HAIG    REPORT:    GoTo [on this page] HaigReport's Menu Of Themes of Menus for our thousands of pages
TIPS for
Navigating HaigReport:  If you arrived at this page, referred from a Search Engine such as Google et al, your URL link will NOT have an #Anchor/Marker to take you to the relevant spot on this page.  In that case, we do recommend that you view our "Latest HaigReport Promotions" of recent additions to our websites, by Clicking Here.  It will open in a new Browser window. 

If
you Click Here, you will be taken, usually, to the specific Unique Content on this page, for which you were most likely seeking.  However, if you Click Here, you will be taken to the Top of the HaigReport Header, below on this page. 

However, if you have arrived at this page from another of our Website pages, your link will usually have an #Anchor, also called a marker, which will take you to the intended specific spot on the page where that marker is positioned.  In fact, it will probably take you there prior to your reading this.  Moving to that Anchor is the final step in the loading of this page.

 HAIG     REPORT:   Is now on  twitter  [from 2nd June, 2013]  link to us HERE on twitter     See our Twitter Strategy    

 HAIG    REPORT:  SEE: Russell Mathews' COMMENTARY:    Russell Mathews' [BCom BSc LLB & BA] current TOPICAL commentary on GOVERNMENT, politics & business     Press to READ       Press for MENU   

 HAIG    REPORT:    WANTED:
Healthy female "dog" to breed with Parson Russell Terrier, to produce ASSISTANCE DOGS.   Rochedale South QLD 4123
I wish to breed from my Parson Russell Terrier. He is a trained assistance dog. He has a wonderful nature. The breed of his mate could be varied or a cross; eg Parson Russell Terrier, Jack Russell Terrier, Beagle, Bull Terrier, Bull mastiff, Staffy, and/or Fox Terrier plus many others. She does not need to be "pedigreed". I am very protective of my dogs. She will become very valuable to me and become one of my assistance "dogs". If we can assist each other, please contact me on my contact form, including your email address and your landline phone number so I can phone you to discuss. 

Because I am disabled and have an LLB [so therefore understand the Law surrounding disabilities and assistance dogs] I am now branching out to providing Assistance dogs to disabled persons [even if disabled in only a minor way and so not even realizing it]. This is not a business proposition but rather just a very necessary service I can offer to the community.
Many people have a disability and do not realize their ailment or "problem" is by law, the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) [DDA], classified as a "disability". This is especially so for people getting on in years, and who have a dog, and are maybe moving to accommodation where they are told they cannot take their dog. In a majority of cases, those people cannot be legally forced to surrender their animal/dog.
I will be assisting those person who already have dogs, but are being forced, unlawfully, to dispose of them because maybe they are moving accommodation. I can train your existing dogs to be assistance dogs and provide the documentation as required by the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) [DDA]. I do not intend to charge for this, but just maybe cover some marginal costs.

 Click here  to Learn how your Personalized Alert Notice [IMMEDIATELY ABOVE] is prepared by our HAIG Unique Visitor Algorithm: [HUVA] or  Click here  to see your UNIQUE Personalized Alert Notice in a new Browser Window.


The Heiner Affair: ONE CASE of the FUNDAMENTAL FRAUD and CORRUPTION in the Australian Labor Party.



The HAIG REPORT: the EVIDENCE
 

The labor 'EDGE' is ELECTORAL FRAUD:

The HEINER AFFAIR confirms corrupt labor.

The labor ELECTORAL FRAUD involves labor's many "REGISTERS" of PHANTOM VOTERS. These "Registers" are neither formal nor official, but are real never the less.   The organisor of one is Terry Mellifont, struck off so ex-lawyer and the criminal husband of DISTRICT COURT JUDGE Julie Maree DICK. [Link]

Once labor was in power, Wayne Goss set about institutionalizing its corruption, with the establishment of the CJC.  Labor has done this in many other ways too, including, most seriously, by appointing corrupt individuals and "suspect individuals" to the Judiciary. 

Taint sticks to Quentin Bryce

Piers Akerman

Saturday, April 26, 2008 at 03:04pm

AN unprecedented legal challenge may prevent the appointment of Australia’s first nominated female Governor-General, Queensland Governor Quentin Bryce.

