloried by former Chief Commissioner Graeme Ashton, Guerin, and another former Assistant Commissioner Fryer, the rhetoric espoused by Fryer in relation to the CAA and its Chairman Kel Glare appeared in written form under the name of Brett Guerin on our Facebook page.
The diatribe lasted only a short time before it was deleted when Guerin realised his mistake. Recorded by us before deletion, we were amazed to find another post within minutes with the identical diatribe, but under the name of Vernon Demerest, Guerin had blown it. What an idiot,
We had already advised Demerest that we knew it was a Police member and warned the author that the name would be blocked if the trolling continued.
With Guerin’s absurd behaviour, we delightfully responded to Demerest,’ We know who you are. It is a matter of professional standards. We doubt that Guerin would have been too concerned as he had already dodged the bullet once and would be confident his position would protect him.
This exposure was followed by a series of letters to the Chief Commissioner reporting the extent of the trolling, given that we had contact with a number of victims.
Had the CAA not identified Guerin, the trolling would have doubtless continued
Our correspondence of the 12th of April 2017 fell on conveniently deaf ears. We didn’t even receive acknowledgements, let alone any comfort the matter was being addressed.
With apparent inaction by authorities, working with investigative journalist Cameron Houston of the Age, who in turn Neil Mitchell of 3AW, the Chief Commissioner, was asked about the trolling on air, and his response was to dismiss the matter as trivial. Somebody was getting a bit excited on a keyboard.
Guerin was then exposed and came onto the Mitchell Show to admit his trolling and dismiss it as trivial.
The following day Houston wrote a detailed article exposing the extent and the content of the vile trolling. All the significant media mastheads ran the headline about Guerin’s exposure.
The next day Guerin resigned.
The IBAC investigation looks very ordinary when the facts are disclosed, particularly those omitted in their report.
The other glaring anomaly in the IBAC report is the gloss over of the length of time Guerin was trolling for the better part of a decade.
IBAC expects the people of Victoria to accept that a person can troll for that long, espousing the most vial references without them being what the perpetrator thinks? Does it seem IBAC may be accepting that the Guerin ultra-ego is somehow a different person?
Very convenient for the perpetrator and very concerning that this stuff can perhaps sway our Corruption Watchdog.
The other great anomaly in this investigation is that no real or reported effort was made to track down the other players in this artifice.
We are expected to believe that Guerin did not have other sympathisers, barrackers or willing recipients of his work egging him on. We are not that naive.
It is beyond reasonable belief that others were not identified given IBAC had access to all Guerin’s electronic devices, and each transmission sent or received leaves a footprint. Maybe IBAC investigators need some internet training.
It gives us no comfort at all as we have never discounted a theory of an ultraright wing enclave within VicPol fed by Guerin’s rants.
The reality is there is every chance of a ‘Jedi Council’. It has certainly not been discounted.
We have drawn the obvious conclusion that our so-called Corruption Watchdog is lucky to come up with a whimper, but we note they are pretty good at getting a conviction for pillow talk.
Unfortunately, the IBAC is largely a paper tiger when it comes to matters of substance, such as the ICook Foods, Slug-Gate fiasco
by CAA | Oct 20, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
20th October 2021
The Opinion piece by Deputy Police Commissioner Rick Nugent in the Herald Sun on the 19th of October 2021 sets out the extraordinary and successful efforts that Victoria Police is applying to Youth Gang crime.
In so far as the effort is targeted from when a young person first comes to police notice, the work is very commendable but disappointing in its sphere of influence.
The CAA has long argued that by the time a child comes to police notice irrespective of the resources that may then be applied, for far too many, the prognosis for that child is that they will become a recidivist. The cycle is entrenched in them.
In short, ‘The horse has bolted’.
For every young person targeted and effectively removed from a gang either by sanctions or otherwise, a long line of willing aspirants anxiously waiting to fill the voids created.
Understanding and accepting that all young people are and quite properly aspirational is the key. It is a matter of guiding or influencing those aspirations characterised as ‘achieving social prestige and or material success’.
Therefore, the efforts of the Victoria Police in this context are too late. The more significant effect will be achieved if the contact is with the young people before entering the scene and coming to Police notice. We do not encourage the lessening of the operational efforts currently underway; they are essential.
The problem with the gang issue is cultural, and we do not mean culture based on ethnicity, although that may appear to be the case. The point is the culture of misdirected aspirations. And the solution, police having positive interactions with young people before aspirations influence their negative behaviours.
This will reduce the gang culture dramatically by addressing the supply side. It will also positively impact the crime and antisocial behaviour of teenagers more broadly.
We accept that the resource drain on Victoria Police during the Covid pandemic has been astronomical. Therefore, we understand the need not to pursue the Police In School Program (PISP) previously announced by the Chief Commissioner. It would have been pointless as schools went in and out of lockdown. However, as we come out of this pandemic, we would be encouraging the Chief Commissioner to re-establish that commitment so schools can plan their involvement.
While a PISP adequately resourced will have a positive influence, this will not occur overnight; the original programs influence after the closure took a number of years to bleed out of the system; similarly, the reintroduction will take time to have an effect. If past experience is any guide, the time frame of impact by the reintroduction will be relatively short.
Although the PISP was the cornerstone of Police influence on young people, many of the programs that have been mothballed also need to be revisited and built-in support of the schools’ program to increase its effectiveness.
Examples like the Blue Light Program have a role to play. Although there is some argument the core activity is not as popular as it was, that assumption is incorrect as the commercial sector, before Covid, had developed a market for underage Disco’s that they had trouble accommodating due to their popularity.
Blue Light Disco’s support and coordination with the PSIP program will have a dramatic and positive effect.
by CAA | Oct 20, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
20th October 2021
The premier, Daniel Andrews, announced a new law recently – all those on a long list of private and public employees would have to be vaccinated or lose their jobs. The list included those employed in our courts.
Promptly the Chief Justice, Anne Ferguson, announced that judges (among many others) were not bound to obey that law, and the Premier agreed.
The judge’s ruling was not preceded by any complaint, hearing, or other process. It was not a ruling of the Court. So was she saying that judges are above the law? And did Premier Andrews then agree with that?
That would be absurd, of course. It has long been well known that our judges are not above the law. So we are left with the obvious conclusion that Dan Andrews’ “law” is not actually the law at all. He severely overreached himself – and he has agreed. In what other ways has the Premier overreached himself, announcing “laws” on the whim of himself or some faceless fool?
One example may be the curfew that has locked Victorians in their homes, to no apparent good effect (and even while the trains kept on running)! When a legal challenge was mounted the curfew was quietly abandoned, but so far as we know no apology was issued for the poor victims who had been fined in the meantime under the “curfew laws”. Outrageous unlawful “laws” that purportedly have been reinstated at the time of writing.
Much of what the beloved leader has done during this pandemic has been overreach; the deadly “hotel quarantine disaster” of 2019, which led to the deaths of 800 Victorians, reminds us of how the implementation of government policy can sometimes be neither sound nor sensible.
Some policies, becoming de facto “laws”, just go too far to be countenanced. Ask Justice Ferguson.
Mandatory vaccination policies might be seen as just going too far. The Premier’s “laws” have already wreaked economic havoc and saddled us with debts that our great-grandchildren will continue to bear. Deliberately putting even more people out of work to satisfy the drive for uniformity, as opposed to individuality, goes too far to be countenanced.
Ever heard of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? We Australians have signed up for that; which means we signed up of the right to refuse to undergo medical treatments if we so choose. The writer, along with most of his friends and colleagues, is vaccinated. That was our choice. But we call the mandated vaccination program – and the policy to force people out of work if they choose to not be vaccinated – simply abusive and outrageous overreach.
by CAA | Oct 16, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
17th October 2021
The Parliamentary Inquiry into the closure of ICook Foods, ‘Slug-gate’, has released its second report into this fiasco. As expected, it weighed heavily into the Health Department and Greater Dandenong Council. Adding substantial weight to the CAA call for Recall petitions for Government and Local Government at https://chng.it/R8HJ8Hk8
The report and all documents referred to in this article can be viewed at https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/1001-lsic-lc/inquiry-into-the-closure-of-i-cook-foods-pty-ltd
The report produced fourteen findings and made five recommendations, and they are in addition to the findings and recommendations of the first report.
The Inquiry wisely steered away from delving into the alleged criminality in this matter. Doing so could compromise due process and risk the success of prosecution; however, they were clear on who should be addressing these issues. A view often expressed by the CAA.
Referring to a leaked Police Briefing Paper the Inquiry recommended-
“It recommended further investigation by Victoria Police to ‘identify any alleged corruption or misuse of office’. However, at the time of the brief, Victoria Police did not pursue the investigation further.
The concerns probed in the police brief are serious allegations which should be fully investigated. As stated in the first report, allegations of this nature call into question the integrity of Victoria’s food safety framework and the processes undertaken by regulatory authorities. “
The Chief Commissioner has announced a further Investigation after this initial Briefing Paper. However, the Victim is less than confident that this investigation is proceeding as he has only been advised that the new Investigators are compiling another report – not an investigation.
The area’s where we believe the Inquiry erred or was misled were-
In relation to the actual closing of ICooks by the Chief Health Officer.
A reference to ‘temporary closure’ of ICooks was, at best ‘disingenuous. The mechanics and processes adopted by Health Department and Greater Dandenong Council ensured that ICook Foods, no matter what ICooks did to address the claimed failures, many spurious; the closure Order was not lifted until well after the period that all current contracts held by ICooks moved into default and clients were forced to move to an alternate supplier decimating the ICooks business.
That process, by any measure, is corruption.
Ironically, and surprise, surprise, there was only one supplier left in the market capable of dealing with this influx, the Government-sponsored and dramatically financially inept basket case, called Community Chef.
Other businesses that would have been capable of dealing with the influx of work due to the closure of ICooks had previously ceased to operate in this space as a result of the entry into the market of Community Chef and their anti-competitive advantages and preferential treatment gifted them by Government making competition against them fraught.
Many of ICooks clients had previously moved to Community Chef after the fanfare of their entering the market but had moved back to ICooks before the Closure Order. This, in part, explains why the Community Chef was only operating at 25% capacity and bleeding rivers of cash.
