131106-G. H .Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To MR Clive Palmer - MP Elect - Re THE GOVERNMENTS CORPORATE FRAUD PDF

WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Mr Clive Palmer
6-11-2013
Palmer United Party Admin@PalmerUnited.com 5

?
Cc: Mr Tony Abbott: Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.au

Ref: 131106-G. H .Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Clive Palmer -MP electReTHE GOVERNMENTS CORPORATE FRAUD
10 Clive, I understand that the Australian Electoral Commission had declared you the successful candidate of 2013 Federal election in the seat of FAIRFAX, hence, as a Member of Parliamentelect (do note the word -elect as you are not a Member of Parliament nor entitled to any 15 benefits as such until you have actually been sworn in taking up the seat!) I urge you to hold the government accountable for its reported 5 billion dollars UNCONSTITUTIONAL spending spree/give away, as if there is no tomorrow. Remember they are giving away the hard earned taxes your companies also had to pay! I have outlined various relevant matters below. 20 As a CONSTITUTIONALIST I hold our constitution that is The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) as being sacred. No one and so neither the courts or any Royal Commission (even so they purported to do so in their own criminal manner, such as FRATERNISING by members of the High Court of Australia) can amend the constitution but only We, the People, by a proper referendum to approve such proposed amendment of the 25 constitution.
Hansard 25-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE
30
Mr. WISE: I can see no other course. It has taken 100 years for the United States to pass a Civil Service Act, and now it is not of very much value. If we get a party system, and follow it out in the appointment of civil servants, we will be initiating a system of corruption which would gain strength every day. END QUOTE
35 Now lets consider your own businesses. Suppose you appoint a new CEO and he then immediately or about immediately start reportedly transferring millions of dollars to (say) his mates bank accounts, without any approval to do so, and without having the legal authority either to do so. Obviously, you would likely call in the authorities, including the police, but what if the police is acting in a manner such as exposed by Shane at his website Kangaroo Court of 40 Australia? Former federal cop Mick Keelty to investigate stolen federal votes. So where are the real police? https://au-mg6.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?retry_ssl=1 and The Canberra Mafia. How and why the Australian Federal Government conceal corruption. http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com/2011/10/09/the-canberra-mafia-how-and-why-thep1 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
australian-federal-government-conceal-corruption/ and Public service keeps fraud cases private http://www.smh.com.au/national/public-service-keeps-fraud-cases-private-20110923-1kpdr.html