Documents lodged with the Queensland Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee on February 14, two months before Ms Bryce was nominated as Australia’s next Governor-General by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, have created a Constitutional nightmare for the Queensland Government and the Prime Minister.

The papers are contained in the nine-volume Rofe Audit, by leading Sydney barrister David Rofe, QC, into the long-running and unresolved Heiner Affair involving approval by the Goss Cabinet in 1990 of the illegal shredding of documents relating to investigations into allegations of child abuse at a Brisbane detention centre.

Ominously for Ms Bryce, the PCMC has already conducted what it terms a “preliminary examination’’ and has sought further advice on aspects of the material which contains a list of 68 alleged prima facie criminal charges and specific evidence and arguments in support of those allegations.

In response to that request, lawyers representing Mr Kevin Lindeberg, a former public servant who sought the involvement of the PCMC, last week told the committee that “recent events’’ had made the need for action “more urgent’’.

They reminded the committee that since their complaint was lodged in February, Mr Rudd had announced his appointment of Ms Bryce as Governor-General designate to take up her duty on or about September 5, 2008.

The PCMC would be well aware that Mr Rudd is named in (alleged) prima facie criminal charges 1 and 2 of Volume 1, and the Hon. Quentin Bryce AC in the (alleged) prima facie criminal charge 67 of Volume IX of the Audit respectively,’’ the lawyers wrote.

The letter also notes a recent judicial appointment in Queensland and says that with that appointment, the PCMC now held evidence alleging prima facie criminality in respect of six serving Queensland judicial officers, Justice Catherine Holmes, Justice Tim Carmody,
  Judge Julie Dick, Her Honour Leanne Clare, His Honour Noel Nunan and State Magistrate Michael Barnes.

Ms Bryce sought a report on the Heiner Affair from then Premier Peter Beattie on October 23, 2003.

Premier Beattie presented the report to her in April, 2005, almost two years later, but did not make the document public, in stark contrast to the manner in which he handled the Anglican Church’s report into abuse which he tabled in the Queensland Parliament before the resignation of former Governor General Peter Hollingworth in May, 2003, as a matter of “public interest’’.

Rev Hollingworth, a former Archbishop of Brisbane was the subject of a relentless campaign during which he faced allegations that he had participated in a church cover-up and failed to act against church officers engaged in sexual abuse.

A fortnight before Mr Hollingworth’s resignation, then Labor Opposition Shadow spokesperson for Children and Youth and the Status of Women, Ms Nicola Roxon, told Federal Parliament on May 13 that: “… We cannot afford to brush it aside, keep it behind closed doors or say it is someone else’s issue. We need to be prepared to take a leadership role here. It might be awkward for the government. We need to take some action so this terrible issue is dealt with. The community thinks that leaders in this country are covering up what has happened in the past. Whether they think it is church leaders, politicians or other powerful people, we must make sure that we are never part of that conspiracy. We on this side of the House and, I am sure, the people on the other side of the House do not want to cover up this issue ...’’

The following day, Victorian Labor Senator Stephen Conroy continued the attack, telling the Senate that: “Victims, parents and the community do not want any more cover-ups. They want their stories told, they want perpetrators brought to justice and they want further generations of children to be protected from such suffering.’’

He was followed by South Australian Labor Senator Nick Bolkus, who said “In our performance, in our response, we also will be judged on whether and how we respond to this important challenge. If we as a national parliament do not take the right and proper moral stand on issues relating to paedophilia that affect our children, then we too could be condemned - and I think quite fairly so - by the public of Australia for turning a blind eye to paedophilia, its victims and those who tolerate it.’’

On May 26, three days before the Mr Hollingworth resigned, the then Opposition leader, Simon Crean, told the House “you cannot have people in authority who have covered up for child sex abuse. It is as simple as that’’, and “Isn’t a person of authority who failed to act on issues of child sexual abuse guilty of moral turpitude? Of course he is. This is a person in authority. This was a person to whom the allegations were made, and he failed to act.’’