It is where that river runs that is the key to this issue.
Although the Inquiry report referenced the Auditor General, why the Auditor General wasn’t tasked with examining the money trails of Community Chef when it is clear the motive of this artifice called Community Chef, cost us millions that are unaccounted for defies comprehension.
Where did the money go?
There is the matter of the not insignificant, not far short of $10 Million they borrowed from the ANZ Bank, which we the taxpayers have to repay.
Where did that money go?
How any Bank could possibly countenance a loan of that magnitude to a company with a nine-year track record of failure and as financially inept as Community Chef is again beyond comprehension. The circumstances of this loan and its disbursement need to be examined very closely.
Given the hoops, legitimate borrowers have to go through to get a few thousand dollars, let alone millions, raises some very serious questions as to the propriety and processes around that loan.
The stench of corruption lingers on this transaction.
Accounting trickery identified in the Pitcher Partners Report into the entity’s finances exposed the habit of annual depreciation being manipulated to lessen the annual losses.
The insolvency bullet was dodged by Community Chef by a $1m letter of comfort supplied to the entity by the Health Department- again, our money.
Accounting chicanery? Where was the Auditor General?
In fairness to the Inquiry, we do not believe the ANZ loan was adequately exposed to the Inquiry, and there is perhaps a very good if nefarious, reason to play this down by the bureaucrats involved.
Intelligence that we have been gathering as to the identity of suspected beneficiaries of this artifice is not inconsistent with other matters currently being scrutinised elsewhere; however, there is only one sure way to discover the truth. A Forensic Audit of the financial transactions of the companies that make up Community Chef, and a thorough investigation without fear or favour by Victoria Police.
IBAC may also have a role to play to examine allegations of Police corruption in this matter.
The air needs to be cleared, with the cards to fall, where they may?
That audit, we believe, will expose the true culprits and beneficiaries of both individuals and or other entities.
The unpleasant smell that lingers around this issue is that of something rotten.
The CAA will not be satisfied until the whole issue is properly investigated, and not just the offences committed against ICooks, but also those against the State of Victoria.
by CAA | Oct 15, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
15th Ocrober2021
We have learned that the Andrews Government has appointed Mr. Graham Ashton to inquire into reported failings of the Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority – the 000 call takers. Surprising that they did not ask Ms Coate, who did such an outstanding job of finding out who was responsible for setting up the deadly Hotel Quarantine shambles last year.
Which reminds us of Mr. Ashton’s stellar performance record – the only qualification he brings to his new task:
He presided over the decision to NOT prosecute anybody arising out of the Red Shirts Rort. This was the infamous saga in which the Ombudsman, Ms. Deborah Glass found “Labor had created an artifice by paying casual electorate officers to work as part-time campaigners instead of carrying out electorate duties”. But under Mr. Ashton’s supervision and control Victoria Police said “no charges will be laid against any person” – a “very sad day for democracy in Victoria, (and) …a very sad day for the justice system”. (The Age, 15/10/2019);
He was in charge when the Victoria Police dismembered an honest police investigation into the “I Cook Foods” plot. Honest coppers have reported that before they were “re-assigned” under protest, they had found and reported upon clear evidence that several public officials had grossly misused their positions;
We remember also the awful, deadly, implementation of Hotel Quarantine “oversight” by untrained, unqualified and unsupervised so-called Security Guards – a decision that most fifth year constables would have recognised as doomed to failure from the outset and which constituted greatest single policy failure in the State’s history. According to The Guardian (9/10/20) then Chief Commissioner Ashton texted a message saying this was “a deal set up by the Department of Premier and Cabinet” but he reportedly could not remember, and he did not keep a diary – right?
Oh, and perhaps we should also recall the Lawyer X affair – this was not commenced while Mr. Ashton was Chief Commissioner, but certainly the disgraced Office of Police Integrity was closely involved in it – the OPI where Mr. Ashton was Director of Operations. Nothing wrong with the regulator being involved in the operations they were supposedly auditing is there? No conflict there? That affair has been officially labelled, by Vicpol, “a profound failure of policing” and Mr. Ashton fought for years to have it covered up while he WAS Chief Commissioner. That is to say, he was in charge of the multi-million-dollar effort to prevent the disclosure of “reprehensible conduct… and …. “atrocious breaches of the sworn duties imposed on every police officer” (High Court of Australia AB v CD; EF v CD)
We are confident Mr. Andrews will find Mr. Ashton’s ultimate report satisfactory.
by CAA | Oct 12, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
13th October 2021
It seems that if you are a victim of a crime, you can no longer rely on authorities to protect you and hold the perpetrators to account.
Or have we entered a new social phase where it’s not the crime but who committed it that determines whether the offenders are investigated and prosecuted.
This new and developing social order has historical equals.
You have to look no further than the French Revolution for a comparison. After suffering years of oppression, the Third Estate (us) revolted in a violent struggle resulting in many of the first Estates heads parting company with their bodies courtesy of the guillotine. Barbaric as that was, the modern metaphorical outcome for many may be just as humiliating and decisive and we would argue the process has started.
So, what to do when the ‘system’ is stacked. The team assisting Ian Cook, the victim of the Slug-gate affair, are vigorously exploring alternatives.
The team is currently discussing strategies with eminent legal practitioners who believe that the ‘system’ has failed.
As CAA has delved further into the Slug-gate debacle, where a family business, ICooks Foods, was the victim of criminal acts perpetrated by the ‘system’, we have been shocked at where the tentacles of this unlawful activity reach and into which bastions of our society it seems to have corrupted. Health Department, Victoria Police, Politicians, a raft of local governments, and the Government funded, Community Chef Board and management.
Evidence is constantly emerging, and that evidence now clearly implicates some very senior people. Conflict of interest, incompetence, conflicted relationships, and downright dishonesty, lying under oath, manipulating legal processes and suspected bribery are there to see for those willing to look.
The complete failure of these bastions is very perplexing and draws us towards the conclusion of a cover-up of more dire criminal proportions.
The complete failure thus far, by those charged with protecting us from corruption, have failed the Cook family and their employees in the first instant, but arguably on a higher plane the people of this State who pay the wages of those who are supposed to protect us. We also pay handsomely the people responsible for criminal acts against us; we pay for the privilege.
No wonder many Victorians feel reamed.
It is now two years since this egregious behaviour when Mr Cook lost his business and his employees their livelihood, perpetrated by Government officials and bureaucrats was reported to Police by Mr Cook, and a whistle-blower independently reported the corruption to IBAC.
Mr Cook, the victim, has no more confidence now than when the nightmare started that a proper investigation is being undertaken. He has lost count of the various investigators that the matter has been shuffled through.
This process is a bit like doctor shopping – eventually, somebody will achieve an outcome that comforts the Police hierarchy directly involved.
There are two documents currently available on the Parliamentary website that we would encourage you to read. Go to https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/lsic-lc/inquiries/article/4807
The first, a report from Pitcher Partners, sheds light on motive and gives an insight into how our taxes are used and abused.
The second is a report from the Detectives that undertook the first ICooks investigation and perhaps indicates why some in Victoria Police would like to see this investigation buried, presumably because it may expose them.
The report details the criminality of the ICooks affair and was submitted to VicPol hierarchy in June 2020 sixteen months ago and still no action against the suspects, as far as the Victim knows.
That lack of action is inexcusable particularly given that many of the offences are straightforward and most of the Police work has already been done by retired Police.
It certainly gives the impression that a ‘cover-up‘, is afoot.
That VicPol is vigorously trying to block a Freedom of Information issue relating to ICooks through VCAT lends strength to the theory. The Government Model Litigant Rules seems to have been ignored in this matter.
On that point, you would have thought that within Victoria Police, they would have learnt that cover-ups rarely succeed, and when exposed, cause more pain than coming clean in the first instance, think Gobbo.
The evidence is so strong in the ICooks matter that the chances that a prosecution may fail are extremely low, and that takes into account prosecutors ‘running dead’.
And we are not referring to ‘Jay walking’. The offences we identified are all very serious and carry substantial jail time on conviction – we contend, nobody is above the law. The various agencies must pursue the perpetrators without fear or favour.
Whether the Police have some difficulty in pursuing the matter because of the victim’s alleged connection at the Parliamentary Inquiry to the death of an eighty-nine-year-old (89) patient at Knox Private Hospital is not known.
However, the inference was put to the Parliamentary Inquiry by multiple bureaucrat witnesses in an attempt to paint ICooks as the perpetrator without any conclusive proof. The poor lady weighed 38 kilos and was 185cm (Over 6 ft) tall, and she had a blood-born infection when presented at the hospital and other very serious health issues.
This patient was clearly in the ‘end of life phase’ at 98 and the alleged listeriosis infection, an easily treated pathogen, that can be cured in a hospital environment in a matter of a couple of days at most, would have had no influence on her ultimate demise which occurred many days after she was admitted to the Knox Hospital.
Conspicuous by their absence was the medical records and pathology reports routinely done in any Hospital that would have supported the bureaucrat’s assertions. With months to prepare for the Inquiry and unlimited resources this omission is significant.
A competent investigator would easily have found no connection between ICook Foods and the unfortunate death if they cared to look.
Evidence also exists, which is also irrefutable, that a number of people made false affidavits (Perjury) in an attempt to prosecute the victim – the malicious prosecutions all failed, not without substantial cost to the innocent victim and the public purse.
The investigations carried out by the ICooks team have established the truth within CCTV footage that shows that the perpetrators committed Perjury and attempted to Pervert the Course of Justice supporting the general thrust of the original investigators report.
The current work of the ICooks team will potentially spawn a new speciality within the Legal profession representing victims who have not received justice through bureaucratic interference, corruption, dishonesty, or ineptitude.
The ‘bureaucratic system’ is geared to protect itself and use the depth of its resources to protect perpetrators and to avoid accountability of those within. Ironically the people who decide to use these resources, our money, are generally seriously conflicted and are commonly the suspected perpetrators.
Thought must be given to how these decisions to dip into the public purse can be done without conflicted people making or influencing these decisions.
ICooks is exploring a new legal strategy and the perpetrators, which stretches into double figures, will now become quite twitchy as the metaphoric rope tightens its grip.