QUOTE At the end of 1999, a team of immigration analysts was facing a curious problem. Asked to compile statistics on where new migrants were living, the staff had to dig out original forms to match against later data. But as they moved through the department's old Cumberland Street offices in Sydney, they found scores of files had vanished. Click here to view interactive graphic About the same time, another official arranging a citizenship ceremony was annoyed to find a child's name missing from a key certificate. He searched for a hard copy original to check the name but he came across the same problem. The file couldn't be found. There was another link. That child's citizenship file and the documents missing from Cumberland Street had been handled by the same senior officer - David Moon. The missing papers were later found stashed inside his office.
10
15
It was later revealed 110 Chinese migrants whose applications Moon had approved should never have been granted citizenship. Moon had been taking thousands of dollars in kickbacks and luxury overseas holidays to illegally fast-track them through the system. In 2008, the 69-year-old was jailed. Now, a Herald investigation has found evidence to suggest there may be hundreds of similar cases lying in wait. Confidential files obtained using freedom of information show thousands of allegations of graft and abuse of office are being levelled against government staff each year - but only a handful are properly investigated. Last year, almost 1800 misconduct cases were handled inside just 5 per cent of the agencies that make up the federal government. In the past six years, more than 3200 investigations have been conducted inside the Department of Defence alone. Almost one-fifth of Australian Customs and Border Protection's workforce has been investigated since 2007 for offences including bribery and ''prohibited imports''. In January, customs joined two law-enforcement bodies already under the purview of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, a corruption watchdog. But for the rest of the Commonwealth, no one is watching. Moon's is a salutary lesson because he wasn't exposed by someone blowing the whistle. There was no one inside the Department of Immigration who would have been willing or able to do anything with allegations that controversial - at one point, Moon simply declined to be interviewed by department officers. The Australian Federal Police, which concentrates on drug trafficking and counter-terrorism, is reluctant to deal with Commonwealth fraud matters. It is likely the police took the case because the evidence was too conspicuous to ignore. There may be hundreds of bureaucrats in the public service who have previously been the target of internal investigations. In one confidential memo obtained by the Herald, senior Department of Immigration personnel are told that several staff had resigned ''to avoid incurring a breach of the APS [Australian Public Service] code of conduct on their employment record and likelihood of serious sanction being imposed''. This is not a rare occurrence. In the past six years, no fewer than 919 fraud investigations into Commonwealth public servants were prematurely terminated because they resigned. THE senior executives who lead Canberra's public service promulgate the myth the Commonwealth does not have a corruption problem. Carmel McGregor, then the acting public service commissioner, told a parliamentary law enforcement committee in mid-2009: ''There is no evidence that corruption is widespread in the APS." That may be p2 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
20
25
30
35
40
true. But it is also true that corruption in the Commonwealth government is just as prevalent as elsewhere in Australia. Not only are a substantial number of allegations formally lodged every day against APS staff, but most of those are never independently examined. Previously unpublished audits obtained by the Herald record more than 3800 internal investigations in nine departments in roughly the past three years. The Department of Defence has been home to another 1300 in the same period and there are scores of other agencies whose files remain secret. The Australian Taxation Office has conducted 883 internal investigations in the past two years. Last year, in 10 agencies, there were 21 cases of alleged corruption, 65 conflicts of interest, and 247 cases of fraud. The public has heard about none of these, and many, on the evidence seen by the Herald, appear to have been handled discreetly to avoid public embarrassment. Indeed, there were only 11 referrals to the federal police by the entire Commonwealth government last year. The internal audit files obtained by the Herald also show widespread corruption risks - poorly-managed procurements worth many millions of dollars, shoddy information security measures such as passwords which are never expunged and a culture of rorting travel benefits, salary entitlements or department credit cards. In 2007, Griffith University published data from a survey of 8000 public servants about fraud and misconduct.
10
15
20
Canberra scored as well, or as poorly, as NSW, Queensland and Western Australia, which all have corruption-busting agencies. A total of 22 per cent had direct evidence of the rorting of entitlements, 31 per cent had seen a cover-up of poor performance and 10 per cent had seen someone use their status to obtain personal favours. More federal employees had seen money stolen, resources improperly used for personal gain or pornography downloaded to a work computer than their state counterparts. Crucially, only marginally fewer Commonwealth employees (2.4 per cent) had direct evidence of the payment of bribes than those in NSW (2.9 per cent). The Australian Public Service Commission guides the bureaucracy on values and conduct. The Australian National Audit Office audits spending and performance. The Commonwealth Ombudsman handles complaints. And almost every department has its own audit unit. They say where cases of serious corruption emerge - Moon is an example, as is Nick Petroulias, the former assistant tax commissioner jailed in 2008 for selling classified information - the AFP has the powers needed to investigate. But there are several problems with this position. ''They have a conflict of interest,'' John McMillan, the former Commonwealth Ombudsman, says. ''They do not want to expose a weakness in their own procedures or have the public questioning the integrity of their process. By and large the interest of an agency is to avoid any publicity questioning its efficiency or integrity.'' Of 500 internal fraud cases recorded in the Department of Immigration in the past two years, only six were referred to the AFP.
25
30
35
40
Last year, Centrelink investigated 337 of its employees for misconduct including conflicts of interest, fraud and abuse of office. In 2008, the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs investigated 138 allegations that staff obtained a benefit by deception, and 475 misconduct cases between July 2007 and December 2009. How many cases were referred to the AFP by each agency in the past two years? One. p3 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
The reluctance of departments to bring ignominy upon themselves is one reason for the low rate of referrals if someone has defrauded the agency it is because financial controls allowed them to do so. But there is another important reason. Internal investigators might find an invoice is missing, but they are unlikely to uncover one that was forged.
Then there are questions about the AFP's capacity to take up the cudgels. That it does so already is a myth, says Professor A.J.Brown,one of the country's most recognised public law experts. Unless the matter touches on criminality at the top end of the spectrum, the AFP has other priorities. ''There is currently no expectation [among Commonwealth agencies] that the AFP would ever help deal with other types of alleged official misconduct, such as conflicts of interest, even in complex or serious cases.'' Even the former AFP commissioner, Michael Keelty, has suggested as much. In 2006, he said the anticorruption agency that oversees the AFP could have its jurisdiction expanded. ''If we are serious about this, and if it is not just a quick fix, then the AFP could benefit in its investigations if the ACLEI [Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity] had a wider remit than what is proposed," he said. FEDERAL governments have been forced to install a series of royal commissioners to address misconduct when it makes its way to the surface. Brown cites the Palmer and Comrie inquiries into the Department of Immigration which exposed a ''far-reaching pattern of systemic organisational failures''; the Cole inquiry into the payment of $220 million in bribes by AWB; and the Clarke inquiry into the government's handling of the Mohamed Haneef affair. Then there is the Securency scandal. So far, eight executives and a former deputy chairman of the Reserve Bank of Australia have been charged here and overseas with the bribery of officials in Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam to secure banknote printing contracts. This week, the government announced a ''National Anti-Corruption Plan'' at a cost of less than $700,000 which is to be compiled by people inside the Attorney-General's Department. The government says it will ''involve a thorough review of existing measures''.
10
15
20
25
But on Thursday, the Home Affairs and Justice Minister, Brendan O'Connor, said those around him had yet to present a compelling argument that Australia's largest body politic needs a standing royal commission. The former diplomat and long-time Canberra watcher Bruce Haigh says such arguments are never going to be mounted by the vested powers that run the federal government. Corruption is not a topic discussed at dinner parties in Canberra.
30
''Canberra is a closed place,'' he says. ''There is a culture that we're separate and we're apart. It is a phony culture.'' END QUOTE
And
Pigs On The Run The Australian Federal Police http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com/2011/04/11/pigs-on-
35 the-run-the-australian-federal-police/
QUOTE This posting has one agenda. To show how the Australian Federal Police under the leadership of Commissioner Tony Negus conceal criminal conduct in Federal Government Departments and Agencies. The current Defence Force sex tape scandal is almost exactly the same as the current Reserve Bank Bribery Scandal. Both had complaints made to the Federal Police. On both occasions the Federal Police did nothing until the media became involved. It is worth noting that the Commonwealth Ombudsman, Professor John McMillan, openly stated in an ABC Four Corners interview that the Australian Federal Police do not want to know about corruption in their own department. He said he was told this directly by senior Australian Federal Police. This in itself says there needs to be a Royal Commission into the Federal Police. He made this statement in October 2008 in an interview with Sally Neighbour in the story titled Good Cop, Bad Cop. click her to watch). The reality is p4 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
40
45
fairly clear that it is a lot broader than that, the Federal Police do not want to know about corruption or criminal conduct in any Government Department. Australian Defence Force sex tape scandal The Australian public have seen the Federal Polices cover-up tactics in full flight in the last few days with the Australian Defence Force sex tape scandal involving the 18 year old girl. The Federal Police initially swept it under the carpet and only decided to investigate when Channel 10 ran an interview with the girl on the nightly news. or at least that is what the Australian Defence are implying by their public statements. Both Defence and the Federal Police are have been contradicting each other all over the place with their public staements. A quick overview is that an 18 year old female cadet at the Australian Defence Force Academy was secretly filmed having sex with a male cadet using the telecommunication service Skype. The male cadet had set up the video unknown to the girl and six other cadets were in another room watching, two which were under the age of 18. Still photographs were also taken on mobile phones and distributed around the base. Another cadet was shown the photos and was disgusted and made a complaint to Defence Force Officers.
10
15
The 18 year old female was told by Defence that Federal Police had told Defence Force investigators that it was not a crime in the ACT like other jurisdictions (other states). She was told that all that would happen is that the cadets involved have leave stopped and restriction of privileges. The day that Channel Ten ran the story they contacted the Australian Defence Force Academy for a response and were told that the Federal Police had changed their initial advice because it happened on Federal Property and it is covered by Commonwealth Laws and that the they would now in investigate. The problem with this is that the ADF (Australian Defence Force) have a very large and well resourced legal department and would have been well aware right from the start that a crime had been committed and that is was covered by Commonwealth Law. The General Counsel for Defence, David Lloyd would have been aware without a doubt but as you can see from a previous posting he has no hesitation in covering up corrupt and criminal conduct at the ADF. (Click here to read previous posting) The so-called initial advice that it was not covered by ACT laws and that they only decided to investigate when they realised it happened on Federal Property and is covered by Commonwealth Laws is one of the most stupid things I have ever heard. It does not matter whether it is on Federal Property or not to be covered by Commonwealth laws and the original Federal Police Officer who gave the advice would have known this the same as David Lloyd General Council for Defence would have known. The whole of Australia is covered by Commonwealth Laws no matter were you are in the country. I really have to wonder if the ADF ever contacted the Federal Police in the first place and only did when the media became involved. This is what Commissioner Tony Negus has been quoted as saying in the last few days:
20
25
30
35
Australian Federal Police commissioner Tony Negus said the original information provided by defence to police related to a very bare set of circumstances. That advice that was provided by defence didnt really fully comprehend the magnitude of what we now know to be the case, Defence sought advice from the AFP and was initially advised it did not appear any offences had been committed. Mr Negus said defence conducted some original inquiries and some preliminary legal advice was provided on the basis of that information. But then again the circumstances came out more fully later on, he said. p5 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
40
Asked if he thought this was intentional, Mr Negus replied: No, there was preliminary advice sought on a particular question, that advice was provided and the circumstances then grew from there. ( To read the full article click here) Sounds like total crap coming from Tony Neguss mouth to me.
Just for the record what happened is a clear breach of section 474.17 of the 1995 Criminal Code: 474.17 Using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence (1) A person is guilty of an offence if: (a) the person uses a carriage service; and (b) the person does so in a way (whether by the method of use or the content of a communication, or both) that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, menacing, harassing or offensive. Penalty: Imprisonment for 3 years. It took me all of 15 minutes to skim through the 1995 Criminal Code to find a section that covers the exact situation. Are we really to believe the ADF and Federal Police did not know? Reserve Bank of Australia bribery scandal
10
15
The Reserve Bank bribery scandal involves a subsidiary of the Reserve Bank of Australia called Securency which makes and sells bank notes. As it turns out they have been caught bribing overseas officials to win contracts. It is illegal under Australian Law to bribe overseas officials. A whistleblower who worked for Securency went to the Australian Federal Police in April 2008 armed with hard evidence. The Federal Police tried to sweep it under the carpet which they did successfully until May 2009 when The Age newspaper in Melbourne ran a story exposing the corrupt deals at Securency. In an interview with ABC Radio on the 26th May 2010 this is what Federal Police Commissioner Tony Negus said: There was an initial assessment done of that material and at that time, over the coming months, it was decided that there was insufficient material to launch an investigation. Looking back, there could have been more done at that time, I think, to look further and deeper into the issue. At a later stage there was more material provided to the Australian Crime Commission, which was again provided to the AFP; at about that time the matter was formally referred to us by the RBA after the matter was featured in The Age newspaper. It is almost verbatim with what Tony Negus has said in relation with the Defence Force sex scandal.
20
25
30
Below is some of the transcript showing what the whistleblower said on the ABC Four Corners program in a story titled Dirty Money which was broadcast on the 24th M ay 2010. INSIDER (Re-enactment): Well the fact that it was happening right under the nose of the Reserve Bank of Australia was again it was staggering to me. I just couldnt believe that this was happening to a subsidiary of the Reserve Bank.
35
NICK MCKENZIE: By April 2008, our Securency insider had seen enough. He walked into the offices of the Australian Federal Police building in Melbourne with the same information he has exposed on Four Corners tonight. p6 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
DR DAVID CHAIKIN, ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS, SYDNEY UNIVERSITY: The information that that whistleblower had was gold. NICK MCKENZIE: But instead of prompting action the Insiders information was all but ignored by the AFP.
