Comment

Comment by Rory Donnellan on January 21, 2012 at 3:27pm

The Blight government are now clutching at straws in a panic bid to cover-up the ongoing debacle at Queensland Health...

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/health-reforms-dismissed-as-a-...

Comment by Rory Donnellan on January 18, 2012 at 2:25pm

Rob,

Sounds like you have stirred up the beehive, which suggests you are getting a bit too close to the honey.

Comment by Rob Messenger on January 17, 2012 at 11:31pm

Rory,

No tax audits, but what about being found guilty of contempt of parliament and getting kicked out, despite Australia's pre-eminate expert on parliamentary procedure Harry Evens ( Clark of Federal Senate - 40 years service) saying I was not guilty?

I took a person to Parliament who had a big problem with Child Safety Department. Police had told this person 9 months earlier "you'll never be charged with a criminal offense because there is no evidence".

I sat this person in the public gallery and read out to parliament some very embarrassing facts and behaviour that had been carried out by the Child Safety Minister and his department.

I would have continued raising this matter in parliament until justice was served, but 24 hrs after this person sat in parliament and listened to me embarrassing the government, this person was charged with two criminal offences.

This made the matter subjudice, and I was not allowed to raise this matter in parliament until the matter had been dealt with by the courts. Of course coincidentally the matter kept on being adjourned and delayed. Meaning that the government and child safety minister was saved more embarrassment and political damage.

I tabled a letter to the CMC complaining about suspected corruption and political interference  relating to the criminal charging of this person, and I was referred to the ethics committee for two reasons.

1) Breached the subjudice rule because I referred in parliament to a matter which was before the criminal courts

2) In my letter to the CMC even though I'd used thick black texter pen 20 plus times on the persons name and child's name, after the ink dried the names in some areas of the letter were faintly visible. When a light was applied during a scanning process, the names were very readable. There fore I was charged with identifying people in a child safety matter and found guilty of contempt.

The person I took to parliament has now had another 3 criminal charges laid against them, and yes the court date has been delayed again. A child safety officer who was placed in charge of this person, even though they were to be a witness for the prosecution, attempted to use custody of the child as an inducement for this person to plead guilty to the charges. This was all taped and sent to the CMC, who ... surprise surprise ... referred to back to child safety so that they could investigate themselves.

When I say I believe its rotten to the core ... its rotten to the core. And I haven't even told you about the police who threatened to raid my office and home to try and get evidence to throw at this person, after they sat in parliament.

The Speaker of parliament hired a QC to write to the Police commissioner and told him that the police were out of line and that he ( speaker ) would take the police to the high court if they tried that sort of stunt again.... or words to that effect.

What's the bet that this person's court case will be delayed until after the next state election?

I can talk more in this blog about what happened, than I can in parliament, which is a sad reflection on so called free speech in parliament.

Once this matter is no longer subjudice, then all I need is 5 mins in parliament under privilege and I will have the Child safety and police ministers sweating blood ( metaphorically speaking)

Comment by Rory Donnellan on January 17, 2012 at 10:16pm

Rob,

Sounds like Mr Nuttall might have been the fall-guy, a scapegoat to distract media attention from far more serious criminals. Now that you are on their trail, I hope you aren't subjected to tax-audits every 3 months, or some other other dodgy tactic to keep you similarly distracted.

Comment by Rob Messenger on January 17, 2012 at 9:28am

Rory,

It may be rhetorical, but its a dam good one. I believe after speaking with Mr Nuttall that its goes to the highest levels of government in QLD. The only way to address corruption in QLD is to establish a Fitzgerald style Royal commission and give indemnity to Nuttall.

If I was premier I'd also say, "there is indemnity for the first 5 politicians and public officers who come forward and give credible information about hight level corruption... there will not be any more indemnities given out after that.."

Comment by Rory Donnellan on January 17, 2012 at 8:51am

I know this is merely a rhetorical question with no real prospect of being answered in the foreseeable future, but it would be interesting to find out how far up the chain of command this institutionalised corruption extends.

Comment by Ian Macrae Yeates on January 17, 2012 at 8:07am

I think you're on a winner here, Rob!

Comment by Rory Donnellan on January 17, 2012 at 6:07am

Rob,

There must be a few other Queensland "Stealth" collaborators who will no doubt expect the same "right to silence". It's obviously in the interests of the Labor government to keep the trail of corruption under wraps.

 

Comment by Rob Messenger on January 16, 2012 at 9:19am

Peter, So we agree that the "Prince" shouldn't have the right to silence? 

Comment by Peter Jesser on January 16, 2012 at 5:37am

You are absolutely right. They are supposed to "monitor" and "audit". They do not do either, as far as I can see. I have some ideas on third party investigation which would really shake up the system, but I am still working on that.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page