The ballot box is not the only weapon available.
You will be held to account.
You can count on it.
by CAA | Oct 12, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
12th October 2021
The Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. Calls for Action.
Disgraced former Labor Minister, Luke Donnellan, must immediately resign from Parliament. Donnellan said, “I don’t believe it is possible or appropriate to maintain my ministerial responsibilities given these rule breaches.” The Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) agrees but simply resigning as a Minister is not acceptable. Donnellan must go.
Donnellan has been named on oath at the current IBAC Inquiry as being involved in rorting of the public purse and in ‘branch stacking’ which strikes at the heart of our democracy.
Former New South Wales Premier, Gladys Berejiklian, resigned as Premier and as a member of Parliament when simply faced with an announcement she was to be investigated. This is right and proper under our Westminster System of Government. Donnellan must do the same to preserve our ethical standards of government that have been so damaged by the Labor Government of Victoria.
The Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) has proposed that legislation be introduced in Victoria to allow a corrupt, inept, unaccountable government to be forced to an early election. The details of the proposal for a ‘Recall Petition’ are on the CAA website (caainc.org.au) and this has already attracted over 22,000 signatures.
Recall Petition legislation is in use around the world to restrain governments and local governments and public officials from improper behaviour. Signing the CAA Petition will exert pressure on every government, of whatever persuasion, to introduce legislation to ensure accountability in future. Accountability sadly lacking in Victoria at present.
The public interest must be served and be seen to be served.
And Donnellan must go.
by CAA | Oct 12, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
12th October 2021
Misconduct in public office is broadly defined. It can be any conduct by a public sector employee which is unlawful or fails to meet the ethical or professional standards required in the performance of duties or the exercise of powers entrusted to them.
Misconduct generally occurs when a public officer abuses authority for personal gain, causes detriment to another person or acts contrary to the public interest.
Following the notorious “Red Shirts Rort” heavily criticised by the Ombudsman where Labor paid back $388.000.00 of money rorted from the public purse, and where no criminal charges were brought, we are now faced with another major Labor scandal involving Branch Stacking.
Counsel assisting IBAC, Chris Carr SC, told the current inquiry there was evidence of systematic rorting of taxpayer resources in the Labor Party, and Branch stacking which strikes at the very heart of our democratic system of government.
Carr’s direct quote: “One would not have expected that the misuse of public officers for political purposes would have continued after the Ombudsman’s report was published in March 2018, “he told the inquiry.”
Federal Labor MP Anthony Byrne told the inquiry his staff were performing factional work during the day, while they were being paid by the taxpayer.
A claim that this is not unlawful fails any test. Clearly those engaged are prima facie guilty of misconduct in public office under the definition set out above.
Are those responsible for this rort to be again excused? Surely time to put those responsible before a court of law. Or are politicians a protected species to whom the law does not apply?
The Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. demands that no, “Get out of jail free” card be played in this matter and that prosecutions be brought against those involved in the public interest.
by CAA | Oct 7, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
7th October 2021
The Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) has been highly critical of the sentencing practices of Victorian Courts where judges persistently impose less than maximum sentences, which are set by Parliament, on habitual criminals.
The Herald-Sun of 3 October 2021, an article by Rebekah Cavanagh, describes the criminal career of one John Lindrea, a criminal who has been in jail for all but four years of his adult life and is currently awaiting sentencing for a violent armed robbery where a firearm was held to the head of an innocent victim. The terror of this for the woman victim can only be imagined.
Lindrea has prior convictions for a double murder, bank hold-ups and escaping from prison. When arrested for his latest armed robbery, Lindrea refused to identify his co-offender or disclose what happed to the firearms involved. The firearms were found hidden at the scene of the robbery seven months later.
On 4 October 2021, John Lindrea was sentenced to eleven and a half years jail with a minimum of eight years and nine months before being eligible for parole.
The maximum penalty for armed robbery in Victoria is 25 years’ imprisonment. However, the most common imprisonment length for armed robbery from 2014–15 to 2018–19 was three to four years. Why?
What is going on in our courts? Where are the rights of victims being addressed? What regard did the court have to the terror of the victim in Lindrea’s case having a loaded shotgun put to her head and expecting to be killed?
Lindrea is a double murderer and a convicted armed robber with a long criminal history. Surely we can expect our courts to impose maximum sentences, as set by Parliament, in cases like that of Lindrea. Only a maximum sentence could keep us safe from this habitual violent offender.
If judges continue to ignore Parliament, the CAA calls on Parliament to create a Commission of Judicial Performance Review with the capacity to sanction judges who consistently ignore Parliament and act as a law unto themselves.
by CAA | Oct 3, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
4th October 2021
The Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) has consistently criticised the present Victorian Government for its inability to prevent its bureaucrats from acting corruptly. The ICook Foods fiasco is a classic and ongoing example.
Now we have Victoria’s Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) facing 58 charges brought by WorkSafe, alleging the DHHS endangered the lives of its workers, security guards and hotel quarantine guests (not the bureaucrats) when it failed to provide a safe workplace for its employees and failed to ensure people were not exposed to risks to their health and safety.
Departments are not the decision makers – it is bureaucrats within those departments who make the decisions. At the heart of these issues is that no one is held accountable. The Coate Inquiry was unable to determine just who made the critical but flawed decisions. A plethora of, “I can’t remember” responses from Ministers and officials was a plague of a different kind.
What is certain is that DHHS mistakes in hotel quarantine drove the state’s deadly second wave of COVID-19.
The effort to stop Covid 19 spreading was doomed from the moment already established protocols for dealing with disasters, including pandemics, were ignored by the Government and they set off on a frolic of their own proclaiming they knew best. They did not.
The Coate ‘snowflake inquiry’ into the failed system linked 768 deaths during the second wave back to the hotels.
WorkSafe alleges the DHH failed to appoint people with infection prevention and control expertise at the hotels, failed to provide security guards with appropriate infection control training and did not provide, at least initially, written instructions on how to use protective gear.
In all charges, the health and safety regulator said the DHHS employees, the government’s authorised officers and security guards were put at risk of contracting COVID-19 and serious illness or death.
The Coate Inquiry linked ninety-nine per cent’ of Victoria’s second wave cases to the hotel quarantine fiasco.
The maximum penalty for each of the charges is irrelevant as any fines imposed are returned to the State’s coffers.
The charges are listed to go before a Magistrates Court for a filing hearing on October 22. Of course, ultimately a plea of guilty would assure only a summary of the evidence would be given to the court again ensuring the guilty politicians and officials are protected.
Coate’s inquiry found poor infection prevention and control measures were the genesis of outbreaks that seeded in the community from the Rydges on Swanston and the Stamford Plaza.
The then Health Minister, Ms Mikakos, resigned a day after Premier Daniel Andrews’ evidence to the Inquiry, in which he accepted he was ultimately responsible for Government decisions.
The CAA now asks, if Premier Andrews was ultimately responsible, why has he not been charged by Work Safe? Why have other Ministers and Department Officials involved in these shambles not been charged? Those responsible for the decisions that led to this tragedy of hundreds of deaths and thousands of serious illnesses must be charged and held to account.
The failure of Work Safe to bring charges against the individuals involved cannot remain unchallenged.
by CAA | Sep 28, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
28th September 2021
Why do we have a Police Force? So that by and large we can live together as a community in peace and harmony. Police Forces have no intrinsic merit of their own. They exist solely for the service they can provide to the community.
In providing that service we could reasonably expect high ethical standards, transparency and accountability. Are we seeing that with the Victoria Police?
The Lawyer X scandal dates back years and the Victoria Police fought tooth and nail, at the cost of millions of dollars, to keep Nicola Gobbo’s name from public disclosure. VicPol took the case all the way to the High Court, which found in December 2018 that Victoria Police’s conduct in using Gobbo as a confidential informer was “reprehensible” and had corrupted prosecutions.
The outcome of this sorry saga is yet to be played out. Some of the police involved could end up in jail.
Following this debacle, one could expect that the lessons have been learned. But have they? It appears not.
There is currently a case pending before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) where leave is being sought to call as witnesses four members of VicPol who were engaged in the first police investigation of the ICook Foods scandal. An investigation that has been moved several times for reasons that have never been disclosed. No transparency here, even when questions have been asked as to why the case was moved.
Who made the decisions to keep moving the case? Why? Who is accountable for these decisions? Certainly no one at ICooks has been given any idea. Victims of alleged corruption were ignored. No accountability here.
One could expect that if there is nothing to hide then VicPol would be more than willing to accede to the request to call these police at the VCAT hearing. Such is not the case. VicPol is again taking every step possible to thwart the appearance of these three at VCAT. Why?
There is an old legal adage, “Innocence demands the right to speak. Guilt invokes the right to silence.”
A public body like VicPol should honour the “Model Litigant Rules” that apply to all Government Departments. Why not in this case?
Ethical conduct, transparency and accountability must be embraced if we are to have faith in the integrity of the Victoria Police.
by CAA | Sep 28, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
28th September 2021
Why do we have a Police Force? So that by and large we can live together as a community in peace and harmony. Police Forces have no intrinsic merit of their own. They exist solely for the service they can provide to the community.
In providing that service we could reasonably expect high ethical standards, transparency and accountability. Are we seeing that with the Victoria Police?
The Lawyer X scandal dates back years and the Victoria Police fought tooth and nail, at the cost of millions of dollars, to keep Nicola Gobbo’s name from public disclosure. VicPol took the case all the way to the High Court, which found in December 2018 that Victoria Police’s conduct in using Gobbo as a confidential informer was “reprehensible” and had corrupted prosecutions.
The outcome of this sorry saga is yet to be played out. Some of the police involved could end up in jail.
Following this debacle, one could expect that the lessons have been learned. But have they? It appears not.
There is currently a case pending before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) where leave is being sought to call as witnesses four members of VicPol who were engaged in the first police investigation of the ICook Foods scandal. An investigation that has been moved several times for reasons that have never been disclosed. No transparency here, even when questions have been asked as to why the case was moved.
Who made the decisions to keep moving the case? Why? Who is accountable for these decisions? Certainly no one at ICooks has been given any idea. Victims of alleged corruption were ignored. No accountability here.