The key to the allegations made against Ms Bryce and several other senior Queensland politicians and judicial officers echoes the point made by Mr Crean: they were made aware of allegations and failed to act.

Under the Queensland Crime and Misconduct Act 2001 and the repealed Criminal Justice Act, government authorities must act if they receive allegations of “suspected’’ official misconduct. Failure to do so falls into the category of “abuse of office in commission’’.

The Rofe Audit makes it clear there is evidence that goes well beyond this low threshold.

The PCMC review follows the release last August of the so-called Judges’ letter which stated that “any action by Executive Government which may have breached the law ought not be immune from criminal prosecution where and when the evidence satisfies the relevant provision’’.

It would seem that the best possible course for Mr Rudd and Ms Bryce is to insist on all matters being investigated and resolved before the Governor General designate takes up her new post.

Until then she should decline to be sworn in to prevent a significant taint being attached to the highest public office in the land. For that matter, Ms Bryce should stand aside in Queensland until a proper investigation clears removes forever this taint from the Queensland government and the office of Governor in that State.

See also
The Heiner Affair - a matter of concern
Balson's letter to Quentin Bryce (May 2005)

See Scott Balson's account of the shredding scandal

Taint sticks to Bryce

Piers Akerman

Saturday, April 26, 2008 at 03:04pm

AN unprecedented legal challenge may prevent the appointment of Australia’s first nominated female Governor-General, Queensland Governor Quentin Bryce.

Documents lodged with the Queensland Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee on February 14, two months before Ms Bryce was nominated as Australia’s next Governor-General by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, have created a Constitutional nightmare for the Queensland Government and the Prime Minister.

The papers are contained in the nine-volume Rofe Audit, by leading Sydney barrister David Rofe, QC, into the long-running and unresolved Heiner Affair involving approval by the Goss Cabinet in 1990 of the illegal shredding of documents relating to investigations into allegations of child abuse at a Brisbane detention centre.

Ominously for Ms Bryce, the PCMC has already conducted what it terms a “preliminary examination’’ and has sought further advice on aspects of the material which contains a list of 68 alleged prima facie criminal charges and specific evidence and arguments in support of those allegations.

In response to that request, lawyers representing Mr Kevin Lindeberg, a former public servant who sought the involvement of the PCMC, last week told the committee that “recent events’’ had made the need for action “more urgent’’.

They reminded the committee that since their complaint was lodged in February, Mr Rudd had announced his appointment of Ms Bryce as Governor-General designate to take up her duty on or about September 5, 2008.

“The PCMC would be well aware that Mr Rudd is named in (alleged) prima facie criminal charges 1 and 2 of Volume 1, and the Hon. Quentin Bryce AC in the (alleged) prima facie criminal charge 67 of Volume IX of the Audit respectively,’’ the lawyers wrote.

The letter also notes a recent judicial appointment in Queensland and says that with that appointment, the PCMC now held evidence alleging prima facie criminality in respect of six serving Queensland judicial officers, Justice Catherine Holmes, Justice Tim Carmody, Judge Julie Dick, Her Honour Leanne Clare, His Honour Noel Nunan and State Magistrate Michael Barnes.

Ms Bryce sought a report on the Heiner Affair from then Premier Peter Beattie on October 23, 2003.

Premier Beattie presented the report to her in April, 2005, almost two years later, but did not make the document public, in stark contrast to the manner in which he handled the Anglican Church’s report into abuse which he tabled in the Queensland Parliament before the resignation of former Governor General Peter Hollingworth in May, 2003, as a matter of “public interest’’.

Rev Hollingworth, a former Archbishop of Brisbane was the subject of a relentless campaign during which he faced allegations that he had participated in a church cover-up and failed to act against church officers engaged in sexual abuse.

A fortnight before Mr Hollingworth’s resignation, then Labor Opposition Shadow spokesperson for Children and Youth and the Status of Women, Ms Nicola Roxon, told Federal Parliament on May 13 that: “… We cannot afford to brush it aside, keep it behind closed doors or say it is someone else’s issue. We need to be prepared to take a leadership role here. It might be awkward for the government. We need to take some action so this terrible issue is dealt with. The community thinks that leaders in this country are covering up what has happened in the past. Whether they think it is church leaders, politicians or other powerful people, we must make sure that we are never part of that conspiracy. We on this side of the House and, I am sure, the people on the other side of the House do not want to cover up this issue ...’’