INSIDER (Re-enactment): Well it was always like, Yeah were working on something else or Were overseas or Well get back to you. And it sort of petered out after four or five months to no contact at all and that was just where it stayed. NICK MCKENZIE: Were you surprised? INSIDER (Re-enactment): Yeah, I was surprised. Yes. I was surprised that a serious matter like this with very serious implications for the people involved in this activity that it could just be dismissed so relatively easily. NICK MCKENZIE: In May last year, The Age newspaper finally lifted the lid on Securencys d odgy deals. That same day the Reserve Bank of Australia called in the AFP. A year had passed since federal agents were first tipped off.
10
15
End Transcript. (Click here to read the full transcript) (Click here to watch the video) It is interesting in the discrepancy in what Tony Negus said and what the whistleblower said. I know who I believe. Today is April 2011 some three years after the whistleblower went to the Australian Federal Police with evidence that was described as Gold in the above transcript yet no one has ever been charged and probably never will be if Tony Negus has his way. There are plenty of other examples of the Federal Police sweeping crimes under the carpet, two being the AWB Bribery Scandal and the Chief Magistrate Ron Cahill scandal, but I was in the process of doing postings on both of those so I will hold off getting into the details of them. While it is fair to say that many Federal Police are decent people who do their job to the best of their ability, it is also fair to say that many Federal Police are guilty of concealing criminal offences on a regular basis and should be in jail, starting with Commissioner Tony Negus whose leadership not only allows this to happen but helps facilitate it. Below is an email that I sent to Commissioner Tony Negus and others on the 11th April 2011. From: Shane Dowling [mailto:shanedowling1@bigpond.com] Sent: Monday, 11 April 2011 12:17 PM To: tony.negus@afp.gov.au; brendan.oconnor.mp@aph.gov.au; R.McClelland.MP@aph.gov.au; roman.quaedvlieg@afp.gov.au; andrew.colvin@afp.gov.au; michael.phelan@afp.gov.au; peter.drennan@afp.gov.au; andrew.wood@afp.gov.au; Stephen.Smith.MP@aph.gov.au; denise.taunton@defence.gov.au Cc: tony.abbott.mp@aph.gov.au; senator.ludlam@aph.gov.au; senator.brandis@aph.gov.au; senator.trood@aph.gov.au; andrew.wilkie.mp@aph.gov.au; meetinginvitation@pm.gov.au Subject: Defence Force Sex Tape Breach of Section 474.17 of the 1995 Criminal Code Dear Commissioner Negus One of the laws that has been breached in the Defence sex tape scandal is:
20
25
30
35
40
Section 474.17 of the 1995 Criminal Code: p7 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
474.17 Using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence (1) A person is guilty of an offence if: (a) the person uses a carriage service; and (b) the person does so in a way (whether by the method of use or the content of a communication, or both) that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, menacing, harassing or offensive. Penalty: Imprisonment for 3 years. It took me all of 15 minutes to skim through the 1995 Criminal Code to find a section that covers the exact situation. I have done a posting on my website which covers the matter, It is titled Pigs On The Run The Australian Federal Police http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com/2011/04/11/pigs-on-the-run-the-australian-federal-police/ If you need any more help please do not hesitate to contact me. (Given the situation is obviously beyond the capabilities of the Australian Federal Police) Regards
10
15
Shane Dowling END QUOTE
We also then have to consider the case of Magill v Magill in which I had the involvement to assist Liam Magill in that his (former) wife Meredith McClelland Magill had produced 3 children 20 during the marriage. During 2000 Liam then asked me to assist him (Which I subsequently did FREE OF CHARGE) as his lawyer at the time had claimed that Liam needed $6,000 to fund an appeal against a Registrars decision. I pointed out that on 25 October 1994 in the matter of Abbott v Abbott (Brisbane hearing of the Family Court of Australia) Kay J as part of the Full Court had stated that there never could be a time limit upon a review of a Registrars decision, 25 and as such I viewed no appeal was required. Just a review. Safe to say, the judges turned against me in the Magill v Magill case, but in the end while his appeal was dismissed the Full Court acknowledged that Liam was not the father of 2 of the 3 of the children born during the marriage. and that was Liam was after, the truth! 30 I understand that this matter went all the way to the High Court of Australia, before Justice Susan Crennan. In my view, this judge had a conflict of interest, in that if she had upheld the case of Liam then her former husband Max may very well have been able to sue Susan herself Also, as I understand it the following is claimed: 35
Susan Crennan (nee Walsh) while residing with her husband Max had a long term affair with Michael, the latter One was residing with his wife Helen in allegedly an open marriage. Michael & Helen had 2 children being Michael Jr born May 1965, Anna born April 1968. Max and Susan had 2 children during the marriage being Daniel born 25/5/1967, Brigit born 20/5/1969. I understand that after the broke up in 1976 then Susan advised Max he was not the biological father of the 2 children born during their marriage. Subsequently Kathleen was born while Susan and Michael were married.
40
People do at times fall in love and children then are born as result of this. It has been as I understand it something that happened for centuries and indeed the Knights which were fighting in the Middle East then already used chastity belts to seek to prevent their wifes to engage
p8 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
In sexual intercourse during their absenteeism. Too bad if the Knight was slain in battle. There are those who reside in what is known as open marriage, where in fact for the survival of the marriage either or both parties are involved in extra marital affairs. It is however also to the children to deny them the right to know their genetic makeup. When no such open marriage 5 situation exist, and the wife secretly has a lover and bears a child to him, but pretend to the husband to be the biological father, that where I view the wife by this is very deceitful, not just to the husband but indeed, it may eventuate that a child may very well die because the mother failed to make known the childs genetic history. In an emergency this can be very serious. A child may have an adverse affect to certain medication, etc, not known to the husband when he delivers in 10 an emergency his child to a hospital in good faith he is the biological father of the child. The deceit by the wife is also, that this husband has an emotional and mental compact with the child, and then is told forget about it you are no longer relevant to the child because I cheated on you about being the father of the child.
.
15 How on earth can this be in interest of the child, one has to wonder. Perhaps compulsory paternity testing is what should be introduced? Women who fail to disclose extra marital relationships at the time of a child being conceived nevertheless later seek child support also must be considered to have been willing to defraud the courts as well as commit perjury, etc.
.
20 I have grave concerns that Susan Crennan as a judge in the High Court of Australia, where she is supposed uphold the law, yet I view showed a total disregard to her own children rights during the time she deceived them to be the children of her husband, besides the continuous deception against her then husband Max. I view we have apathetical lair in the court and this person then has to adjudicate about a case that might be deemed by people to be similar to her own deceptive 25 conduct and so there was an implied bias and she should have I view abstained from hearing and determining the case. What to me she seemed to do was to endorse her own deceptive conduct as being justified. The book "Law Made Simple" by Colin F. Padfield, LL.B.,D.P.A.(Lond.) on page 55: QUOTE 30 "The Rule against Bias. A true judicial decision can be reached only if the judge himself is impartial. This is an obvious requirement in a court of law or a tribunal. In R. v Rand (1866) it was held that a judge is disqualified where (i) he has a direct pecuniary interest, however small, in the subject-matter in dispute; or (ii) there is real likelihood that the judge would have a bias in favour of one of the parties. 35 For example, if a judge is related to, or is a friend of, one of the parties to a dispute there would be real likelihood of bias. It is immaterial whether a judicial decision was in fact biased, for as was said by Lord Chief Justice Heward in R. v Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy (1924): 'Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly 40 be seen to be done.'
END QUOTE
He High Court of Australia was duty bound to adjudicate the Magill v Magill case according to the provisions of the Family Law Act 1975 which dictates that the marriage is between one man and one woman to the exclusion of others then I view to legal provisions and not as to how one 45 of its own judges may have perhaps an immoral/unlawful conduct.
R v. Lusink and another; Ex Parte Shaw (1980) 6 FLR 235 and 236 QUOTE However in some cases the words or conduct of a judge may be suck as to lead the parties reasonably to think that the judge has prejudged an important question in the case, and then prohibition may issue. Of course, the court which is asked to grant prohibition will not lightly conclude that the judge may reasonably be suspected of bias in this sense; it must be "firmly established" that such a suspicion may reasonably be engendered in the minds of the parties or the public, as was made clear by the court in R v Commonwealth Conciliation and p9 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
50
arbitration Commission; Ex parte Angliss Group (1969) 122 CLR 546 at 553-4, in the passage cited in R v Watson; Ex parte Armstrong (132 CLR at 262).
10
The critical question, however, is not whether a judge believes he or she has prejudged a question, but whether that is what a party or the public might reasonably suspect has occurred (see per Lord Denning MR in Metropolitan Properties Co. (FGC Ltd v Lannon (1969) 1 QB 577 at 599, a judgment cited with approval by this court in R v Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission; Ex Parte Angliss Group (1969) 122 CLR 546 at 553; In some circumstances repeated denials of prejudging might well convey the impression of "protesting to much"... END QUOTE
.
15
20
Dimes v. Proprietors of the Grand Junction Canal (1852) 3 II,L.C. 759 QUOTE The fundamental rule of English (Australian) law is that " No man can be a judge in his own case". It has long been held that if there is bias or the appearance of bias such as to deny justice or create the impression that justice has not been done, then that bias, or apparent bias, is sufficient to invalidate the decision of those who made the decision. END QUOTE Reg v. The London County Council (1894) XI .L.R. 24 Sharp v. Carey (1897) 23 V.L.R. 248 Austin Digest 17. Reg. v. Moleswort (1893) 23 V.L.R. 582 Austin Digest 17. Black v. Black (1951) N.Z.L.R. 723 Ex Parte Blume (1958) W.N. (N.S.W.) 411Austin Digest 93,339,457,458 The test of judicial bias as laid down by the high court is whether it has been established that i t might reasonably be suspected by a fair minded person that the judge might not resolve the question before him with a fair and unprejudiced mind END QUOTE QUOTE R v. Lusink and another; Ex Parte Shaw (1980) 6 FLR 235 and 236 However in some cases the words or conduct of a judge may be such as to lead the parties reasonably to think that the judge has prejudged an important question in the case, and then prohibition may issue. Of course, the court which is asked to grant prohibition will not lightly conclude that the judge may reasonably be suspected of bias in this sense; it must be "firmly established" that such a suspicion may reasonably be engendered in the minds of the parties or the public, as was made clear by the court in R v Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission; Ex Parte Angliss Group (1969) 122 CLR 546 at 553-4, in the passage cited in R v Watson; Ex Parte Armstrong (132 CLR at 262). The critical question, however, is not whether a judge believes he or she has prejudged a question, but whether that is what a party or the public might reasonably suspect has occurred (see per Lord Denning MR in Metropolitan Properties Co. (FGC Ltd v Lannon (1969) 1 QB 577 at 599, a judgement cited with approval by this court in R v Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission; Ex Parte Angliss Group (1969) 122 CLR 546 at 553; In some circumstances repeated denials of prejudging might well convey the impression of "protesting to much... END QUOTE
25 QUOTE In the Marriage of P.N. and J.S. Axtell 7 FLR 931
30
35
40
45
In my view the 9 November 2006 decision of the High Court of Australia in Magill v Magill cannot stand, and the Court upon its own undertaking should have the case reheard. 50 In my view as like in the U.S.A. we have a corporate court system now existing, rather than a constitutional court system provided for within the constitution that we better take notice of how to return to a constitutional court system.
QUOTE
From: JACOB ROGINSKY <jroginsky@verizon.net> To: 'Richard Cordero' <dr.richard.cordero.esq@gmail.com>, legaljobs@inmotiononline.org, jstellakis@mbolegal.com, lawvhh@hofstra.edu Cc: AMOJ_MAIN@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 11:14 am [AMOJ_MAIN] RE: [Lex_Rex] Re: On exposing unaccountable judges' riskless wrongdoing and a plan of Subject: action to achieve legislated judicial reform Attachments: Text version of this message. (6KB)
It is time we all came to grips with the reality that the media moguls will do everything they can to support the tyranny of the ruling class in America. Only if we face the truth of our condition will we be in any position to do something about it. Corderonism is a safe and futile alternative to the philosophy of democratic realism, which ties government reforms to the peoples strength and governments weakness. Jacob Roginsky From: Lex_Rex@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Lex_Rex@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Cordero Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2013 1:40 PM To: legaljobs@inmotiononline.org; jstellakis@mbolegal.com; lawvhh@hofstra.edu Subject: [Lex_Rex] Re: On exposing unaccountable judges riskless wrongdoing and a plan of action to achieve legislated judicial reform ABSTRACT of Exposing Judges' Unaccountability and Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing :
10
15
Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting and a Plan of Action to Achieve Legislated Judicial Reform Based on Transparency, Accountability, Discipline by Citizen Boards, and Liability of Judges and Judiciaries to Their Victims
20
by Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq. Judicial Discipline Reform New York City Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@gmail.com
25
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf This study analyzes official statistics of the Federal Judiciary, legal provisions, and other publicly filed documents. It discusses how federal judges life -appointment; de facto unimpeachability and irremovability; self-immunization from discipline through abuse of the Judiciarys statutory self -policing authority; abuse of its vast Information Technology reso urces to interfere with their complainants communications; the secrecy in which they cover their adjudicative, administrative, disciplinary, and policy-making acts; and third parties fear of their individual and close rank retaliation render judges unaccountable. Their unaccountability makes their abuse of power riskless; the enormous amount of the most insidious corruptor over which they rule, money!, as well as other social and professional benefits make doing wrong to grab them tempting; and millions of in practice unreviewable cases make the temptation ever-present.
30
35
These are the means, motive, and opportunity for judges to do wrong and for their wrongdoing to be inevitable. p11 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
Judges do wrong in such regular, widespread, and coordinated fashion as to have turned wrongdoing into their institutionalized modus operandi and the Judiciary into the safe haven for judicial wrongdoers. Their abuse of power entrusted to them by We the People is a betrayal of trust. Engaging in it and giving priority to covering it up to protect themselves and their peers injure in fact peoples rights, property, liberty, and life; and deprive the People of their fundamental human, civil, and due process right of access to fair and impartial courts. Exposing the existence, scope, and gravity of their wrongdoing to the national public will cause such outrage as to enable the media and voters to force legislated, rather than! voluntary, judicial reform, lest politicians be voted out of, or not into, office; this is realistic, as the Tea Party precedent shows.
10
The exposure is started by the study, whose publication will pioneer the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting. It can be continued at a presentation by the author held at a law school attended by its members and those of business, journalism, and IT schools, civil rights advocates, and the media. The evidence of judges wrongdoing will introduce the call for reverse surveillance over them by We the People, as opposed to the mass surveillance over the People by the NSA with judges rubberstamping approval revealed by Edward Snowden. The presentation can give rise to the formation of a multidisciplinary team of students, professors, journalists, and civil rights advocates to conduct reverse surveillance through a Follow the money! and IT Follow the wire! investigation. The team can organize the first of a series of multimedia conferences to report to the national public its findings and expose judges pattern of disregard of the law. It can announce the formation of a multidisciplinary academic and business venture to promote: 1. the establishment of local chapters to surveil, report, and advocate reform a) based on transparency, accountability, discipline, and judges and the Judiciarys liability to their victims, and