One could expect that if there is nothing to hide then VicPol would be more than willing to accede to the request to call these police at the VCAT hearing. Such is not the case. VicPol is again taking every step possible to thwart the appearance of these three at VCAT. Why?
There is an old legal adage, “Innocence demands the right to speak. Guilt invokes the right to silence.”
A public body like VicPol should honour the “Model Litigant Rules” that apply to all Government Departments. Why not in this case?
Ethical conduct, transparency and accountability must be embraced if we are to have faith in the integrity of the Victoria Police.
by CAA | Sep 26, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
26th September 2021
Things have been really tough for Police over the last eighteen months or so when they are regularly dragged away from what they know is essential work to deal with the Covid Crisis.
The hard part of Policing is that the Police share many of the views of the broader community, so it is not surprising that there is disquiet in the ranks and that disquiet is growing.
Additionally, they are subject to a constant barrage of views, statements and questions by the Public demanding answer to questions that the Police do not have answers for because the Government has failed to inform the public and the Police adequately.
The Police are copping the brunt from the people, not the Government who made the decisions; they are ensconced well away from the conflict they have caused.
The most significant frustration for both the public, and the public who are Police, are the inconsistencies and double standards exercised regularly by the decision-makers. A set of rules for them and another for us promoting the concept that the ‘them’ are somehow immune from this disease.
The lack of clear direction in the management of this Pandemic and the use of blatant scaremongering has damaged the credibility of the managers of this Pandemic.
We have all been exposed to ridiculous pessimism of dire outcomes by the euphemism for information – modelling. Whether modelling ever gets it right is problematic as we have seen this now-discredited process fail over and over with climate change and now Covid.
We have all been exposed to misinformation, sometimes appearing as rationale material on the Web. Noting so-called reputable critics are former employees of vaccine producers, but we are never told the circumstances as to why they are ex-employees, as this may destroy their credibility.
We are entitled to be sceptical about these comments, along with a lot of other rubbish masquerading as fat on the internet.
Therefore, it is unsurprising that this disquiet is now manifesting into a movement or organisation of proportions sufficient to raise some interest and concerns.
To each of the many Police members involved in responding to the protests and expressing concern, the CAA empathises with your views. Many of us experienced similar pressures during our police service; however, as it was then, and is now, the proud and resilient Victoria Police will weather this storm.
The bottom line is that you have each taken an oath that must take precedent over your personal views, whether political or otherwise.
Most of the CAA are vaccinated, but we were fortunate to receive the jab when it was not overshadowed by inducements and other strategies to remove freedom of choice.
Most of us concluded it was a wise move partly because of age and, more importantly, the actual on-ground raw data showing the vaccine’s effectiveness.
We saw through the fog.
We also rationalised that having these vaccines processed by the same authority that processed all the other vaccines we are exposed to is reliable.
The list of vaccines that have not raised community ire are;-
So much of the hyperbole has been created by misinformation.
But we are concerned, and while understanding the angst of some Police members, when you signed on to this proud profession and took that oath, your life rules changed, which is a distinction that only Police share.
The vast majority of Police and Police Veterans share this common bond, and although when you cease to be employed (retire) from VicPol, you are never de-oathed, and that oath or its values will stay with you forever.
To all the members who are concerned, the correct way to deal with your stress is to, in the first place, do your sworn duty and ensure your Association acts on your behalf. That is what you pay your union dues for.
Your anger must be directed at the Government, in this instance, not command; remember, they have little choice as they are hamstrung by the ‘Sate of Disaster’ and the Health Orders.
We know they have made mistakes, but we have also seen them learn. Just compare the command and control of the earlier demonstrations in this tranche to the Shrine demonstration.
Please do not take any action that will risk your integrity because you can never get it back once compromised, and do not create additional load on your colleagues; that is not the police way.
We do not judge or criticise you as we have been to a similar place but encourage you to ‘Uphold the right’ because not doing so means anarchy.
by CAA | Sep 26, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
26th of September 2021
A commonly agreed definition of corruption—albeit a narrow one—is ‘the misuse of entrusted power for private gain’.
Forms of corruption vary but can include bribery, dishonest lobbying, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, parochialism, patronage, influence peddling, graft, and embezzlement.
Corruption erodes trust, weakens democracy, hampers economic development, and exacerbates inequality, poverty, and social division.
However, exposing corruption and holding the corrupt to account can only happen if we understand the way corruption works and the systems that enable it.
Corruption has no limits, status, level of education, heritage, wealth, social, political views, cultural divides or what football team you follow.
There is just no limit to which sector of the socio-economic divisions where corruption may be spawned or who the purveyors might be.
Corruption per se, is also not a criminal offence of itself but a description applied to a raft of very serious criminal offences.
The Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) defines corruption in the public sector as
- Taking or offering bribes.
- Dishonestly using influence.
- Committing fraud, theft or embezzlement.
- Misusing information or material acquired at work.
- Conspiring or attempting to engage in the above corrupt activity.
There is also a raft of Criminal Offences that can be applied to many alleged corrupt activities currently occurring in Victoria within the public sector disappointingly not seen by the IBAC definition,
- Perverting the Course of Justice.
- Perjury
- Misconduct in Public Office
- Malfeasance In Public Office
- Multiple conspiracies to commit these offences and a raft of lesser dishonesty crimes.
We strongly suspect that many people in the public sector will be horrified to know that they are unwittingly being used to commit such serious crimes.
Their station within the bureaucracy or the nature of their work across the whole of the government sector, including all the independent agencies- anywhere where the public purse is the employer, whether executive management or the lowest level of the sector we should not allow them to escape the consequences of their unlawful actions.
Corruption has a unique capacity of being exposed no matter how careful or deceptive the perpetrators are.
Often, perpetrators foolishly believe that their superiors will protect them because they are only doing what they would want – absolute rubbish.
History is littered with those who suffer the consequences of doing illegal acts believing that is what the boss would want. The most striking of examples were exposed in the Hague War Crimes Tribunals. A cold cell is often the consequence.
At the first sign of trouble, the perpetrator’s subordinates go under the bus. If you are a friend of the perpetrator, you are guaranteed to be the first to go under well ahead of the subordinates.
Why is Victoria so corrupt?
The Government of the day has to take a fair amount of responsibility, but it matters little the Government’s political persuasion but most importantly, the example they set.
Rife corruption is an extension of behaviour and tolerance by executives within a system.
Corruption becomes a cycle and is normalised to such a degree; many do not realise they are corrupt or their unlawful behaviour.
Ironically, the purveyors of corruption are punished by corruption as much as everybody else. They are shooting themselves in the foot; how stupid is that?
The impact of corruption defined by IBAC is,
Corruption erodes the trust we have in the public sector to act in our best interests. It also wastes our taxes or rates that have been earmarked for important community projects – meaning we have to put up with poor quality services or infrastructure, or we miss out altogether.
How do we break this cycle and bring this State back?
The CAA proposes a Judicial body to deal with the current and historical corruption issues and, in the first instance, offer immunities to government employees from all sectors and levels who have witnessed, are aware of, or have been involved in corrupt practices.
The targets of the Inquiry are the leaders who perpetuated the corrupt evolution. To those people, the CAA warns you should be very concerned.
This Inquiry will allay a lot of concerns from employees who fear they have been unwitting participants either through coercion or ignorance in illegal activity and should be allowed to come forward without retribution.
Although the Inquiry will require powers to conduct in-camera hearings, the function of the Inquiry will be to allocate any investigations to the appropriate agency with the capacity to monitor and make directions to the agency as required.
A corruption buster that will remove the shackles of corruption from the many who have been burdened with the crimes by the unscrupulous is essential.
We are confident that the vast majority of people relying on the public purse to service their mortgage and lifestyle are basically honest and dedicated – they should not be put in the positions many find themselves in, just to retain or curry favour with a boss.
It is the boss that must be held to account.
by CAA | Sep 24, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
25th September 2021
Equipping Police with Water Cannon equipment can be a vexed question, with those that would seek to see demonstrators whose lawless behaviour should be ripped into line on one side, and tunnel-visioned liberationists, with a, how dare they, attitude and the ‘Police State’ mantra on the other.
We would argue that if you focus on somewhere near the centre, the water cannon should be an essential tool for Police.
Many of the issues driving community angst to demonstrate are driven by Government decisions, so while there is an imperfect government with a ’Tin ear ‘to the community, we will always have unrest irrespective of the partisan bent of the Government of the day.
Riots, in general, are spawned by extreme elements hijacking and riding on the back of genuine community concern to promote their extreme ideologies and ideals. In many cases, their ideals may not be supported by the majority of demonstrators.
As with most of these conflicting issues, the Police are left to pick up the pieces and suffer injuries and abuse at the hands of rabble.
Moreover, the Police are always relentlessly scrutinised for innocuous reactions that can be portrayed adversely.
It would be interesting to see how these critics would fare standing in the police shoes. According to some, the Police are supposed to just stand there and be spat on, jostled, assaulted and abused and not react.
That is a moot point; as we already know, the critics would not be brave enough.
So, Police need the support of appropriate resources to minimise their risks, improve their effectiveness and reduce resource demands.
The protestors, however, have an alternate problem, how do they avoid being swept up in the fervour created by agitators and fall foul of the Police doing their job. The Police can’t possibly know which demonstrator spitting and abusing them is a genuine protestor pushed over the line or an agitator.
So, we need to increase the protection against serious harm and legal consequences for the genuine.
It seems to us that the issue is a bit of a ‘no brainer’ really.
A very wet demonstrator is likely to withdraw from the action and is a better option than an injured or arrested demonstrator losing their liberty for a cause and tying up Police resources.
Water Cannons used properly after appropriate warnings are issued, seek only to saturate the crowd in the first instance. Continued insurrection and the water jet will move any crowd and may lead to injuries but that would be a last resort and entirely at the discretion of the perpetrators.
A saturated demonstrator has a trip home to worry about, so the consequences of not obeying a lawful direction by Police will be a very uncomfortable and perhaps embarrassing ride home.
The alternative of being trampled by a Police horse, arrested, pepper-sprayed or hit with rubber bullets or tear gas, again makes the Water Cannon the best worst option.