The following day, Victorian Labor Senator Stephen Conroy continued the attack, telling the Senate that: “Victims, parents and the community do not want any more cover-ups. They want their stories told, they want perpetrators brought to justice and they want further generations of children to be protected from such suffering.’’

He was followed by South Australian Labor Senator Nick Bolkus, who said “In our performance, in our response, we also will be judged on whether and how we respond to this important challenge. If we as a national parliament do not take the right and proper moral stand on issues relating to paedophilia that affect our children, then we too could be condemned - and I think quite fairly so - by the public of Australia for turning a blind eye to paedophilia, its victims and those who tolerate it.’’

On May 26, three days before the Mr Hollingworth resigned, the then Opposition leader, Simon Crean, told the House “you cannot have people in authority who have covered up for child sex abuse. It is as simple as that’’, and “Isn’t a person of authority who failed to act on issues of child sexual abuse guilty of moral turpitude? Of course he is. This is a person in authority. This was a person to whom the allegations were made, and he failed to act.’’

The key to the allegations made against Ms Bryce and several other senior Queensland politicians and judicial officers echoes the point made by Mr Crean: they were made aware of allegations and failed to act.

Under the Queensland Crime and Misconduct Act 2001 and the repealed Criminal Justice Act, government authorities must act if they receive allegations of “suspected’’ official misconduct. Failure to do so falls into the category of “abuse of office in commission’’.

The Rofe Audit makes it clear there is evidence that goes well beyond this low threshold.

The PCMC review follows the release last August of the so-called Judges’ letter which stated that “any action by Executive Government which may have breached the law ought not be immune from criminal prosecution where and when the evidence satisfies the relevant provision’’.

It would seem that the best possible course for Mr Rudd and Ms Bryce is to insist on all matters being investigated and resolved before the Governor General designate takes up her new post.

Until then she should decline to be sworn in to prevent a significant taint being attached to the highest public office in the land. For that matter, Ms Bryce should stand aside in Queensland until a proper investigation clears removes forever this taint from the Queensland government and the office of Governor in that State.

See also
The Heiner Affair - a matter of concern
Balson's letter to Quentin Bryce (May 2005)

Return to the shredding scandal

The FUNDAMENTAL cause of
FRAUD
and CORRUPTION
in Western Democracies; [such as Australia and the US]:  is:

*    A GROSSLY DEFECTIVE ELECTORAL SYSTEM;

*    labor ABUSES the defects;

*   the labor government is thus a fraud;

 *  THUS, all its decisions are defective/corrupt;


* THUS, all its decisions are defective/corrupt;







Brisbane City Council [BCC] CORRUPTION:
Breaking, Entering and Stealing.

plus ILLEGAL IMPRISONMENT; CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Brisbane City Council Corruption, breaking, entering and stealing, illegal imprisonment, CRUELTY to ANIMALS.

[go to HAIG REPORT home]  
BEWARE LABOR LAWYERS [Lavarch],
they will STEAL YOUR RIGHTS and FREEDOMS. 

This is far more serious than Beattie’s Dr DEATH, HEALTH and WATER  debacles. 

Beattie's Lavarch & coy devised the health regulation 200(1) [a regulation, so it did not have to go before parliament] to seem to give the public sector parasites the “right” to have you arrested so they can trespass in your yard AND HOME BUILDING AND STEAL YOUR PROPERTY.   WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF THAT WAS DONE TO YOU?   Imagine yourself in that situation as IT CAN HAPPEN TO YOU.