15
20
25
b) implemented with the aid of citizen boards; 2. the creation of a for-profit institute to conduct IT research, educate, publish, etc.; and 3. the submission of articles on judges abuse of power and secrecy for publication in a v olume that can lead to a periodical. Such reform will be of historic proportions although it will only implement foundational principles of our republic: We the People are the only source of sovereign power, who entrust a portion of it to each public servant and to whom each is accountable, for none is beyond our control or above the law. The reform can begin in the Federal Judiciary and extend to Congress, the Executive Branch, the states, and the rest of the world. A new We the People-government paradigm can emerge: the Peoples Sunrise.
30
35
Those who are instrumental in its emergence can become recognized here and abroad as the Peoples Champions of Justice. For information on staging the presentation, contact Dr. Cordero at Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@gmail.com. Dare trigger history! http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf p12 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
2013 Richard Cordero. All rights reserved. A license is hereby granted for distributing and reprinting this article, provided it is distributed and reprinted in its entirety, without addition or modification and with inclusion of this copyright note; proper attribution is made to the author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.; and its link accompanies it: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >Lsch:8. END QUOTE
Getting back to your (hypothetical case against your) CEO, What if judges are FRATERNISING with your CEO how to defeat your case against him? 10 Dont tell me this doesnt happen, because I provide my submission on 19 July 2006 in the County Court of Victoria and in the end ton you during the marriage he Commonwealth of Australia lawyers submitted it was not in the best interest of the general community for it to oppose my appeals. Yes, after a 5 year epic legal battle I comprehensively defeated the Commonwealth of Australia, and so its highly paid lawyers, and none of my evidence and 15 submissions were challenged else. by any of the attorney-Generals, including that the evidence proved that the 2001 purported Federal election and the 2004 purported federal election were never constitutionally valid, and hence, as I submitted, neither John Howard or for that other purported elected Members of Parliament were not elected, and so neither were Ministers at the time of the 2003 armed murderous UNCONSTITUTIONAL invasion into Iraq. 20
HANSARD 22-9-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE The Hon. E. BARTON (New South Wales)[10.32]: I have read these reasons through very carefully, and I have been unable to discover that any of the evils which my hon. and learned friend, Mr. Clark, fears may be expected from leaving these words as they are. The powers are powers of legislation for the peace, order, and good government of the commonwealth in respect of the matters specified. No construction in the world could confer any powers beyond the ambit of those specified. The Hon. N.E. LEWIS (Tasmania)[10.35]: I should like to submit for the consideration of the leader of the Convention the question whether the words which the legislature of Tasmania have proposed to omit might not raise the question whether legislation of the federal parliament was in every instance for the peace, order, and good government of the commonwealth. Take, for instance, navigation laws. Might it not be contended that certain navigation laws were not for the peace, order, and good government of the commonwealth, and might there not be litigation upon the point? We are giving very full powers to the parliament of the commonwealth, and might we not very well leave it to them to decide whether their legislation was for the peace, order, and good government of the commonwealth? Surely that is sufficient, without our saying definitely that their legislation should be for the peace, order, and good government of the commonwealth. I hope the leader of the Convention will give the matter full consideration with a view to seeing whether these words are not surplusage, and whether, therefore, they had better not be left out of the bill altogether. The Hon. E. BARTON: The suggestion of the hon. member will be considered by the Drafting Committee. Amendment negatived. END QUOTE HANSARD 10-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
25
30
35
40
45 Australasian Convention)
QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).Then, again, there is the prerogative right to declare war and peace, an adjunct of which it is that the Queen herself, or her representative, where Her Majesty is not present, holds that prerogative. No one would ever dream of saying that the Queen would declare war or peace without the advice of a responsible Minister. END QUOTE HANSARD 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN: We can make an exception in favour of imperial interests. We have no desire to interfere with the imperial prerogative in matters of war and peace! p13 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
50
55
END QUOTE
I WAS THE ONLY PERSON WHO ACTUALLY PLACED THE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA, ON 4 OCCASIONS, BEING 18 5 FEBRUARY 2003, 19 FEBRUARY 2003, 18 MARCH 2003 AND 19 MARCH 2003, THE LATTER ONE BEING THE VERY DAY OF THE UNCONSTITUTIONA ARMED MURDEROUS INVASION INTO IRAQ. As I indicated above you are NOT a Member of Parliament until you actually take up the seat 10 elected for when the writs are returned. As such neither are so Tony Abbott, Joe Hockey, Malcolm Turnbull and anyone else who has been declared the successful candidate in the 2013 federal election, and this apart from the fact that the writs were invalid and so in any event no valid election was held for either Houses of Parliament, a repeat of the same of the 2001 and 2004 federal elections. What this underlines is what I understand your claim against the 15 Commonwealth Electoral Commission of incompetence, such as losing a reported 1,400 plus ballot papers.
.
While I understand you seem to favour electronic voting, however, as they was proven in the U.S.A. there they had at some voting centres 100% votes for one candidate to be President, as the 20 computers had been rigged. Moreover it was reported that electronic votes exceeded by more than 50% of the actual registered electors who had voted there. As such, electronic voting is a disaster that should never be accepted. What I submitted to the JSCEM (Joint Standing Committee in Electoral Matters) many years ago, way back in 2002, was that we need to have a separate body overseeing the Australian 25 Electoral Commission, this, as it now supervises its own conduct, and therefore there is an implied bias and a show of incompetence. Perhaps those attending to vote counting should be attending as if they attend to some hazard area, meaning in white overalls, that contains no pockets but only a zipper in front to undo, so that they cannot remove any ballot papers. Further, that security cameras are there to record the 30 vote counting. As the Framers of the Constitution stated; 35
Hansard 25-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. WISE: I can see no other course. It has taken 100 years for the United States to pass a Civil Service Act, and now it is not of very much value. If we get a party system, and follow it out in the appointment of civil servants, we will be initiating a system of corruption which would gain strength every day.
40
END QUOTE
So true. The unsupervised Australian Electoral Commission now can be infiltrated, if not already, by gangsters of the political party mobs, to remove ballot papers to ensure their candidate in marginal seats can still be declared to be the successful candidate, this, even so they had lost the 45 vote count originally. As I submitted to the JSCEM that there should be a blanket 4 year ban on any federal funding, etc, in regard of companies which provided in the previous 4 years financial support/donations to any candidate in an election. For sure, you may not liked this kind of a system but then again as 50 the Framers of the Constitution made clear:
Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS.-Suppose the sentry is asleep, or is in the swim with the other power? p14 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
Mr. GORDON.-There will be more than one sentry. In the case of a federal law, every member of a state Parliament will be a sentry, and, every constituent of a state Parliament will be a sentry. As regards a law passed by a state, every man in the Federal Parliament will be a sentry, and the whole constituency behind the Federal Parliament will be a sentry.
5 END QUOTE Hence, your business interest should be second place to your duties and obligations as a sentry.
.
And as a Member of Parliament (once you have taken up the seat of FAIRFAX) then consider 10 also the following:
Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.. The arguments of the Hon. Mr. Carruthers appear to have fallen on deaf ears, but, [start page 2042] as he pointed out, if there be embedded in the Constitution a direct enactment that no proposed laws for taxation including more than the one subject of taxation, and no proposed Appropriation Bill going outside the ordinary services of the year, can be legally dealt with, both the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate would not only be authorized, but would be imperatively required, in the discharge of their duty, to rule such a measure out of order at any stage of its existence. END QUOTE
15
20
And
Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE
25
Sir JOHN DOWNER.-Now it is coming out. The Constitution is made for the people and the states on terms that are just to both. Mr. DEAKIN.-It is made for the lawyers under this clause. Sir JOHN DOWNER.-I do not think so. If you say "Trust the Parliament," no Constitution is required at all; it can simply be provided that a certain number of gentlemen shall be elected, and meet together, and, without limitation, do what they like. Victoria would not agree to that. But there is a desire to draw the very life-blood of the Constitution, so far as the states are concerned, by this insidious amendment, which would give the Houses authority from time to time to put different constructions on this most important part of the Constitution. I hope we will do as we have done in many instances before, in matters that have been much debated-adhere to the decision we have already arrived at.
30
35 END QUOTE
And Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HOLDER.Surely there would be at least one representative out of the whole Senate and one member of the House of Representatives, who would have individuality enough, and strength enough, to get up and challenge the order of any particular measure which might be disorderly under this clause of the Constitution. Mr. ISAACS.-They would not all sit on the same side of the House. Mr. HOLDER.-I should think not. They would not all be Ministerialists, or all members of the Opposition, or all members of any particular party; and I cannot believe that any Bill which contained anything objectionable at all could pass through both Houses of the Federal Legislature without finding some one p15 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
40
45
member of either of the two Houses who would rise to a point of order , and have such a Bill laid aside of necessity as being out of order under this provision. END QUOTE And Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. CARRUTHERS (New South Wales).-It is worth while considering the stages that a proposed law has to go through, and the opportunity afforded to a member of either House or a member of the Executive to call attention to any infraction or infringement of the Constitution. It does not require a majority of the members of the House of Representatives to insist that the Constitution shall be obeyed in the matter of procedure; it only requires one solitary member to rise to a point of order , and the Speaker has to give a legal interpretation of the rules of procedure. It only requires one member of the Senate to call the attention of the President to the fact that a Bill is introduced contrary to the Constitution for that proposed law to be ruled out of order. It does not require a majority of the states to insist that the Constitu tion shall be obeyed, because a majority of the states cannot by resolution infringe the Constitution. Neither House could pass the standing order which would give the majority power to dissent from the Speaker's or President's ruling. The standing orders only confer certain explicit power. They give no power to either House to pass an order which would enable its members to amend the Constitution. END QUOTE
10
15
20 And
Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. REID.-I suppose that money could not be paid to any church under this Constitution? Mr. BARTON.-No; you have only two powers of spending money, and a church could not receive the funds of the Commonwealth under either of them. [start page 1773] END QUOTE Hansard 4-3-1898 Constitution convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
25
30 Australasian Convention)
QUOTE Clause 83.-No money shall be drawn from the Treasury of the Commonwealth, except under appropriation made by law. Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-I beg to move-
35
That at the end of clause 83, there be added the words "but until the first appropriation the Governor-General in Council may draw from the Treasury, and expend, such moneys as may be necessary for the maintenance of any department transferred to the Commonwealth under this Constitution." This is an amendment of substance, which I will explain in a few words. Clause 83 means that no money can be spent unless Parliament passes an Appropriation Act. But before Parliament is in existence certain departments will have been transferred to the Commonwealth. These departments will have to be administered by the Commonwealth, and that will necessitate expenditure for the maintenance and continuance of the departments. Mr. ISAACS.-How about the expenses of electing the first Parliament? Mr. BARTON.-That might have to wait. One is so chary about giving power to spend money that is not appropriated by law that I and my colleagues on the committee have endeavoured to keep the power down as low as possible, so as to confine it to expenditure absolutely necessary for the administration of departments. p16 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
40
45
END QUOTE Hansard 11-3-1898 Constitution convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Sir JOSEPH ABBOTT.Can it be suggested, however high the Federal High Court may be in regard to attainments, that under any circumstances the Judges of that court would have the experience, the training, and the knowledge of the men composing the Court of the Privy Council? Would it be possible to separate the members of the Federal High Court from local influences? Unintentionally, men are influenced by their surrounding conditions. It does not follow because a man is to-day in public life as Attorney-General, and tomorrow is sitting on the bench wearing the ermine, that he can dissociate himself or separate himself from local surroundings and be unbiased or uninfluenced by those considerations . Take a case of importance arising here. I admit that our Judges have great learning and extensive knowledge, and I admit the great power and the great strength of our Supreme Courts throughout the various colonies, but I say that they can have no experience equal to the men who occupy positions on the bench of the Privy Council. We are told, however, that the members of the Privy Council do not understand our law, that they do not know our conditions, and that they are unacquainted with local influences. Well, I have always considered that a very trifling matter in fact, I have thought it was a very desirable thing that they did not understand our local conditions, because our laws are not to be interpreted in regard to local conditions, but according to the intent contained within every word in them, apart from local conditions. I have heard men express their astonishment that the Judges of our own Supreme Court have not taken into consideration the Hansard debates when they were giving judgment. I feel quite sure that when an appeal goes to the Privy Council all these considerations are completely wiped out. The members [start page 2290] of the Board of the Privy Council do not consider our local conditions, but interpret our Acts in the words in which they are printed. I have already referred to the two chief objections to appeals to the Privy Council; first, the expense, and, secondly, the delay. I have endeavoured to show that the expense is not so enormous as it is represented to be. If honorable members will look at the return in relation to appeals to the Privy Council from decisions of the Supreme Court in Queensland every layman, at all events, will be struck by the fact that the expenses of one appeal were only 29 in Queensland, and 219 in the Privy Council-that means the taxed costs of the appeal. It has nothing to do with the local costs; it means the preparation of the transcript and the final cost in London. The difference between the cost of appeals to the proposed High Court and the cost of appeals to the Privy Council is well but rather under stated, by Sir Lambert Dobson, in a document which is quoted at page 969 of the report of the debates of this Convention at Adelaide; and I think that we are very much indebted to Sir Edward Braddon for quoting that information in the speech which he delivered on that occasion. In many cases counsel's fees at the present time are higher here than I have ever known them before, and I say this with a knowledge extending over 30 years of practical experience. Mr. BARTON.-Counsel's fees are a great deal lower with us than they were a few years ago. END QUOTE
10
15
20
25
30
35
40 So let we put you to the test regarding the following!