The water cannon only converts to the jet stream for those who continue to defy the lawful directions.
The CAA calls on the Chief Commissioner to request the Government to urgently supply multiple Water Cannon crowd control vehicles with supporting legislation. At least two are required for refill overlaps and riotous behaviour on multiple fronts.
Any disputes as to the propriety of using this equipment should be fought in the Courts, not on the streets .
As a former Commissioner of an interstate Police Force once said, “We had a Sarrison six-wheel-drive ex-Military Personnel Carrier, water cannon in the shed and never used it.”
Maybe having it, was why it was never needed?
by CAA | Sep 23, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
23rd of September 2021
We have heard many unsavoury machinations surrounding Slug-Gate and the shocking treatment meted out to the Cook family by State bureaucrats and officials that we all employ to administer our State.
A thorough Police investigation will undoubtedly uncover substantial corruption in the treatment of this family and their forty-one staff.
And thorough it must be, as anything short will reignite the Red Shirt saga where apparent blatant crime was never proceeded with
There are allegations that previous police investigations into Slug gate were not completed when the matter was removed from investigators on the cusp of an outcome and handed on to others to start again. This allegedly happened five times.
That process and the decision making around this process is open to the allegation of inappropriate interference in an investigation, corruption, or put more bluntly, Perverting the Course of Justice, and or Misconduct in Public Office, very serious criminal offences.
Particularly given the politically charged environment around these issues, we must be satisfied that the work of Victoria Police was conducted without fear or favour.
The confidence of all of us in our Police Force is at stake.
These alleged behaviours of Senior and Executive Police need to be independently investigated to determine whether it was corruption or poor management. Either way, we need to be reassured everything is above board, and a proper investigation is proceeding free from partisan political influence.
This investigation cannot be allowed to ‘fall of the truck’ as the ramifications of this whole scenario goes to broader questions of corruption in public office, and the honesty and ethics of our employees, the State bureaucrats, as well as the Senior and Executive Police.
The experience of Police in dealing with a matter like this requires not only knowledge of the criminal law but an understanding of business which may explain some Police resistance, but that only means the Police need skilled resource support, that is no excuse not to pursue this matter.
The issues of Slug Gate have been well ventilated. Still, little attention has been publicly given to ‘Community Chef’, the company established by the Government and sixteen Municipal Councils destined to monopolise the prepared food sector of the catering market.
After ‘Community Chef’ with its raft of concessions caused many other competitors to close the last major competitor and an impediment to a market monopoly, ICooks was also eliminated, completed by a Health Order on spurious grounds.
The question of corruption and perhaps other illegal activities is ‘writ large’ over ‘Community Chef.’
From a variety of sources, the following is known or suspected about ‘Community Chef’,
- Their land, a fully equipped ‘State of the art’ factory and $500,000.00 cash start-up was gifted to the company from Government coffers without a business case. All up over $19m.
- A gift to an independent business with no obligation to repay is obscene.
- Now a moot point. If they did make a profit, where would it go?
- Government or semi- Government entities that used the ‘Community Chef’ were exempted from competitive tender, a substantial competitive edge over the competition—possibly breaching anti-competitive law.
- They were exempt from some State taxes and charges—another competitive edge.
- ‘Community Chef’ creditors were given a Letter of comfort of $1m, perhaps to obscure liabilities.
- They were allowed to continue to operate for nearly ten years in technical insolvency—an obscene competitive edge.
- They never turned a profit for any of the (annual) reporting periods during their existence.
- They continually received cash injections from their owners, Local Councils. It is best described as manna from heaven to the tune of $3m on top of the $4m in interest-free Government loans, which we are not sure if they were ever serviced or just written off.
- They also charged higher rates than the market had previously enjoyed.
- There has never been any reasoning or justification, based on empirical data, as to why this facility was needed in the first place or why the privileges and benefits should be provided to a non -Government entity.
- Their finances indicated substantial drawdowns towards its end. These drawdowns, $100’s of thousands of dollars, seem to have miraculously evaporated.
- How the ‘Community Chef’ incurred a six-million-dollar debt that appears never to have been serviced is astounding.
It is irrefutable that this business had significant shortcomings.
To understand the depth of the issue, you need to understand that the operations and corporate governance of ‘Community Chef‘ was overseen by,
- Sixteen Council owners and over two hundred elected councillors would by necessity be required to vote and agree to the financial top-ups for their business on numerous occasions during its existence.
- There were sixteen Council Chief Executives and countless council subordinate staff intimately aware of the’ Community Chef’ o
- The ‘Community Chef’ Board of directors, including council appointees rotating through the Board, should also be required to answer awkward questions like, please explain?
- The Health Department had multiple Officers engaging with the ‘Community Chef‘ operations.
There is also a raft of regulators that have allowed this calamity to flourish, and they are all, perhaps not surprisingly, now the fiasco has been exposed, very obvious by their absence.
It will be interesting to see which of these entities commits to their charter to come out now and address this issue to ensure it does not happen again and bring perpetrators to justice.
The list is impressive, but performance to date is very ordinary.
- The Auditor-General (AG)
- Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC)
- Victoria Police
- Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC)
- The Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission (IBAC)
- The Local Government Inspectorate.
Hans Christian Anderson best summed up this disaster in his tale of ‘The Emperor has no clothes.’ The weaves are the perpetrators who promoted and maintained the charade, and the Emperors are those listed above adorned in their invisible clothes.
With an abundance of corporate oversight, we ask the following questions,
- How was this apparent basket case of a company allowed to continue to trade when no other comparative company would legally be permitted to do so?
- How was this company that was ‘Community Chef’ permitted to breach anti-competitive laws with impunity?
- How is there not one recorded case exposing the sham company by the hundreds of people who had oversight until very recently?
- Over the life span of this company, why was there no Government intervention given the enormous financial burden that was building?
- Why was the ‘Community Chef’ purchased for $1.00 by the Government that also accepted the company’s liabilities of $6-7m?
- Why was the business not offered to the market to be sold for the $6-7m current valuation at the time of closing to minimise the financial impost on the State?
- Was the sale of ‘Community Chef’ legal?
On finances, by the time ‘Community Chef’ was sold to the Government for $1, it absorbed somewhere around $28m and passed a $6m debt to the Government to settle liabilities. These figures do not account for the many other millions that were generated by the company’s operations. Where did that money go? It is a reasonable question.
At the end of the day, this exercise in futility at operating a business will possibly end up costing taxpayers circa $100m when civil and criminal litigation is concluded.
And this is where the duck comes in.
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. This duck is called corruption.
The only plausible explanation for the lack of intervention is that all the identified people were either utterly incompetent or directly or indirectly lied to. On the balance of probabilities, the latter would be our pick.
The investigation into this issue will need to expose the ‘who’, not the ‘what’; that is already known, and given all the player’s identities are known, it may be a big task but not a difficult one.
As the interest in this matter continues to escalate within the community, this whole sorry saga may end up the touchpaper for further backlash from the Le Tiers État (French) or The Third Estate.
To say this estate is currently angry would be understating the obvious but, unless there are some circuit breakers, the inevitable outcome, as the French discovered in 1789, will be insurrection, and heads will metaphorically roll, predominantly from the First Estate.
by CAA | Sep 13, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
14th September 2021
The saga of Slug-gate was further ventilated at the most recent hearings of the Parliamentary Inquiry into the affair.
Due to time constraints imposed on examining witnesses, by the nature of these inquiries, means evidence to the public is limited. Without the evidence being adequately tested, an observer could well draw incorrect assumptions.
Examples presented by the Health Department and the City of Greater Dandenong Officers that needed scrutiny but failed to attract adequate attention were evident.
The evidence of genome sequencing of listeria found in a deceased patient who allegedly ate food supplied by ICooks and a link to listeria located in the ICooks facility gave the impression the facility was the problem.
The listeria, however, was found in Corned Beef and Ham at the facility. Neither products were produced by ICooks but bought in from national suppliers. This crucial evidence was omitted.
Evidence was given that this connection to the patient’s death was significant in issuing the Closure Order that ended the ICooks Business.
We know that this information was not conclusive and was not fully available to the CHO until days after the Order was served.
So how the issue of listeria played a significant role in the decision to close ICooks, is at best oblique, with the timelines critical to relevance omitted.
Omitted also from the evidence was that the listeria sample located at ICooks was 90% below the Regulated level for this pathogen to be considered a health problem. Under food standards legislation, the ICook sample levels are deemed to be safe for human consumption. Another critical omission.
The evidence instead inferred using selective adjectives that the patient and the factory sample were a close match or nearly the same. For professional witnesses to emphasise words in oral presentations to create a false narrative was inexcusable.
Health Department and Greater Dandenong Council witnesses should have given evidence that was fair and frank but was instead selective and deceptive.
Those witnesses had a Doherty Institute analysis that stated clearly that the match was probable, not the same, as the evidence implied. There is no such thing as a genetic fingerprint; the use of this term was a scientific fraud.
There was compelling evidence before the inquiry from an independent Environmental Health Inspector that investigated the listeria issue and found the patient who died never consumed any foods from ICooks.
During the inspection of ICooks by the Greater Dandenong Council, there was a high probability that the factory may have been contaminated by officials undertaking the inspection.
There is video footage showing the Heath Inspectors who obtained these samples routinely contaminating the site during their inspection, but the witnesses were not examined on this critical point.
Whether this contamination was deliberate, or incompetence will ultimately be tested in court.
Also of significance, a substantial quantity of evidence was presented from bureaucrats portraying that the Health Department Closure Order’s decisions, were distinct and independent from the Inspections conducted by local bureaucrats that resulted in the ninety-six charges against ICooks and later withdrawn.
This perception was debunked entirely, not by opposing evidence but from one of the local inspectors letting slip towards the end of her testimony that her superior was in constant contact with the Health Department during the inspection. An attempt to cover a conspiracy, blown.
There were many other anomalies or attempted manipulations of the evidence around the listeria issue.