YOUR HOME IS NO LONGER YOUR CASTLE, thanks to LAVARCH and Labor.   Don’t just take my word for it.  In Queensland, labor is CORRUPT.   See the “advice” of the Labor hack commissions, at the CMC, the Legal Services Commission and the Information Commissioner [see last sentence 4.25], that the Brisbane City Council [BCC] [or any local council or other parasite] can enter your yard AND HOME BUILDING, AND STEAL YOUR PROPERTY.  THEY BROKE AND ENTERED MY HOME BUT THE POLICE COULD NOT CARE LESS; are the POLICE CORRUPT too?  Of course, that advice by the corrupt labor hacks is wrong, [people are supposed to have the protection of the courts – see below where I explain the legal position: I have been fully trained as a lawyer with an LLB]. 

Yes, without court orders the council, or any government bureaucrat who has it in for you, can come and take 30tons of topsoil from your yard and charge you for doing it. [Legally they do need court orders, but, in the corrupt labor state, the Courts and police do not care.]  The Police will support them with false arrest and false imprisonment. All that is needed is a good story.  Forget about the truth.  It is irrelevant that it was breaking the law; both administrative Law and CRIMINAL LAW. That it is against the law is no problem.  That is what happened to me.   I had been working at improving the top soil in my yard for four years.  It was of the quality of high grade potting mix, being mainly organic compost.   I had been mulching my yard diligently for four years. The Brisbane City Council [BCC] decided that they would pick on me [check the webpage about why I am picked on, especially by gutless parasitic lowlife scum like public servants, when I have the time to publish it].  It was illegal discrimination.  Excavator and heap of soilThey even had a bob-cat in to scoop the top 100mm of my soil, plus an excavator, no less, to steal the tons of valuable bobcat and soilcompost, behind a retaining wall [which they found they had to destroy - Hughie's desire??].  I had that compost to improve my yard and to save water. The BCC also stole all my water saving material I had to INSTALL WATER SAVING PROCEDURES.  [THIS IS THE BCC's PERVERSE REASON THAT THEY STOLE MY MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, AND POSSESSIONS; TO PREVENT ME FROM DOING GOOD THINGS, in the then looming, now present, wateer crisis.] I had all that in my landscaping as I was preparing to make my yard a very productive, and EXTREMELY WATER EFFICIENT vegetable and fruit garden to grow my own food as I am disabled and so very poor.   They had a variety of trucks come to load up different lots of my property I had in my yard. They neatly stacked it in the tray of the small trucks. They had stolen and then sold or gave my property to their mates.  I did not have my property just lying on the ground but rather stacked up on blocks at least 30 cm above the ground as required.

When the home owner fights back through the courts the Supreme Court will dismiss the application and declare that home owner a vexatious litigant.  On both occasions I produced BCC documents by way of affidavit showing conclusively that BCC and their parasites trespassed, stole my property AND HAD THE QUEENSLAND POLICE ASSIST THEM.  [I’ll tell you about the parasite of a cop below. He perjured himself in his affidavit. Other police have since denigrated him to me. Rantala is his name and here’s his photo.]purjuring police Rantala

They are not all corrupt, but enough are and those who are not are merely complicit.  Magistrates refused to allow the Police to convict the home owner after five separate charges were laid. Five false charges - yet the Minister for Police says the Police did nothing wrong, This is because he is working for the bureaucracy and not the voters.

I am FULLY TRAINED as a LAWYER so I will explain the law briefly.   See the Section 160 of the Health Act 1937 attached.  See Sub-Section 2 of Section 160.  It clearly states that I must be given a right to be heard, before they gain the necessary court order.  I was not given a hearing nor did they have a court order. Sub section (2) ensures Natural Justice [aka Due Process and aka Procedural Fairness] to me in that I should have been given notice of a hearing where it was proposed to cause detriment to me.   The Right to be heard is a Common Law right, and does not need to be legislated, but it has been.

What Lavarch and her corrupt cohorts did to try to allow her public sector parasitic labor mates invade peoples homes without court orders [the BCC knew that they needed a court order – see their letter to me and told me in that letter they would apply to the Magistrates Court, THEY KNEW THEY WERE CRIMINAL],  THEY ARE  CERTAIN TO CONTINUE.

,   SO    VOTE THEM OUT.    Anyone  will be better than a corrupt  government  that  has  corrupted our whole legal system.

[go to HAIG REPORT home]