QUOTE iinet - Terry Brennan To Terry Brennan
45
Nov 4 at 12:43 PM Subject: $8 Billion to the reserve bank of Australia, while people of Australia are in poverty.
50
The so-called conservative federal government in this last week gave the Reserve Bank of Australia 8 Billion Dollars, saying it was necessary to protect the nation from global economic shocks. HELLO? Here we have an Australian Central Bank, masquerading as being owned/controlled by the Federal Government, but in fact is privately owned and completely independent (read the Australian Banking Act) and in fact, whilst they are quick to point out when asked who p17 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
55
owns it, that the Australian government injected a million dollars to get it started! So the stupid goyim are indoctrinated and brainwashed to believe that the RBA is owned and controlled by the Federal Government, when in fact it is nothing of the kind, it is owned and controlled by the Federal Reserve Bank of America, which in turn is owned and controlled by the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Goldman Sachs, and other Jewish international banksters. Now this week we have idiot treasurer Joe Hockey, saying that the Federal government has to put $8 Billion back into the RBA to protect the nation from global economic shocks! Here we have the Federal government, who was given the funds by the RBA in the first place, who created it out of nothing - thin air - with the flick of a few computer keys, (which we are not supposed to know, or even discuss) handing it back to the RBA to protect the nation. What does the RBA do with it? They cancel it out of existence of course, ready for the next loan out to the stupid goy government all at interest of course, which they also create out of thin air! When I went to primary school, this kind of behaviour was know as insanity, but today of course, we are more educated. Now its called economics! YEAH RIGHT! They all should be jailed!
10
15
20
25
The business by which banks create money out of nothing is so simple, that the mind is repelled. Prof. John Kenneth Gailbraith. Admin
30
------ Forwarded Message Subject: FW: $8 Billion to the reserve bank of Australia, while people of Australia are in poverty.
35
Subject: $8 Billion to the reserve bank of Australia, while people of Australia are in poverty. END QUOTE
40
45
50
55
As the Government is only recently appointed, and as such where there are no writs returned than none of the Members of Parliament-elect for the House of Representatives are sitting Members of Parliament, then none can vote or approve any appropriation bills for the reported this last week gave the Reserve Bank of Australia 8 Billion Dollars transfer of monies. As such, unless such monies were authorised by Appropriation Bills prior to the 2013 Federal election it seems to me that any conduct by Treasurer Joe Hockey, Prime Minister Tony Abbott and others in the Cabinet may constitute conspiracy to defraud the Consolidated Revenue Funds (THIS MEANS THE TAXPAYERS). . WHAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT IS IF IT CAN BE DEEMED REASONABLE, WHERE JULIA GILLARD REQUIRED SOME 18 MONTHS TO HAVE AN ASSESSMENT IF PENSIONS NEEDED A INCREASE IN PAYMENTS, WHEREAS PENSIONERS WHO RETIRED ACTUALLY ARE RECEIVING NO MORE BUT THEIR OWN MONIES BACK PAID DURING THEIR WORKING LIVES IN SPECIAL TAXATION, AND SO WHAT ASSESSMENT, IF ANY AT ALL, DID THE GOVERNMENT ENGAGE IN TO INVESTIGATE IF IN THE FIRST PLACE IT HAD CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS TO TRANSFER ABOUT 8 BILLION DOLLARS TO A PRIVATE COMPANY, NOT BEING A GOVERNMENT ENTITY OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA, AND IF THERE WAS SUCH CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS, NOT THAT I CONCEDE SUCH
EXISTED, THEN IF THERE WERE APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATION BILLS IN BLACE TO ALLOW FOR THIS TRANSFER? It seems to me that this more is a CONSPIRACY by those involved to defraud the taxpayers. In 5 my view a ROYAL COMMISSION should be held into this matter. FANCY GIVING AWAY $8 BUILLION UPON THE SAY SO OF PEOPLE WITHOUT ANY ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE PEOPLES PARLIAMENT.
R v Kidman [1915] HCA 58; (1915) 20 CLR 425 (16 September 1915)
10 QUOTE
The first question is as to the competence of the Australian Parliament to make the provisions of the Crimes Act 1915 (No. 6 of 1915) retrospective. By sec. 2 it is enacted (by way of amendment of the Crimes Act 1914) that any person who conspires with any other person "to defraud the Commonwealth" shall be guilty of an indictable offence; the penalty attached being imprisonment for three years or less. By sec. 3 it is enacted "This Act shall be deemed to have been in force from the date of the commencement of the Crimes Act 1914" (29th October 1914). There is, therefore, no doubt as to the intention of the Parliament to make a conspiracy to defraud the Commonwealth between 29th October 1914 and 7th May 1915 (the date of the commencement of the Crimes Act 1915) an indictable offence. There is no doubt that the Act of 1915 was meant to be retrospective; and therefore the numerous cases which lay down the principle of construction against retrospective or retroactive operation are inapplicable. If the Act were an Act of the British Parliament with its plenary powers, the principle of construction must yield to the clearly expressed intention of the Legislature. But the question as to the power of the Federal Parliament a Parliament which has no power to legislate except as to specified subjectsto legislate retrospectively, remains. For the purpose of the question I may assumewithout in any way deciding the pointthat, apart from the Act No. 6, a conspiracy to defraud the Commonwealth does not constitute a criminal offence within the State law or otherwise. END QUOTE
.
15
20
25
30
QUOTE Sorell v Smith (1925) Lord Dunedin in the House of Lords In an action against a set person in combination, a conspiracy to injure, followed by actual injury, will give good cause for action, and motive or instant where the act itself is not illegal is of the essence of the conspiracy. END QUOTE
Any FAIR MINDED PERSON would hold that this 8 Billion dollars give away is not something that was reasonably committed to after informed debate and discussions within the 35 Cabinet upon consideration of relevant Appropriation Bills for this, and hence we seem to have Tony Abbott to run a Government like that was reportedly done by Kevin Rudd. As I ongoing have made clear, including during 2011 numerous Sydney radio shows, we must pursue a ROYAL COMMISSION into the UNCONSTITUTIONAL murderous invasion into Iraq. After all, if the Commonwealth of Australia held it was not in the interest of the general 40 community to oppose my submissions (on 19-7-2006) then surely the General Public should be entitled to know why not? Is it because those involved in the UNCONSTITUTIONAL murderous armed invasion where indeed acting unconstitutional/unlawful, and causing Australian soldiers if not killed then to be injured in such unconstitutional/illegal invasion, then would those Ministers and others involved could be held to have committed TREASON, war 45 crimes, crimes against humanity, etc, and could be sued personally So better not to challenge my overwhelming evidence, not in the interest of the general community, but in the interest of the gangster mob parading as a political party in power, it seems it was? 50 Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
QUOTE Sir JOHN DOWNER.I think we might, on the attempt to found this great Commonwealth, just advance one step, not beyond the substance of the legislation, but beyond the form of the legislation, of the different colonies, and say that there shall be embedded in the Constitution the righteous principle that the Ministers of the Crown and their officials shall be liable for any arbitrary act or wrong they may do, in the same way as any private person would be. END QUOTE p19 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
55
I would like to see that those relatives of the soldiers who died in Iraq (and so Afghanistan) personally sued the relevant Minister(s) for their UNCONSTITUTIONAL invasion causing directly or indirectly the dead of their relatives. What kind of responsible Minister system do we have if they end up even being promoted when they stuff up big time, and not the minister but the taxpayers rather end up paying a compensation bill?
10 We also have that it is claimed the Commonwealth of Australia is going to pay to municipal/shire councils the monies they provided for the yes ill-conceived campaign to amend the constitution, to recognise them as a level of government. In my view, as a CONSTITUTIONALIST this would be unconstitutional because the funding cannot be deemed to be for public purposes of the Commonwealth. Also, I was one who objected to Banyule City Council on constitutional 15 grounds for it to support out of ratepayers funds the yes campaign and it simply made clear it would not respond further to me. As such the arrogance of the councillors and the CEO was that they could do as they like no matter if it was legally or not as they are above the rule of law. Well, now that their ill fated conquest was defeated then let them pay up out of their own monies and not that taxpayers, such as those whos councils refused to support the ill fated campaign still 20 end up having their taxation used for those irresponsible in their decision making. . Also, it should be understood that business confidence much is based upon how they understand relevant taxation applies and this as any business must calculate the charges they will make for their products they sell, to include any overhead cost such as taxation. Hence, if the 25 Commonwealth of Australia increased taxation then businesses must have well advanced warning about this. Constitutionally this is actually provided for, just that it is being ignored, in that the treasurer must hand down a budget that allows for the Appropriation and corresponding taxation Bills to be passed by both Houses of Parliament, and where it is failing to be passed in the Senate then a 3 month wait is required (as such the Cocopop tax was never constitutionally 30 valid as it was overnight in the Senate passed) and then if it fails again a DOUBLE DISSOLUTION to be held and after this is held (considering the writs are generally 100 days later returned) then a further joint sitting of both Houses of the Parliament may be required. As such we are looking at say at least 6 months before any taxation amendments can be implemented and as such a budget must be handed down to allow for all this. Meaning that 35 where the financial year commences on 1 July of each calendar year then the budget must be at least 6 months prior to this handed down meaning well before the Christmas prior to this 1 July. And, as the Framers of the Constitution made clear that once the Appropriation Bills and corresponding Taxation Bills were passed and enacted then they were so to say locked in and couldnt be amended for that financial year, not even in time of war! 40 Hansard 12-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. GLYNN Does that put a maximum on military expenditure? Mr. PEACOCK: A maximum on all expenditure!
45
Mr. BARTON: It seems to me to put a maximum on all expenditure, because the whole of the expenditure cannot exceed the total yearly expenditure in the performance of the services and powers given by the Constitution, and any powers subsequently transferred from the States to the Commonwealth. Mr. SYMON: Does that prevent any increase in case of war? Mr. BARTON: Yes. p20 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
END QUOTE
As such it is irrelevant if there are conventions to do otherwise, because conventions cannot overrule the true meaning and application of the constitution!
.
5 Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
Australasian Convention) QUOTE
10
15
Mr. WISE.-If the Federal Parliament chose to legislate upon, say, the education question-and the Constitution gives it no power to legislate in regard to that question-the Ministers for the time being in each state might say-"We are favorable to this law, because we shall get 100,000 a year, or so much a year, from the Federal Government as a subsidy for our schools," and thus they might wink at a violation of the Constitution, while no one could complain. If this is to be allowed, why should we have these elaborate provisions for the amendment of the Constitution? Why should we not say that the Constitution may be amended in any way that the Ministries of the several colonies may unanimously agree? Why have this provision for a referendum? Why consult the people at all? Why not leave this matter to the Ministers of the day? But the proposal has a more serious aspect, and for that reason only I will ask permission to occupy a few minutes in discussing it. END QUOTE QUOTE BROWN v. TEXAS, 443 U.S. 47 (1979) -- CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE 3527. The law helps the vigilant, before those who sleep on their rights. "A statute does not trump the Constitution." People v. Ortiz, (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th at p. 292, fn. 2 Conway v. Pasadena Humane Society (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 163 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. JERRY ARBERT POOL, C.A. No. 09-10303, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT (Opinion filed September 14, 2010), On Appeal From The United States District Court For The Eastern District of California "A statutory privilege cannot override a defendant's constitutional right." People v. Reber, (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d. 523 [223 Cal.Rptr. 139}; Vela v. Superior Ct, 208 Cal.App.3d. 141 [255 Cal.Rptr. 921], however, "the judiciary has a solemn obligation to insure that the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial is realized. If that right would be thwarted by enforcement of a statute, the state ...must yield." Vela v. Superior Ct., 208 Cal.App.3d. 141 [255 Cal.Rptr. 921 Obviously, administrative agencies, like police officers must obey the Constitution and may not deprive persons of constitutional rights. Southern Pac. Transportation Co. v. Public Utilities Com., 18 Cal.3d 308 [S.F. No. 23217. Supreme Court of California. November 23, 1976.] If evidence of a fact is clear, positive, un-contradicted and of such nature it cannot rationally be disbelieved, the court must instruct that fact has been established as a matter of law. Roberts v. Del Monte Properties Co., 111 CA2d. 69 (1952) If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers. Thomas Pynchon They will do whatever we let them get away with. Joseph Heller ~*~
20 Also consider:
25
30
35
40 END QUOTE So much more about it but as I often say we are being ruled by gangster mobs parading as political parties who have hijacked our legal system, our constitutional form of government and betrayed electors.
.
45
No one in the world could accept, at least not a FAIR MINDED PERSON, that Cabinet suddenly realized after being established (that is when sworn in) that they needed to provide 8 Billion dollars to a privately run company, called the Reserve Bank of Australia and this regardless if it was unconstitutional and no appropriation bills existed to authorize this. 50 We have this notion of conscious voting, as if the Members of Parliament can vote to party lines or to their own conscious. what about voting as to what the electors desire? It seems they just lost the plot! 55 We have the notion of Not in the interest of the general community and one then has to ask who decides what is not in the interest of the general community? Is it whenever some government Minister has stuffed up bid time and then use this phrase to avoid any scrutiny?
When the Commonwealth of Australia fought a protracted legal battle against me for FAILING TO VOTE and then after originally scoring convictions before a magistrate (I was given the understanding he was so to say leaned upon to convict me) then on appeal somehow it was no longer in the interest of the general community to oppose my appeals, even so the lawyers were 5 already attending to court and merely needed to oppose my submissions. so, who are the general community one has to ask?
WATSON v_ LEE (1979) 144 CLR 374;( JUDGE3 STEPHEN J.) QUOTE As Scott L.J. said in Blackpool Corporation v. Locker (1948) 1 KB 349, at p 361 , speaking there of sub-delegated legislation, "there is one quite general question . . . of supreme importance to the continuance of the rule of law under the British constitution, namely, the right of the public affected to know what that law is". The maxim that ignorance of the law is no excuse forms the "working hypothesis on which the rule of law rests in British democracy" but to operate it requires that "the whole of our law, written or unwritten, is accessible to the public - in the sense, of course, that at any rate its legal advisers have access to it at any moment, as of right". END QUOTE
10
15
20 Why is the general community not entitled to know why it was not in the interest of the general community to oppose my appeals where ever since the Commonwealth of Australia nevertheless continues to fine people for FAILING TO VOTE? WAS IT BECAUSE IT WAS HELD THAT MY EVIDENCE THAT THE THEN 25 GOVERNMENT HAD BEEN UNCONSTITUTIONALLY AND SO UNLAWFULLY BEEN INVOLVED IN A WARFTMONGERING CVONDUCT KILLING EVEN BABIES IN THEIR COTS DURING THE iRAQ INVASION AND BY THIS COMMITTING MASS MURDER, CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, WAR CRIMES, ETC, THAT IT WAS HELD BETTER NOT TO HAVE THIS DIRTY LAUNDRY EXPOSED IN THE 30 COURTS? AND MANY OF THE THEN MINISTERS ARE NOW AGAIN BACK IN POWER AND TONY ABBOTT NOW BEING PRIME MINISTER, THAT IS FOR MAXIMUM 3 MONTHS AS UNLESS THEY ARE VALIDLY ELECTED THEY WILL SEIZE TO BE SO AT THE EXPIRY OF THEIR 3 MONTH APPOINTMENT. 35 Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
QUOTE
10
15
20
25
30
35
Mr. BARTON.-We are going to suggest that it should read as follows:the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make any laws not applicable to the general community; but so that this power shall not extend to authorize legislation with respect to the affairs of the aboriginal race in any state. Mr. ISAACS.-My observations were extended much further than that. The term general community" I understand to mean the general community of the whole Commonwealth. If it means the general community of the whole Commonwealth, I do not see the meaning of saying that the Parliament of the Commonwealth shall have the exclusive authority to do that, because any single state would have the right to do it under any circumstances. If it means less than that-if it means the general community of a state-I do not see why it should not be left to the state. We should be placed in a very awkward position indeed if any particular state is forbidden to pass any distinctive legislation in certain well-known instances. For instance, if Victoria should choose to enact that Afghans shall only get hawkers' licences under certain conditions which are not [start page 228] applicable to Europeans she may be debarred by this sub-section from doing so. I do not know how it will affect our factory law in regard to the Chinese which does not operate beyond the confines of Victoria at all. Sir EDWARD BRADDON.-Why single out the Afghans? Mr. ISAACS.-If any other race possess the same characteristic as the Afghans I will put them in the same class. At all events, the expression general community" means the whole community of the Commonwealth. I do not think that this has any application. If it is to have any application at all, it seems to me to be intended to debar the state from passing legislation-necessary legislation, but purely confined to that state. I do not think that that sub-section ought to be there at all if that is the meaning of it. Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-I think the original intention of this sub-section was to deal with the affairs of such persons of other races-what are generally called inferior races, though I do not know with how much warrant sometimes-who may be in the Commonwealth at the time it is brought into existence, or who may under the laws of the Commonwealth regulating aliens come into it. We have made the dealing with aliens, which includes a certain degree of coloured immigration, a power of the Commonwealth, and we have made the dealing with immigration a power of the Commonwealth, so that all those of the races who come into the community after the establishment of the Commonwealth will not only enter subject to laws made in respect to their immigration, but will remain subject to any laws which the Commonwealth may specially devise for them. There is no reason why the Commonwealth should not have power to devise such laws. Sir GEORGE TURNER.-An exclusive power? Mr. BARTON.-It ought to have an exclusive power to devise such laws. Sir GEORGE TURNER.-If it does not exercise it can the state exercise it? Mr. BARTON.-Once the Commonwealth legislates with reference to the question of aliens and immigration, its legislation displaces the state law. END QUOTE HANSARD 28-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
40 QUOTE
Mr. ISAACS.-What is the meaning of the statement that the state cannot legislate for the whole general community? Mr. BARTON.-That is by way of description. A law made by the state does not apply to the general community. END QUOTE .
45
Hence, the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 is unconstitutional in that it pursues to be a race law against the general community. The external affairs powers cannot provide legislative powers that is not permitted within subsection 51(xxvi)! External powers can only provide for 50 the Commonwealth to enter into treaties within its constitutional powers but cannot be enforced against any citizen unless it is backed up by legislation (that is within its existing legislative powers). External Affairs powers cannot create legislative powers to govern internal matters! Hence I view the Tasmania Dam case failed on this also. But then again when you have a judge on the High Court of Australia refusing to hand down a decision because he doesnt know the 55 constitutional issue, it may underline how incompetently they are prepared to adjudicate in constitutional matters.
.
Hansard2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates; QUOTE Dr. QUICK.p23 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
10
The Constitution empowers the Federal Parliament to deal with certain external affairs, among which would probably be the right to negotiate for commercial treaties with foreign countries, in the same way as Canada has negotiated for such treaties. These treaties could only confer rights and privileges upon the citizens of the Commonwealth, because the Federal Government, in the exercise of its power, [start page 1753] could only act for and on behalf of its citizens. END QUOTE . Hansard 6-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. THYNNE: I shall quote from Mr. Dicey's recent work, which is very clear in its language. He says: One of the characteristics of a federation is that the law of the constitution must be either legally immutable or else capable of being changed only by some authority above and beyond the ordinary legislative bodies, whether federal or state legislatures, existing under the constitution. END QUOTE Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON.-I was going to explain when I was interrupted that the moment the Commonwealth legislates on this subject the power will become exclusive. END QUOTE Hansard 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON (New South Wales).-If this is left as an exclusive power the laws of the states will nevertheless remain in force under clause 100. Mr. TRENWITH.-Would the states still proceed to make laws? Mr. BARTON.-Not after this power of legislation comes into force. Their existing laws will, however, remain. If this is exclusive they can make no new laws, but the necessity of making these new laws will be all the more forced on the Commonwealth. END QUOTE The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) QUOTE 64 Ministers of State The Governor-General may appoint officers to administer such departments of State of the Commonwealth as the Governor-General in Council may establish. Such officers shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General. They shall be members of the Federal Executive Council, and shall be the Queens Ministers of State for the Commonwealth. Ministers to sit in Parliament After the first general election no Minister of State shall hold office for a longer period than three months unless he is or becomes a senator or a member of the House of Representatives. END QUOTE
15 .
20
25
30
35
40
45
As I referred to in my 16 October 2013 correspondence to you: QUOTE 50