- ICooks produced and delivered 120,000 meals, and in excess of 15,000 Salads and sandwiches to the most vulnerable in the community between when samples were taken on 01/02/2019, the elderly patient died (04/02/2019), and the factory was closed 22/02/2019. No other listeria (a reportable disease) was recorded anywhere in the food chains linked to ICooks or any of their suppliers. There were four other cases with a similar Genome sequence in WA and QLD;
- ICook Foods doesn’t sell to these States but these incidents were never investigated. This is critical as the listeria found elsewhere could have entered the hospital via any one of the other six food suppliers who service Knox Private Hospital.
- The patient arrived at Knox Private Hospital displaying listeria symptoms with that relevance being incorrectly dismissed by Health Officials based on the incubation period of the disease. That incubation period was completely erroneous. The patient was not in the incubation period when she presented at Knox Hospital; she was already symptomatic
- That a Knox Hospital patient died from eating ICooks Foods laced with listeria was emphasised by some witnesses as an absolute. This is again erroneous. The patient died, with listeria, not from it, and no link was ever identified between the sandwiches the patient allegedly consumed and those ICooks supplied to the Hospital. Suspecting or believing is in the realm of gossip unless substantive confirmation is obtained
- Unfortunately, the patient had severe heart problems and was probably in the end-of-life phase at 89 years of age.
- Of significance, none of the other food suppliers in the chain of the alleged sandwiches was tested or interviewed by officials.
- Six other suppliers had provided to the Knox Hospital Kitchen and the Hudson’s Coffee Shop that provides cakes and sandwiches to patients and staff on-site but no investigation of these possible sources of listeria were investigated: why not? What happened to the abundance of caution so regularly proffered by Health Officials?
- Of greatest significance, with Departmental witnesses emphasising that a listeria outbreak was averted. There was no plausible explanation given whether ICooks was the source and how nobody else who consumed the 135,000 meals, salads, and sandwiches supplied to the vulnerable in that period displayed listeria.
- That the hospital kitchen was never inspected or examined concerning this event is significant as it goes to the crux of this issue.
- Evidence from an independent Environmental Health Officer tasked by the Health Department to investigate the listeria issue gave compelling and emphatic evidence that the patient was on a soft food diet prepared in-house by the Hospital and not from external suppliers. His findings were provided to the Health Department; however, the Closure Order was issued despite this evidence.
- The Deputy Chief Health Officer in an email subsequent to the closure advised the Chief Health Officer and others, that there were two food production lines at ICooks and one line that food was pasteurised through could re-open but that advice was apparently ignored.
- The inquiry was repeatedly told that no one issue caused the formation of the decision by the Chief Health Officer to issue the closure order. The inquiry was never told what these ‘issues’ were.
- A picture was painted in evidence that ICooks lacked qualified food safety and hygiene staff for a facility of this type. Evidence to highlight this deficiency was derived from casual conversations with ICooks staff during inspections once ICook were closed. There was no food handling to observe, and the evidence was clearly designed to create a false impression.
- The health investigators knew that ICooks had on staff, a person qualified at the same level as the auditors used in the industry. The skills and training exceed that of a local Environmental Health Officer and having a person on staff at that level well exceeds any statutory or regulatory requirements for this type of business.
Oral evidence should have been fair and impartial from public service officers. Instead, it was biased in favour of a predetermined position. Any evidence that did not support their hypothesis was overlooked or deliberately manipulated to deflect that ICooks was targeted which when looking at the totality of the evidence they clearly were.
Alleged attempts by Environmental Health Officers to contaminate the factory are astounding given the breadth of video footage covering the Inspectors’ actions. Although they must be aware that they were under surveillance, as is every other person on the premises at ICooks, as part of their food security protocols, they chose to give evidence contrary to the vision.
And then there is the Slug. A nocturnal mollusc that is sensitive to chlorine (the floor cleaning product) swanning around the factory floor in a high traffic area forty-six meters away from the closest leafy vegetables identified initially by Inspectors as the access for the slug.
By the time the evidence was presented the route of the slug was changed to plastic bins a few meters away from the find.
The Variety of Slug was Limas Maximus. This Slug does not eat leafy vegetables; it only consumes rotting matter and is found in compost bins; it would not have come in with fresh produce; it had to have been brought in.
That it was planted was vehemently denied by bureaucrats. Still, there was equally strong evidence that the picture of the Slug used in the prosecution of ICooks had been photo-shopped to remove an incriminating piece of tissue. In that process the colour of the factory floor changed from grey to green.
Evidence that bureaucrats were observed altering the image of the slug photo was compelling from independent witnesses. However, the doctoring was explained away by an admission that they were editing body camera footage removing personal material.
That admission creates another problem. All the footage on a body camera is evidence, and any tampering is arguably Perverting the Course of Justice a serious criminal offence. A court order is required to remove anything from the recorded images.
The working hypothesis is that the targeting of ICooks was not motivated by health concerns but an attempt to remove the last competitor to the Local Government owned and run Community Chef, a company beset by financial woes.
ICooks was deliberately targeted by the Health Department and the City of Greater Dandenong. The evidence of this is overwhelming.
The sin of ICooks would appear to be being a commercial success when the competitor company, Community Chef, owned by the City of Greater Dandenong and fifteen other municipal councils, funded to the tune of millions with our money by the Councils and the Health Department, continued to fail even with preferred supplier status.
It is worthy of note that most commercial competition to Community Chef had been decimated with kitchens similar to ICooks supplying the same market closed putting many workers out of a job because of market manipulation by Community Chef, ICooks was the last impediment to total domination of the market.
Trumpeted at its inception as a GFC job building initiative, the net effect on employment was a substantial loss. Still, it moved the employment to Melbourne western suburbs, perhaps that was the plan all along.
In addition, ICooks had developed the world-leading technology that was patented to produce Texture Modified food. Technology that was valued in the millions of dollars and Community Chef were unable to replicate.
As a sole supplier and with this technology, Community Chef could charge what they wanted and reap millions in international technology sales.
This whole saga is about the money – greed the motivator.
The failure of the Community Chef experiment that had already cost taxpayers over $20m, cost Taxpayers a further $6m to bail out as it was closed and taken over by Western Health.
Why the Community Chef business was not placed on the open market to reduce taxpayers’ exposure is a question somebody must answer; that somebody is the current Health Minister.
This maneuver reeks of cover-up because the anomalies and any criminal behaviours would be exposed if Community Chef had been sold. By keeping the resource in-house allows for the cover-up to continue and be hidden within the giant Health Department bureaucracy and budgets.
When this whole saga is settled financially, the actual cost could well exceed $100m, and for what?
When all is said and done, apart from the rivers of gold flowing out of Community Chef this may also have been about servicing a few bureaucrats’ egos, and crime was not too high a price to pay to cover it up.
There must be people held to account, and perpetrators given lengthy jail terms not just as a penalty but to dissuade other bureaucrats from similar fraud on the taxpayer.
If this does not happen soon, a Royal Commission is the next step, and we are advised that the markers exist for that to happen. From what we know, there are some very embarrassing facts that will be exposed.
It was inserting in evidence before the inquiry by a former Health Minister Jenny Mikakos that a Royal Commission was warranted.
Evidence from Mikakos at a Royal Commission would be riveting.
Slug-Gate is a classic example of why we need the Community Advocacy Alliance’s recommended Recall Legislation, the communities’ weapon against government or bureaucratic corruption.
To register your further support for the Recall Petition, go to caainc.org.au and scroll down to the prompts.
by CAA | Sep 4, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
4th September 2021
The latest Covid infection figures are alarming. However, while the temporary lockdown of some geographic areas may be required, we have seen the lockdown of rural areas that have never had a case of a Covid infection within more than one hundred kilometres, which is ludicrous. Numerous areas in the Melbourne Metropolitan area are also in lockdown despite having no active cases.
More and more businesses will fail if lockdowns continue. Unnecessary, draconian restrictions cause frustration, anger and a loss of respect for the Government, and, importantly, for police required to enforce these restrictions. It will take many years for the Victoria Police to regain the respect it deserves that has been lost due to no fault of its own.
We have accurately predicted anti-social trends in the past. Currently, we are predicting that unless there is significant capitulation by the Government, civil disobedience on a scale never seen before will erupt. Already families are reconnecting despite the rules, using all sorts of clandestine techniques.
Did our leaders expect that the ingenuity of the populous could be suspended by fear indefinitely? Experience from any form of detention throughout history shows that detainees will initially be compliant, but as their servitude extends, they dedicate more time to achieve any forms of noncompliance.
If you are prepared to look, the signs already exist. Road traffic has increased dramatically, and factory carparks are full, compared to earlier and previous lockdowns. The numbers of citizens walking the streets and parks without masks are growing. Talk within the community has shifted from frustration to palpable anger.
Government be warned, start releasing the community from purgatory now; take too long and social disobedience will spread more rapidly than the virus, leading to anarchy. And a real possibility you will be held to account for any outcomes of that nature.
The community that switched the gift of compliance on, will have no trouble turning it off. Once the gift is removed, the Government will never get it back.
The first step is to start lifting restraints on those who are double jabbed and pose minimal risk, something we are told is based on medical advice.
When that happens, the numbers of vaccinations will escalate dramatically.
Too many people are now suffering Mental Health issues, and the number of suicides exceeds the Covid death toll. Most disturbing is that the damage to our children may be permanent, socially, if not clinically.
It is time for a more balanced approach to Covid.
The response must always be proportionate to risk.
|
Kelvin Glare AO APM
Chairman
Community Advocacy Alliance Inc.
“The voice of the community”
|
Ivan W Ray
Chief Executive Officer
Community Advocacy Alliance Inc.
“The voice of the community” |
by CAA | Sep 4, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
4th September 2021
The latest Covid infection figures are alarming. However, while the temporary lockdown of some geographic areas may be required, we have seen the lockdown of rural areas that have never had a case of a Covid infection within more than one hundred kilometres, which is ludicrous. Numerous areas in the Melbourne Metropolitan area are also in lockdown despite having no active cases.
More and more businesses will fail if lockdowns continue. Unnecessary, draconian restrictions cause frustration, anger and a loss of respect for the Government, and, importantly, for police required to enforce these restrictions. It will take many years for the Victoria Police to regain the respect it deserves that has been lost due to no fault of its own.
We have accurately predicted anti-social trends in the past. Currently, we are predicting that unless there is significant capitulation by the Government, civil disobedience on a scale never seen before will erupt. Already families are reconnecting despite the rules, using all sorts of clandestine techniques.
Did our leaders expect that the ingenuity of the populous could be suspended by fear indefinitely? Experience from any form of detention throughout history shows that detainees will initially be compliant, but as their servitude extends, they dedicate more time to achieve any forms of noncompliance.
If you are prepared to look, the signs already exist. Road traffic has increased dramatically, and factory carparks are full, compared to earlier and previous lockdowns. The numbers of citizens walking the streets and parks without masks are growing. Talk within the community has shifted from frustration to palpable anger.
Government be warned, start releasing the community from purgatory now; take too long and social disobedience will spread more rapidly than the virus, leading to anarchy. And a real possibility you will be held to account for any outcomes of that nature.
The community that switched the gift of compliance on, will have no trouble turning it off. Once the gift is removed, the Government will never get it back.
The first step is to start lifting restraints on those who are double jabbed and pose minimal risk, something we are told is based on medical advice.
When that happens, the numbers of vaccinations will escalate dramatically.
Too many people are now suffering Mental Health issues, and the number of suicides exceeds the Covid death toll. Most disturbing is that the damage to our children may be permanent, socially, if not clinically.
It is time for a more balanced approach to Covid.
The response must always be proportionate to risk.
| Kel Glare
Kelvin Glare AO APM
Chairman
Community Advocacy Alliance Inc.
“The voice of the community”
|
Ivan W Ray
Ivan W Ray
Chief Executive Officer
Community Advocacy Alliance Inc.
“The voice of the community” |
by CAA | Aug 29, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
30th August 2021
Two terms that are often confused.
Service Delivery is often referred to as an essential strategy of any enterprise. In many ways, it transcends most other corporate functions. It relates to the interaction between the service provider and the consumer of that service, a facet of all organisations, no matter their function, and is quantifiable, so success or otherwise can be monitored.
Service Management, however, refers to the whole of the organisation and how its function is targeted at delivering the service it produces. Resourcing, infrastructure, personnel, recruiting, training, management strategies, and policies form this function.
By its nature, it is introspective and global in the organisational sense. Its focus will tend to be influenced by efficiencies rather than consumer experiences or effectiveness.
Although at ‘first blush’ the difference seems subtle, Service Management is quite significantly different from Service Delivery which is very extrospective.
Service delivery is a component of business that defines the interaction between providers and clients where the provider offers a service, whether that be information or a task, and the client either finds value or loses value as a result.
‘Good service delivery provides clients with an increase in value.
We are encouraged that Victoria Police have identified that it needs to apply more resources to Service Delivery. That function is relatively new; early signs are that the function is weighted heavily to Service Management instead of Service Delivery, as the functional title infers.
In this symbiotic partnership, however, the Service Delivery function must prioritise above Service Management, and the best way to describe this relationship is by way of examples.
- Police Stations/complexes-
The telephone is an essential device to connect the Police to its community, a connection at the heart of good policing. In recent years the phone has been, in part, rendered redundant. It probably seemed sensible and saved valuable time absorbed in telephone reception functions. Service Management has spawned the development of the current practice of multi-choice options for callers. But when you apply Service Delivery, the following flaws become evident;
- Callers will not know which is the correct option for them.
- The call can bounce around an extensive complex sapping up resource time, frustrating the caller. When a connection is eventually found starts the interaction off negatively, a service delivery failure. Not to mention the resource waste in every bounce.
- One of the options never included is the Officer In Charge, option a trait within the organisation that separates those responsible; from the functionaries and outputs of the organisation.
VicPol is providing, in this case, non-service. Therefore, Vicpol’s responsibility to ensure the Service is appropriate from the perspective of those who are being served, not the organisation. That is a failing of Service Management.
Believe it or not, but the main telephone administrative number for Victoria Police is no longer functional.
If you do not know who is responsible for your issue, your only option is the internet (if you have access), which leaves the public confused and not better off.
If you want to talk to somebody within headquarters or the Headquarters complex, good luck.
Recently a former executive member of VicPol wanted some very basic information and decided not to bother operational resources, 000, or 113444 with his simple request, so he tried to ring the Headquarters switchboard to find it no longer functions. After other futile attempts, he finished up speaking with a real person at Crime Stoppers.
His request was, what is the current title of what was called D24?
The answer given was, what is D24?
A senior manager of the 113444 operations advised us that the issue of people not knowing where to ring was not the responsibility of VicPol; if they want our Service, they are obliged to make sure they are ringing the right place; really?
We do not blame that Officer but the culture of Service Management that has lost sight of Service Delivery, a culture that must be changed.
Did you know that if more than one person rings in to report an incident when the Operator asks whether you would like Police to follow up with you – it only takes one person to say no, and the ‘card’ is marked Police are not required to attend? And that is irrespective of what everybody else may request. So, if you have called the Police and said, ‘yes’ to see them, you may be waiting forever if somebody else says, ‘no’.
The card only has one option. Service Management again trumps Service Delivery.
By the way, do not expect a callback, either from the Operator or the police attending – there is no provision on the ‘Card’ for either. You can’t even get feedback on how; your card was marked.
For a service that relies heavily on community support to function correctly with near-daily requests for public help and demand for public compliance, it seems incongruous that the organisation with that essential reliance treats the public they want help from in the manner they do.
And this problem does not only beset VicPol. The mantle in this space is occupied by VicRoads who are operating at a level of Service Delivery that defies description it is that poor and illogical.
These operational approaches to Service Delivery are not the construct of VicPol but the product of misguided private corporations and the spawning of mammoth call centres (many offshore) as a supposed solution. It is easy to see how the management would be attracted to Service Management – internal efficiency at all costs.
Plenty of consultants will gladly fleece you and tell you how good you are for letting them ruin your organisation.
Poor quality Manager’s incapable of logical decision-making also feed this phenomenon. They are too frightened or cannot make a decision, so they get a consultant in to guide them. That’s called outsourcing management; why have that manager at all, is the efficiency question posed?
However, corporations are now on another path. They are moving towards ensuring customers or recipients of their service have easy access to face-to-face or real person contact experiences away from the previous trends that more often than not created false economies in resources and expenses.
They have realised that Service Delivery out trumps Service Management which regularly damages an organisation.
VicPol needs to be ahead of the game and make the move now.
Good service delivery is the cost of doing good business.
by CAA | Aug 28, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
28th August 2021
Only three witnesses were called at the Legislative Council Parliamentary Inquiry into the ICooks Slug-gate affair hearings on the 25th of August. Still, the quality and nature of their evidence was monumental and has a far-reaching impact beyond just the Inquiry.
The evidence and allegations made by these witness’s strike at the heart of our Parliamentary system and, in particular, the parliamentary inquiry process as a corollary to the ICooks matter.
The three witnesses who each came across as very credible outlined alleged lies told to the Inquiry by previous witnesses, and there were many of them. This was done clinically and dispassionately, and the only nexus between the three witnesses was the investigation of allegations against ICooks Foods, so they were genuinely independent.
They were, however, joined by the pain and loss caused as victims of this debacle. Two professional Environmental Health Officers were forced out of their employment, and of course, the damage wrought on Ian Cook, his company and employees were immense.
Overlaying these allegations rendering much of the evidence already presented to the Inquiry, at best questionable, is the attack on the parliamentary system by witnesses who are alleged to have blatantly lied to the Inquiry.
Without diminishing the impact of the whole affair on the victims, the way this Inquiry proceeds from here will critically impact our Parliamentary system.
We have good reason to believe that the evidence of these witnesses is sound, and evidence exists to support the allegations, so it will be tough for any recalled witness to deny the allegation without risk of exposing themselves to further jeopardy, contempt of Parliament and or the crime of Misconduct in Public Office.
Rights and Responsibilities of witnesses
In general, a witness must answer all questions put as fully and frankly as before a court, inquest, royal commission or board of Inquiry. Any person giving false evidence may be found guilty of contempt.
The committee Chair now has an unenviable task of dealing with the allegations because if they are not dealt with properly, lying to Parliamentary Inquiries will become endemic.
More significantly, the one person who is at the most significant risk of terminal political damage is the Chair.
As an independent, she is likely to suffer the electorate’s wrath if they are not satisfied that a proper and effective inquiry was conducted; the electorate will see her through the same prism as Justice Jennifer Coate, who conducted the Covid 19 – Hotel Quarantine Inquiry. Not a healthy proposition for Politician.
There is an obligation on all Upper House Members sitting at this Inquiry to support the Chair in what we would argue is a bi-partisan obligation to address the alleged lying as distinct from the issues.
This attack on the Parliament’s ability to hold meaningful and legitimate inquiries without manipulation by witnesses who allegedly lie is fundamental to our democracy.
Those named have every right to seek to be recalled and defend their original evidence; however, that comes at significant risk to those who did lie.
The investigation into the ICooks matter is comprehensive. As far as we are aware, the alleged lies referred to throughout this evidence are well supported by compelling evidence and can be proven. We doubt any of the witnesses who have been alleged to have lied will risk returning to the Inquiry as that may only deepen their demise.
If the allegations of lies are not adequately rebutted, the Chair supported by her committee must refer the witnesses to the Privileges Committee of Parliament to be investigated for contempt of Parliament and the Victoria Police for breaches of the Crimes Act.
After the allegations are investigated, Employees of the State may have committed a prima facia offence of Misconduct in Public office.
Lying to the Parliament has to be on the upper end of the scale for this offence.
by CAA | Aug 24, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
24th August 2021
On the eve of the Parliamentary inquiry resuming to further examine the ICooks, Slug- gate matter on the 25th of August 2021, it is worth understanding some of the background, which hopefully will make the evidence given at this inquiry easier to understand.
This is an intriguing and interesting story, but it started in 2007 when as yet unnamed people convinced the then Federal Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development to provide $9 million to build a kitchen facility.
This was accompanied by a $6 million grant from the Victorian Government Health Ministry and the then Health Minister.
To top that off, the Minister provided $.5 million as cash start-up capital and interest-free loans topped up seven times over seven years to a touch under $4 million.
Local Government, who ultimately numbered sixteen councils, owners of the entity Community Chef, chipped another $2.25 Million to help get this project off the ground, followed by near regular top-ups totalling just over $4 million.