As per my 8-9-2013 correspondence the following tuimer tab le is the correct one: QUOTE As I understand it the writs issued had: 15 August 2013 closing nominations as such 23 days must be counted at conclusion of the 15 August and the poll cannot be held until the conclusion of the 23 rd day. As such, it is not on the 23rd day!
55
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 16 August 2013 Friday 17 August 2013 Saturday 18 August 2013 Sunday 19 August 2013 Monday
10
15
20
25
Day 5 Day 6 Day 7 Day 8 Day 9 Day 10 Day 11 Day 12 Day 13 Day 14 Day 15 Day 16 Day 17 Day 18 Day 19 Day 20 Day 21 Day 22 Day 23 Day 24 Day 25 Day 26 Day 27 Day 28 Day 29 Day 30
20 August 2013 Tuesday 21 August 2013 Wednesday 22 August 2013 Thursday 23 August 2013 Friday 24 August 2013 Saturday 25 August 2013 Sunday 26 August 2013 Monday 27 August 2013 Tuesday 28 August 2013 Wednesday 29 August 2013 Thursday 30 August 2013 Friday 31 August 2013 Saturday 1 September 2013 Sunday 2 September 2013 Monday 3 September 2013 Tuesday 4 September 2013 Wednesday 5 September 2013 Thursday 6 September 2013 Friday 7 September 2013 Saturday 8 September 2013 Sunday, after which the first Saturday can become polling day! 9 September 2013 Monday 10 September 2013 Tuesday 11 September 2013 Wednesday 12 September 2013 Thursday 13 September 2013 Friday 14 September 2013 Saturday, first and last available polling date!
END QUOTE The error the AEC constantly and persistently hard headed is making is that it fails to accept that the 23 rd day cannot be used for a poll to be held as the 23 are the minimum days between the issue of the writs and the day the actual poll is held. This despite court judgment as to how days are to be calculated and despite that it was comprehensively defeated by me on 19 July 2006 for the same error in calculation. This is also why the supervision of how the AEC conduct elections should be in the hands of a supervisor not the AEC itself. END QUOTE
30
35 In my view what we need is a VELVET REVOLUTION to reclaim our constitutional and other legal rights. We cannot permit this scum of the earth that call itself a government to flaunt our constitution as it pleases.
.
In the lobbys of the courts in regard of Family Court matters it was a general comment between 40 those representing parties that if a (male) judge had been having sex with his wife ( the previous night) then the female litigant would win, and if she had refused then the male litigant would succeed in his case. It was that some judgments were handed down contrary to the evidence before the Court, like CRYSTAL BALL predictions. Perhaps I might wonder if Joe Hockey and fellow Cabinet Ministers were told by their wives to 45 better provide 8 Billion dollars to the Reserve bank of Australia, no matter how illegal it is, or they are out when it comes to any bed activities?
HANSARD 4-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir HENRY PARKES: The resolutions conclude: An executive, consisting of a governor-general, and such persons as may from time to time be appointed as his advisers, such persons sitting in Parliament, and whose term of office shall depend upon their possessing the confidence of the house of representatives expressed by the support of the majority. What is meant by that is simply to call into existence a ministry to conduct the affairs of the new nation as similar as it can be to the ministry of England-a body of constitutional advisers who shall stand as nearly as possible in the same relation to the representative of the Crown here [start page 27] a her Majesty's imperial advisers stand is relation to the Crown directly. These, then, are the principles which my resolutions seek to p25 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
50
55
lay down as a foundation, as I have already stated, for the new super structure, my object being to invite other gentlemen to work upon this foundation so as to best advance the ends we have in view. END QUOTE
5 After all, the Framers of the Constitution made clear that Ministers would be constitutional advisors to the Governor-General! Well, hello when did we last have a Minister who was a constitutional advisor? At times I wonder if they ever read and understood as well as comprehended what the constitution actually provides for and permits! 10 What we need is the OFFICE-OF-THE-GUARDIAN (Dont forget the hyphens!), a constitutional council that advises the Government, the People, the Parliament and the Courts as to the true meaning and application of the constitution. While those in power in the government may not desire to have me appointed as an Inter-State Commissioner (s101), likely for fear that it would strip them of their unconstitutional pork 15 barreling, they now have me as a critic which can unabated continue to expose their rot. Now lets see how we can reduce Commonwealth spending by simply acting within our constitutional framework. For example the constitution has no legislative powers in regard of art and sport and so what 20 is the Commonwealth doing to fund this? It is simply another pork barreling exercise that the Commonwealth should but out of. It is the legislative powers of the state to fund, if they desire to do so, the arts and sport. If it is not a specifically constitutionally listed legislative power then the Commonwealth has no business to fund it, or for that to legislate in regard of it. Much is argued about there not being a science Minister in the current Federal Government, but 25 again I science is not a listed constitutional legislative power.
Hansard 28-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. GLYNN (South Australia).-I desire to call the attention of the leader of the Convention to an apparent vagueness in the word "exclusive," to which reference has not yet been made. The word "exclusive," no matter at what time the power arises, whether on the coming into being of the Commonwealth, or the exercise of the power by the Federal Parliament, may mean, and I believe does mean, that the power of the state to legislate ceases. On the question of whether the exclusive power under this provision comes into being with the establishment of the Commonwealth, I would call the attention of the leader of the Convention to clause 84. That clause seems to indicate that this exclusive power arises the moment an Act is passed. END QUOTE Hansard 28-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
30
35
40 QUOTE
Sir JOHN DOWNER.-There must be some body which deems it necessary, and the only body to which the words can refer is the Commonwealth Parliament. What very substantial difference does it make whether we leave the provision as it stands or put it into clause 52? True, if the provision is left where it stands, the Federal Parliament will have exclusive power in connexion with this matter; but that body will only have exclusive power when it chooses to exercise it. It is only when the Federal Parliament has passed legislation dealing with the people about whom regulations are to be made that this exclusive power will have arisen. END QUOTE QUOTE
45
50 Hansard 28-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Note clause 52 referred to is now Section 51)
10
15
20
Mr. GLYNN.-There seems to be some doubt as to whether the exclusive power arises upon the establishment of the Commonwealth or on the exercise of the power of legislation. The doubt seems to be removed by clause 84. It is said that if we put this provision in clause 52 the exclusive power may be postponed until legislation takes place. But may you not then have a concurrent power, and may not the competence of the local Legislature to legislate in the matter be continued as long as the legislation is not in contradiction of federal legislation? Mr. DEAKIN.-That is the point. Mr. GLYNN.-Yes, and there is still a vagueness in the word "exclusive." If it is doubtful whether the exclusive power commences with the foundation of the Commonwealth, and if it is possible that it may only come into being on the passing of legislation, may it not still be said that on the passing of exclusive legislation the power of the local Parliaments to legislate is extinguished, but that on the passing of concurrent legislation that power does not cease? Mr. REID (New South Wales).-I think that enough has now been said on this subject by honorable members both sides of the chamber, and I have only a very few remarks to offer. It appears that if the subsection remains where it is state laws will be valid until federal legislation, but the states will not be able to alter or improve those laws during the possibly long interval between federation and federal legislation. Under these circumstances, as we leave to the states for an indefinite time the power of maintaining the laws they have, we should grant to them the power of improving those laws. It would recommend the Constitution more to a large number of persons if we put the sub-section in clause 52, thus enabling each state to legislate on this matter until the Federal Parliament comes in and legislates for all.
END QUOTE What his places beyond question is that the moment the Commonwealth legislate within the granted
constitutional legislative powers then the concurrent legislative powers seize to exist, and the State must
25 retire from this field that moment.

Hansard 31-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. SOLOMON.We shall not only look to the Federal Judiciary for the protection of our interests, but also for the just interpretation of the Constitution: END QUOTE . Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS.-The particular danger is this: That we do not want to give to the Commonwealth powers which ought to be left to the states. The point is that we are not going to make the Commonwealth a kind of social and religious power over us. END QUOTE . HANSARD 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. GORDON.The court may say-"It is a good law, but as it technically infringes on the Constitution we will have to wipe it out." END QUOTE And HANSARD 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTON.The position with regard to this Constitution is that it has no legislative power, except that which is actually given to it in express terms or which is necessary or incidental to a power given. END QUOTE . Hansard 16-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE start page 1020] I think that we ought to be satisfied on these points, and satisfied that if we leave the clause as it now stands there will, at any rate, be some proviso inserted which will safeguard the states in the carrying out of any of their state laws over which the states are to be supreme even under federation. END QUOTE p27 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
Therefore, unless someone smarter than me can show where the word art and sport is provided as a constitutional legislative power for the Commonwealth, it remains to be a State legislative power. Hence any funding for the arts and sports is unconstitutional, and the 5 Commonwealth should but out of the issues and not using it for pork barreling If the States and the Territories desire to fund arts and sports then that is for them to determine how they go about it. We do not need over layers of bureaucracy of Federal and State/Territories where clearly the Federal interference is unconstitutional and more being used for a Federal Minister involved with all his/her perks which we can do well without and a Federal Department 10 less will save us heaps of monies, likely in tens of millions of dollars. And the Arts and Sports will not be a single cent less for it, as the monies instead of being used for pork barreling or to keep bureaucrats needlessly in a jobs, we might even have monies to fund the (Melbourne) EYE & EAR HOSPITAL overdue renovation that are now reportedly cancelled. 15 QUOT email received 4-11-2013
Monday 4 Nov 2013, 6:43 Spending cash for creativity FROM The Conversation TO You From
20
To
The Conversation
inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au
END QUOTE email received 4-11-2013
25
QUOTE email received 4-11-2013
EDITORS NOTE
The government spends somewhere in the region of A$7 billion annually in Australia on arts and culture. But where does the money go? And could it be better spent? Jason Potts argues public funding of arts and culture should concern itself with producing unintended consequences.
END QUOTE email received 4-11-2013
30 http://theconversation.cmail2.com/t/r-l-niytyyd-ahywkiuy-i/
QUOTE 4 November 2013, 6.34am AEST Youve got $7 billion so how will you fund the arts? Provides funding as a Strategic Partner of The Conversation. rmit.edu.au Senior Advisor Prospect Development CBD location Full-time Continuing role $82,952 + $17% super RMIT is a global university of technology and design based Lecturer in Economics x 3 Positions
35
CBD location Full time, continuing position $82,065 - $97,454 p.a + 17% super RMIT is a global university of technology Lecturer in Marketing x 3 Positions CBD location Full time, continuing position $82,065 - $97,454 p.a + 17% super RMIT is a global university of technology
Public funding should promote unintended consequences. Abode of Chaos Last year the Australian Bureau of Statistics did the maths government spends about A$7 billion annually in Australia on arts and culture. The exact dollar figure varies depending on what we count, but it includes heritage, broadcasting and botanical gardens, along with all the usual suspects: performing arts, literature, film, visual arts, and so on. For the sake of argument, lets assume A$7 billion is exactly the right amount of public funding for the arts. To make this exercise fun, lets suppose that no political horse -trading was involved in reaching this figure. Lets assume this figure is the result of disinterested economic calculation of the size of the positive externality in the production of a public good, all wrapped in willingness-to-pay studies, and tied with a big bright cost-benefit ribbon. So whats next? Do we put away our box of shiny economic tools and turn to grubby political compromise to allocate the exact market-failure correcting amount of public funding?
10
15
20
In Australia, as in Europe, this is more or less what we do. Economics to justify an economically efficient level of spending and politics to implement it.
] Click to enlarge Estimate market failure, then politically intervene in direct proportion. This is the standard 20th-century model of applied public goods.
25
Observe this in action in science (CSIRO), academic research (Australian Research Council), and sports (Australian Institute of Sport), among others. Yet modern economics suggests that it would be better if we turned the process upside down. Let politicians determine the level of funding in a given area and let economists determine the allocation.
Why? The political model of funding allocation is very bad at creating or even recognising new knowledge. In fact, political allocation mechanisms cause incentives that reward lobbying and punish experimental or innovative thinking. Only by weakening those incentives can arts and cultural funding seek to be more than a rearguard preservation exercise or sinecure for vested interests.
10
There are four principles we should consider: One: favour indirect over direct funding Direct funding takes small amounts from many taxpayers and pools it in a few large granting bodies for dispersal to many recipients. The indirect funding model eliminates those big pools incidentally the places where all the layers of necessary accountability, governance, expert-committees, lobbying and rent-seeking accumulate. The indirect model offers tax credits to anyone private citizen, corporation, foundation or NGO alike for spending on arts and culture. This approach has at least three great strengths: 1) It does not require government approval of arts and cultural activities. Philanthropists can be great patrons. They can be far more edgy and engaging than government just look at David Walshs Museum Of Old and New Art in Hobart and the art collections of advertising tycoon Charles Saatchi. Tax breaks allow for public support of the arts - without the public judgment of funding criteria (which eventually, inevitably collapses into the politicisation of art and culture).
15
20
One of the Pavilions at the Museum of Old and New Art (MONA) near Hobart. Brett Boardman/AAP
25
Click to enlarge 2) Indirect funding sets up a diversity of funding options: private and public, philanthropic and corporate, big and small. This is messy, and it certainly makes arts management more difficult but such diversity promotes the spread of ideas. It also serves to protect the quirky idea from being catastrophically overlooked by one dominant funding source. A diverse funding mix will be a more robust and resilient funding ecology that is actually more likely to find the crazy genius. 3) Indirect funding weakens incentives to capture by lobbyists and bureaucrats. In other words, less time and resources need be devoted to political organisation and lobbying. This mitigates the arts and cultural grants p30 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
30
support industry. The cost of this support industry, as Nicholas Rothwell reported recently, can be observed in Australias Indigenous arts sector. Two: fund outputs, not inputs We tend to fund inputs for political reasons, specifically as ways of tying funding to particular jobs, groups or regions. The political reasons may be good but they always add up to bad economic reasons, otherwise known as deadweight losses.
So you think you can fund the arts? Channel Ten/AAP Click to enlarge
10
A practical example of the difference is to fund prizes which are awarded for achieving some specified output rather than grants. Grants often promise some output but they only contractually fund the input. Prizes have long been part of art and culture, just as they have in sports, science, innovation, and other fields of human endeavour. The enormous popularity of the various So you think you can dance/sing/debate franchises illustrates the creative energy and diversity that such prizes stimulate. We should probably make more use of prizes in public arts and cultural funding than we do. Funding outputs can also depoliticise arts funding by focusing attention on what we actually want to achieve rather than how we want to achieve it. Applicants are evaluated purely on their ability to be the best at what has been sought. There tends to be a lower bullshit component to prizes than to grants. Three: fund demand, not supply
15
20
Demand-side funding is often superior to supply-side funding because it better aligns producer incentives and it more effectively aggregates consumer preferences. In both cases youre seeking to fund those who receive the output in this case, audiences who therefore are in the best position to evaluate and monitor quality. Supply-side funding involves a lot of trust and often expensive monitoring. This is why economists tend to favour demand side funding: it economises on information and the need for human perfection. Again, its a more robust institutional solution. A useful example is to compare vouchers, where the funding amount is gifted to the consumer, to grants, where the funding amount goes to the producer. Vouchers are used to allocate money to schools, business innovation, and numerous other public services; this is a model that could be adapted to arts and culture. Four: be more like venture capital
25
30
Some of the lessons of venture capital which is also in the creativity business have not been learned by public sector arts and cultural bureaucrats. (Im not being ironic: really there are actual lessons to learn.) p31 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
What does this mean in practice?
Dan Peled/AAP Click to enlarge Adopt a portfolio approach which explicity recognises probabilities of success and failure. This will inform a funding model that incorporates variance endogenously, rather than getting all upset when things dont work out. This will often mean aggressively pursing difference and supporting it not as a sop to the weird, but as a rational risk-management strategy. Crowdfunding arts and cultural public goods should be considered.
10
Rather than gift, or what is these days mostly debt funding, take equity stakes in artists to fund training and development. If we must persist with direct/input/supply funding, this will enable us to at least create a more liquid public asset. Fund experiments and demand discovery. Experiments are a public good because they provide new information to others.
15
Seek voluntary funding models such as lotteries. Lotteries may even be effective for allocation of funds as well as for raising them and this would also limit the conformity and conservatism that expert panels tend to exhibit. Lets encourage unintended consequences Arts and cultural funding could be improved if we could just agree on a level of funding and then use economic analysis to design the models of funding delivery. In short, give the tax system a bigger role and the expert panels a smaller one. Make differences at the margins by funding skewed toward outputs and the demand side. Public funding of arts and culture should concern itself with producing unintended consequences. The problem with the existing direct, input focused model is that it at best only produces intended consequences, and at worst collapses to a kind of welfare. We really should be more ambitious than this.
20
25
This is a foundation essay for The Conversations Arts + Culture section. If you are an academic or researcher with relevant expertise and would like to respond to this article, please use our pitch facility.
30 END QUOTE
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/UnintendedConsequences.html QUOTE Unintended Consequences
35
by Rob Norton About the Author
T
5
he law of unintended consequences, often cited but rarely defined, is that actions
of peopleand especially of governmentalways have effects that are unanticipated or unintended. Economists and other social scientists have heeded its power for centuries; for just as long, politicians and popular opinion have largely ignored it. The concept of unintended consequences is one of the building blocks of economics. ADAM SMITHs invisible hand, the most famous metaphor in social science, is an example of a positive unintended consequence. Smith maintained that each individual, seeking only his own gain, is led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention, that end being the public interest. It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, Smith wrote, but from regard to their
10
own self interest. Most often, however, the law of unintended consequences illuminates the perverse unanticipated effects of legislation and REGULATION. In 1692 the English philosopher JOHN LOCKE, a forerunner of modern economists, urged the defeat of a parliamentary bill designed to cut the maximum permissible rate of interest from 6 percent to 4 percent. Locke argued that instead of benefiting borrowers, as intended, it would hurt
15
them. People would find ways to circumvent the law, with the costs of circumvention borne by borrowers. To the extent the law was obeyed, Locke concluded, the chief results would be less available credit and a
REDISTRIBUTION
of income away from widows, orphans and all those who have their estates in money.
In the first half of the nineteenth century, the famous French economic journalist FRDRIC BASTIAT often distinguished in his writing between the seen and the unseen. The seen were the obvious visible
20
consequences of an action or policy. The unseen were the less obvious, and often unintended, consequences. In his famous essay What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen, Bastiat wrote: There is only one difference between a bad economist and a good one: the bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those effects that must be foreseen.1
25
Bastiat applied his analysis to a wide range of issues, including trade barriers, taxes, and government spending. The first and most complete analysis of the concept of unintended consequences was done in 1936 by the American sociologist Robert K. Merton. In an influential article titled The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Social Action, Merton identified five sources of unanticipated consequences. The first twoand
30
the most pervasivewere ignorance and error. Merton labeled the third source the imperious immediacy of interest. By that he was referring to instances in which someone wants the intended consequence of an action so much that he purposefully chooses to ignore any unintended effects. (That type of willful ignorance is very different from true ignorance.) The Food and Drug Administration, for example, creates enormously destructive unintended consequences with p33 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
its regulation of pharmaceutical drugs. By requiring that drugs be not only safe but efficacious for a particular use, as it has done since 1962, the FDA has slowed down by years the introduction of each drug. An unintended consequence is that many people die or suffer who would have been able to live or thrive. This consequence, however, has been so well documented that the regulators and legislators now foresee it but
accept it. Basic values was Mertons fourth source of unintended consequences. The Protestant ethic of hard work and asceticism, he wrote, paradoxically leads to its own decline through the accumulation of wealth and possessions. His final case was the self-defeating prediction. Here he was referring to the instances when the public prediction of a social development proves false precisely because the prediction changes the course
10
of history. For example, the warnings earlier in this century that POPULATION growth would lead to mass starvation helped spur scientific breakthroughs in agricultural PRODUCTIVITY that have since made it unlikely that the gloomy prophecy will come true. Merton later developed the flip side of this idea, coining the phrase the self-fulfilling prophecy. In a footnote to the 1936 article, he vowed to write a book devoted to the history and analysis of unanticipated consequences. Although Merton worked on the book over the
15
next sixty years, it remained uncompleted when he died in 2003 at age ninety-two. The law of unintended consequences provides the basis for many criticisms of government programs. As the critics see it, unintended consequences can add so much to the costs of some programs that they make the programs unwise even if they achieve their stated goals. For instance, the U.S. government has imposed quotas on imports of steel in order to protect steel companies and steelworkers from lower-priced
20
COMPETITION.
The quotas do help steel companies. But they also make less of the cheap steel available to
U.S. automakers. As a result, the automakers have to pay more for steel than their foreign competitors do. So a policy that protects one industry from foreign competition makes it harder for another industry to compete with imports. Similarly, SOCIAL SECURITY has helped alleviate poverty among senior citizens. Many economists argue,
25
however, that it has carried a cost that goes beyond the payroll taxes levied on workers and employers. Martin Feldstein and others maintain that todays workers save less for their old age because they know they will receive Social Security checks when they retire. If Feldstein and the others are correct, it means that less
SAVINGs
are available, less INVESTMENT takes place, and the economy and wages grow more slowly than
they would without Social Security.
30
The law of unintended consequences is at work always and everywhere. People outraged about high prices of plywood in areas devastated by hurricanes, for example, may advocate PRICE CONTROLS to keep the prices closer to usual levels. An unintended consequence is that suppliers of plywood from outside the region, who would have been willing to SUPPLY plywood quickly at the higher market price, are less willing to do so at the government-controlled price. Thus results a shortage of a good where it is badly needed. Government
35
licensing of electricians, to take another example, keeps the supply of electricians below what it would otherwise be, and thus keeps the price of electricians services higher than otherwise. One unintended p34 6-11-2013 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
consequence is that people sometimes do their own electrical work, and, occasionally, one of these amateurs is electrocuted. One final sobering example is the case of the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989. Afterward, many coastal states enacted laws placing unlimited LIABILITY on tanker operators. As a result, the Royal Dutch/Shell group, one
of the worlds biggest oil companies, began hiring independent ships to deliver oil to the United States instead of using its own forty-six-tanker fleet. Oil specialists fretted that other reputable shippers would flee as well rather than face such unquantifiable risk, leaving the field to fly-by-night tanker operators with leaky ships and iffy INSURANCE. Thus, the probability of spills probably increased and the likelihood of collecting damages probably decreased as a consequence of the new laws.
10
About the Author
Rob Norton is an author and consultant and was previously the economics editor of Fortune magazine. END QUOTE
15 And another saving would be not to give in the irresponsible councilors who wasted their ratepayers monies on their ideology wanting to be a level of government. Let them pay back the monies from their own pockets, to teach them never again to get involved in such matter. Just for consideration, if the Governor-General had called for a DOUBLE DISSOLUTION 20 before 12 September 2013 would councils then have demanded compensation, this even so the Governor-General would do no more but lawfully exercise the delegated prerogative powers. Whatever Julia Gillard contemplated is totally irrelevant as Kevin Rudd was entitled to decide when the election was to be called and not bound by his predecessor elected date. 25 http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/councils-want-refund-on-abortive-local-governmentreferendum/story-fni0fit3-1226741935116
QUOTE
Councils want refund on abortive local government referendum 30