It cost Tax and Ratepayers $17.75 million to open the doors and a further $14.5 million to keep them open made up of government and Semi-Government top-up grants and an end debt of $6 million with an unknown cost of taxation and other costs excused. This little jaunt cost somewhere north of $30 million, and nobody saw it happening???
The add on costs of putting workers on the unemployment queue and charging the local Government owners more than market rates for their services is probably a number not worth exposing; it would be so scary.
You have to wonder and question the ability of Auditors, Community Chef Management, the Board and the various Government and Semi-Government players and elected councillors that run into the many hundreds, yet nobody could see or chose not to see this whole business was a charade and a failure run on a smoke and mirrors management style.
In a commercial sense, this arrangement, one would say, was for some, manna from heaven, but it gets worse.
The owners of the business, the Councils, are also the regulators of the competitors in the market segment this new business was designed to enter, what a cosy arrangement.
What was the objective of this venture when there were no identifiable deficiencies in this market segment preparing meals for Hospitals, nursing homes and meals on wheels before the entry of Community Chef?
The CAA has been told Community Chef was to primarily provide additional employment during the GFC in the Western Suburbs of Melbourne.
This is a particularly curious rationale as the establishment of Community Chef with unparalleled advantages over all the other competitors and particularly when the owners are also the regulators of the industry. The opportunity for improper practices to become rife, and the ability to destroy competition moves into the realms of criminality
As Community Chef evolved and hired more people, more were put out of work as smaller competitors closed. The net effect would seem to be negative, adding to the overall unemployment numbers not decreasing them.
Community Chef also charged higher rates than the independent business in the competitive market and had quality control issues, driving some of their customers back to the independents.
Fast forward to today, and Community Chef no longer exists; it was sold for $1 to the Government along with its accumulated $6 million debt.
The graphic included, supplied by Community Chef to the previous Parliamentary Inquiry, makes for an intriguing read and gives a breakdown of the support they received.
Wasting more than $30 million raises some interesting questions,
- When a business has a guaranteed market share, charges over the odds for its services with exclusive access to its market, how does it lose that amount of money without the sceptre of criminality not being a serious consideration? Incompetence alone could not be that bad.
- Given that sixteen councils owned the business, and we can presume the expenditure of $4 million and operations of their entity was put to the elected councillors, how was the issue, an apparent serious conflict of interest, not addressed?
- How could this Council owned enterprise continue to operate when sixteen councils would have been exposed to this debacle and did not raise any concerns about the efficacy of this operation or withdraw from it?
- How did the Board of Community Chef not know the perilous nature of their business and take action?
- Where was the Auditor General who allowed this edifice and wanton waste of taxpayer’s money being swallowed by this entity to continue?
- Given this happened over an extended number of reporting periods (years), how was this company permitted to continue when it would appear to be insolvent, or did accounting chicanery protect it?
- When ample opportunity existed for the various Health Ministers to be aware of this matter, what action did they undertake to ensure that proper use was being made of such large grants that must have required ministerial approval?
- Where were the bureaucrats who were responsible?
- Who is responsible, the Government or the Councillors of the Municipalities (owners) that supported this venture?
- It could well be that there is a money trail that must be followed.
Many other questions need to be answered in this debacle that will take no less than a Royal Commission to get to the bottom and hold those responsible to account.
This is just one aspect of this matter, the other being the criminality involved in the treatment of ICook Foods as every effort was made to close them down.
We conjecture that the motivation for the crimes perpetrated on ICooks was driven by a desire to get hold of the patented texture modified technology, which had already attracted the interest and offers of millions.
If the Community Chef had succeeded the relief from crippling financial woes based on their track record would only be temporary.
Whoever was benefiting personally from Community Chef, a gift that just keeps on giving must all be identified and held to account.
This Parliamentary Inquiry must be the precursor to a Royal Commission; this enterprise’s depth, breadth, and audacity deserves nothing less
.
by CAA | Aug 24, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized
24th August 2021
The recent violent demonstration about Covid restrictions saw much vitriol aimed at police. This was entirely misplaced. The Government ought to have been the target of community frustration and anger, not the police. Police are not an instrument of Government but an instrument of the people. It is the people of Victoria who have elected this Government. It is Parliament that makes the laws. The police role is to enforce those laws made by Parliament, “Without fear or favour, malice or ill will.” This police do to the best of their ability. No one claims they always get it right.
If the general populace is so dissatisfied with their Government that they want change their remedy is at the ballot box. The Community Advocacy Alliance (CAA) has vehemently argued that there needs to be a process to force a poorly performing Government to call an election. We have a petition circulating calling for a recall petition process to be legislated. Signing that petition may assist in this process being adopted. https://www.change.org/p/petition-to-the-legislative-council-of-victoria-give-democracy-back-to-the-people-with-recall-elections?
In the meantime, the CAA advocates that every legal means available should be utilised to make the Government accountable for the myriad of poor decisions they are making that are so frustrating to most of us.
While the temporary lockdown of some geographic areas may be required, we have seen the lockdown of rural areas that have never had a case of a Covid infection within more than one hundred kilometres. This is nonsensical and has put many small businesses either out of business or teetering on the brink.
In the larger centres of the State, hundreds of small businesses have failed or will fail if lockdowns continue. Unnecessary, draconian restrictions cause frustration, anger and a loss of respect for the Government, and, importantly, for police required to enforce these restrictions. It will take many years for the Victoria Police to regain the respect it deserves and that has been lost due to no fault of its own.
The economic damage being caused by continual lockdowns will take generations to undo. With rising numbers of those vaccinated it is time to remove many of the restrictions that are said to be based on scientific/medical advice that we, who are most affected, are never permitted to see or question.
Too many people are now suffering Mental health issues and the number of suicides is disturbing.
Closing playgrounds, golf courses and banning take-away food and drink, while supermarkets are open, is ludicrous.
It is time for a more balanced approach to Covid.
The response must always be proportionate to risk.
by CAA | Aug 19, 2021 | Uncategorized
19th August 2021
Many a critical line has been published over recent, COVID months, not that far off years, of the sometimes alleged draconian or overreactions of Police when enforcing the Chief Health Officer’s edicts. The latest being the Government closing playgrounds, skate parks and basketball hoops and expecting Police to prosecute any breaches.
As former Chief Commissioner and Chair of the Community Advocacy Alliance Kel Glare has often said, “Police do not get to choose which laws they must enforce”.
The focus of the community disquiet has landed at the feet of Policing instead of the feet of the Government and the Chief Health Officer who are responsible, as we are daily reminded by the Premier, “I am following the health advice”.
Anger at the Premier seems futile, but the Chief Health Officer may not be so strident when the criticism starts to fall in large part his way.
The CAA understands and shares the community anger with the situation we continually find ourselves in, with rules that seem illogical and disproportionate to the risks.
It is reported that nine women per day die from Breast Cancer. That is over tree thousand a year. Still, no proportionate or disproportionate response has developed even when the risk factors of this disease are statistically magnified dramatically for approximately fifty per cent of the adult population. The risk of dying from COVID fades in comparison.
The stubborn refusal to place on the public record all the epidemiological data and the rationale behind what appears to be ludicrously inept decisions have justifiably contributed to community disquiet which is rapidly increasing.
We share the community frustration in being treated like imbeciles incapable of processing the data we seek to make informed views.
We have watched as the anti-Police sentiment has grown and been linked to the argument that Police failed because they have not exercised their discretion. That is arrant and complete rubbish.
Police do indeed have discretion enshrined in Common Law, but police discretion never would or should extend discretion not to enforce a law made by the elected Government. This is distinctly different from a Law that is unconstitutional or one that causes unlawful conduct if applied. The current shemozzle of Health Orders, sadly, do not fall into that category.
As with all these things, the incidents by Police that raise community angst are minuscule in number compared to the hundreds of thousands of police-public interactions related to this Pandemic.
We would argue that the police response has been appropriate and overall exercised with the proper amount of discretion. If people deliberately break the rules and get fined, they have no place bleating, and the media should not offer them succour. They decided to flout the rules, not the Police.
Nevertheless, Policing in this State has taken a severe blow to its overall credibility and trust bank with the community for doing its job.
The overall effectiveness of policing is directly proportionate to the credits in that trust bank.
Part of the post COVID recovery will be rebuilding the community trust with Policing as we fear the long-term effects will impact the efficacy of policing on a broader scale for a long time.
A series of glossy adds will not do it, there needs to be innovative initiatives that rebuild the bank credits, and the Chief Commissioner must start the planning process now.
We acknowledge that this would be particularly challenging with the current competing issues. But failure will consign Policing to an efficacy well below the pre-pandemic levels for years to come.
The current risk is that the negative impact of COVID on Policing would make the last twenty years of inept management fade into insignificance.
The CAA is already exploring initiatives targeting the Trust Bank that the Chief Commissioner may consider, and we are willing to work with VicPol to represent the community in the planning deliberations.
We have a history of accurately predicting major adverse social issues like the 2016 Crime Tsunami. We believe that tsunami will also fade into insignificance with what is ahead of us because of the damage wrought on our children. We will be faced with generational impacts of the like never before seen or imagined in our society.
We also fear the trends of self-harm, suicide and anti-social behaviour in young people is set to explode particularly obversley when and if our freedoms are returned.
The length of the imposts on our young will, or has become the norm for them, and freedom will be a scary place where self-confidence has evaporated.
We know that the younger people are, the more likely they live in the moment, which is not a negative but a fact, so when the freedoms return, they will not be adjusted to that new norm, and the outcome for many will be negative.
In effect, we have taken two years out of their development, and any parent will tell you that can be catastrophic for a young person. Imagine socially jumping from twelve to fourteen or sixteen to eighteen. Something that obviously escapes our leaders.
We call on the Government to ensure funding for the planning and implementation of initiatives geared to make the community feel safer in what will be a traumatic post COVID era of adjusting to what was once considered a normal life.
Victoria Police can play a pivotal role in this transition minimising risk factors to the young.
Having a safe community is an essential part of this State’s regrowth because, without a safe community, everything else in the recovery phase will be adversely constrained.