by: John Masanauskas From: Herald Sun October 17, 2013 8:00PM
LOCAL councils which poured ratepayers' funds into a doomed referendum campaign now want taxpayers to bail them out.
35
Victorian councils are seeking Federal Government reimbursement for about $400,000 they contributed to promote the yes case for the referendum on constitutional recognition of local government. The referendum had been scheduled to coincide with a September 14 election, but was derailed when Kevin Rudd became prime minister again and called an earlier poll. In a motion to be debated at the Municipal Association of Victoria state council next week,
the City of Maroondah said councils had expended considerable time, energy and funds in good faith in anticipation of a September 14 referendum. Councils spent about $3 million across the nation while the former Gillard government pledged to match the municipal funding for an amount up to $10 million.
MAV president Bill McArthur said it was only right for councils to be reimbursed because they had donated the money in good faith. "It was the Commonwealth Government's doing that the referendum didn't proceed," he said. Cr McArthur said that the Abbott Government should renegotiate the campaign funding agreement that the Australian Local Government Association had made with Labor.
10
But Tim Wilson, from the Citizens' No Campaign, said taxpayers shouldn't foot the bill for councils that spent millions on consultants and advertising for a failed bid to boost their status in the Constitution. "The council lobby has millions in assets. They should foot the bill when they knowingly commissioned high-priced consultants for a referendum that was never guaranteed to go ahead. "Councils spent millions trying to con Australians into thinking services were at risk, but cancelling the referendum proved it was always misleading and wrong." Cr McArthur said the referendum was still necessary because of continuing High Court challenges against federal funding of local government. "The problem hasn't gone away," he said. On Friday, the ALGA is due to meet the deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, Warren Truss, to discuss the referendum issue. john.masanauskas@news.com.au END QUOTE
15
20
Another saving to be made is to review the way large pharmaceutical companies are peddling 25 their wares in the Commonwealth of Australia, and if we do have a stringent enough regulation in place such as to deal with them, as clearly the quoted article below shows the need for this. And I am currently working on exposing the usage of barcodes starting with 93 (Australia) on products manufactured and assembled in China, but using the Australian bar code number.
30 We have here shown is the letter N cast in reverse an sold as like the ordinary letter N by Bunnings Warehouse (Preston and Thomastown) The W is correct and has the both the same barcode only one shows 120mm, and the other 150mm.
5 While Sandleford may be an Australian owned company I view it is deceptive to use an Australian barcode number for a product that I view was produced and assembled in the package in China. Amazingly enough Bunnings never picked up that the letter N was at times incorrectly produced and packed. It seems to me that Sandleford may simply have the items send out from 10 china directly to Bunnings and it may never even be aware of the incorrect manufacturing of the letter N. Nevertheless whatever failure in quality control, if there is any in existence, it is my view that it is most unlikely that the back to front (Mirror image) N would have been packed in the Commonwealth of Australia. I do not see any blame to the Chinese because after all as far as I understand it our alphabet is not ordinary used by them. 15 What my concern is that a company like Sandleford might be misusing the Australian barcode number as to pretend it is Australian made where in fact it seems not to be so. How many other companies may perpetrate this kind of what I view abuse and misuse of the Australian bar code system? Likewise, we should stop the importation of food products from New Zealand where it 20 undermines out strict health laws and regulations by importing food items from China (That are without appropriate health inspections to Australian standards) and then flogged as made in New Zealand. This also undermining the ability of our growers and other producers to provide quality food.
http://www.echo.net.au/2013/11/global-giant-fined-2-3-billion-for-faulty-drug-claims/
25 QUOTE
Global giant fined $2.3 billion for faulty drug claims Washington [AFP] Global health-care giant Johnson & Johnson will pay more than $US2.2 billion ($A2.3 billion) to settle allegations that it fraudulently promoted drugs and used kickbacks to promote their sales.
30
In one of the largest health-care fraud settlements in US history, J&Js criminal and civil fine covers allegations the company marketed Risperdal and other prescription drugs for uses not approved as safe and effective by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The settlement further covers kickbacks J&J allegedly paid to physicians and pharmacies for prescribing and promoting those drugs, the US Justice Department said on Monday.
35
The actions resulted in millions of dollars paid under Medicaid, the government health-insurance program for low-income and disabled people, causing losses to both the federal and state governments. This global settlement resolves multiple investigations involving the antipsychotic drugs Risperdal and Invega as well as the heart drug Natrecor and other Johnson & Johnson products, Attorney-General Eric Holder said in a statement.
The settlement also addresses allegations of conduct that recklessly put at risk the health of some of the most vulnerable members of our society including young children, the elderly, and the disabled. J&J is to pay $US485 million in criminal fines and forfeiture and a total of $US1.72 billion in civil settlements with the federal government and states.
J&J unit Janssen Pharmaceuticals admitted it had promoted Risperdal for unapproved treatment of elderly dementia patients and will pay a total of $US400 million, including a criminal fine of $US334 million and forfeiture of $US66 million. Janssens guilty plea requires approval by the US district court. In separately filed civil complaints, the government alleged that J&J and Janssen promoted Risperdal and Invega, a newer antipsychotic drug, to doctors and to nursing homes as a way to control behavioural disturbances in elderly dementia patients, children, and the mentally disabled. The civil settlement also resolves allegations that J&J and Janssen paid kickbacks to Omnicare, the nations largest pharmacy specialising in dispensing drugs to nursing home patients. In 2009, Omnicare paid $US98 million to resolve its civil liability for claims that it accepted kickbacks from J&J and Janssen.
10
15
In addition, the civil settlement announced on Monday resolved allegations that J&J and another subsidiary, Scios, caused false claims to be submitted to federal health care programs for the heart failure drug Natrecor. Scios allegedly marketed the drug for off-label uses. Intended for patients with severe heart failure, it was given to patients with less severe heart issues over weeks and months. As part of the global settlement, J&J must undertake a major overhaul of its pharmaceutical business over five years supervised by the Health and Human Services inspector general. Shares in Dow member J&J were down 0.9 per cent at $US92.58 in midday trading. Omnicare shares rose 0.5 per cent at $US55.47. END QUOTE
20
Whatever your personal business interest might be do keep in mind that you decided to stand for 25 election and the constituents elected you to represent them. Hence you are to be and remain a SENTRY who will place the general community above his own personal interest. If you can accomplish this then I view you are a lot better than most who occupy the benches in the Parliament. And it has been well worth for me to spend the time writing to you! 30 Gerrit for Governor-General! For the moment this is plenty for you to consider and I look forwards to your reply, if any. Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Friends call me Gerrit)
35
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL

(
Our name is our motto!)

131106-G. H .Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To MR Clive Palmer - MP Elect - Re THE GOVERNMENTS CORPORATE FRAUD PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

131106-G. H .Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To MR Clive Palmer - MP Elect - Re THE GOVERNMENTS CORPORATE FRAUD PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Palmer United Party Admin@PalmerUnited.com 5

Cc: Mr Tony Abbott: Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.au

australian-federal-government-conceal-corruption/ and Public service keeps fraud cases private http://www.smh.com.au/national/public-service-keeps-fraud-cases-private-20110923-1kpdr.html

Shane Dowling END QUOTE

25 QUOTE In the Marriage of P.N. and J.S. Axtell 7 FLR 931

40 So let we put you to the test regarding the following!

As I referred to in my 16 October 2013 correspondence to you: QUOTE 50

25 retire from this field that moment.

END QUOTE email received 4-11-2013

END QUOTE email received 4-11-2013

What does this mean in practice?

by Rob Norton About the Author

they would without Social Security.

Councils want refund on abortive local government referendum 30

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL

Our name is our motto!)

You might also like