You may recall the ending, the final scene is of the two sisters – Molly and Daisy – as they were when Rabbit Proof was filmed.
Tuesday 22 April 2014
Siv Parker: Part Two - A dedication to storytelling
The politics maelstrom of Indigenous issues can distract from
what my preferred work is these days, having first spent thirty years in
Indigenous affairs - I am a storyteller. I’d like to dedicate Part Two of my
Easter long read guest spot to story telling, and also acknowledge the great
loss to her family, community, friends and admirers of an Indigenous writer of
international renown who passed recently.
Doris Pilkington Garamara the novelist and
screenwriter was best known for her book filmed to international acclaim -
‘Rabbit Proof Fence’ [2002]. An award winning writer, her accounts of child
removal practices and the impact on their mothers in WA is an exceptional
contribution to Australian literary and cultural life, and provided the
narrative for the findings of the Bringing Them Home report.
I was working in the arts and through
some contacts we’d gotten hold of a copy of Rabbit Proof Fence from the
Director, Phillip Noyce, with permission to hold a free community viewing. The
small hall was full with mostly Aboriginal people. The audience was deathly
quiet for the duration of the movie. And then in one of those lucky
connections, I was invited to chaperone the author for a Q & A screening at
Albury/Wodonga.
On protocol – and there are many that
ensure the respectful
and effective approach to Indigenous filmmaker - if an older Aboriginal
lady is touring with a film – her film - my inclination would have been for her
to be accompanied by a member of her own family. I felt a tremendous honour to
be asked but I felt embarrassed that the organizers had thought it more
appropriate to have me – a stranger – escort her, especially as they’d
gone to the trouble to have me travel from outback NSW to the NSW/Victoria
border city.
It was at the town’s main cinema
complex, and mostly women, it looked like we’d have a fairly substantial pool
to throw up questions during the Q and A with the author scheduled to
immediately follow the screening.
Following introductions, Doris and I
returned to the Lobby. I recall there were some occasional chairs but set well
apart. To sit together we shared a seat for one. I’d just met someone I was in
awe of and now I was trying not to squash her.
I hope she knew I was doing my best to
ensure her comfort for the two day visit, especially as her gentle words and
determined spirit went on to inspire a change of direction in my life. It was
because of her that I decided I too wanted to win the David Unaipon award. (I
won in 2012). Like her, my first books will see the light of day when I’m
starting my 50s and a grandmother. And just like many Aboriginal writers today,
I write because we have stories that we want people to know. With so little
research, some may be the first time these stories are told beyond the circle
of family or community. Or they supplement research by filling in the gaps of
the lived experiences.
Screenings are synchronized down to the
minute and she was a professional. My most vivid memory of this remarkable,
talented and dignified woman was when we moved to the door to wait for the
credits to roll.
You may recall the ending, the final scene is of the two sisters – Molly and Daisy – as they were when Rabbit Proof was filmed.
You may recall the ending, the final scene is of the two sisters – Molly and Daisy – as they were when Rabbit Proof was filmed.
‘I never watch that scene’ she told me,
so she stood outside the door, in a deserted lobby while I waited at the back
of the cinema till they’d faded from view, before walking Doris down to the
front as the lights come up and the audience broke into warm applause. It had
clearly been a harrowing experience for some, and many looked tear stained and
haunted.
The questions were respectful and
reflected the extent to which the broader community were coming to terms with
the Stolen Generations. And then there was one that changed the mood.
I’d noticed her sitting in the middle of
the audience, by herself. Her arms were crossed in front of her body and she
sat tightly screwed into her chair. Horizontal stripes and a short neat
hairstyle.
Her question went something like ….’
Aren’t claims of stolen generations taking the black arm band movement too far.
And I don’t have anything to be sorry about because I wasn’t there’.
The question would have made more sense
if it had been asked when the audience member was still in a state of complete
ignorance rather than after having sat through 94 minutes of a dramatized
account of a true story.
And then I took the Tony Jones approach
and informed her ‘ I’ll take that as a comment’ but she would not be stopped
from commenting. On and on it went. Clearly distressed, she was now quite
agitated and talking over everyone in the cinema. Ok, she was yelling. And then
the audience started to murmur and hiss at her to stop.
It wasn’t a great way to finish the
event but most were already emotionally drained by the experience. Slowly
making our way to the exit and out on to the street and I saw the horizontal
tee coming our way.
And then my eye caught a face I knew.
Though I’d never met her, I was familiar with who Shellie
Morris was from seeing her in my travels in the Northern Territory. ‘I know
you’ she said, and we embraced on the footpath. Something about our public
display of affection stopped the horizontal tee in her tracks. She turned
around and walked away.
Over a decade later, maybe she feels the
same or maybe she has moved on like most people who accept this chapter in
Australia’s history.
At any time the exploits of
three children walking 2,400 kms (1500 miles) is an extraordinary story. At the
time there was a desire and a willingness to invest in the making and the
viewing of that film.
I’m frequently asked for recommendations
for Indigenous reading and I recommend all of Doris Pilkington Garimara’s works
:
Caprice, A Stockman's Daughter, (UQP, 1991)
Follow the
Rabbit-Proof Fence, (UQP, 2002)
Under the Wintamarra Tree, (UQP, 2002)
Home to Mother, (UQP, 2006) ** children’s version of
Rabbit Proof Fence
And where are we today? Stories about
identity and bigotry would seem to the order of the day. But there is far more
to the Indigenous experience than skin colour and how it feels to be racially
vilified. In the context of Indigenous diggers from over a hundred years ago,
no mention whatsoever is made of the colour of their skin, but they were
referred to as black trackers, and were expected to be willing to die for their
country.
If I was going to make comment at all it
would be this – when we are living, we’re directed to grow a thicker skin in
our determination to be treated as human, and accepted as Aboriginal, but when
we die, no one argues that we were Aboriginal. The test for identity is that a
person identifies, is accepted by and has connections with the Indigenous
community. There is no legal reference to skin colour.
And yet some continue to want to raise
it again and again if only to hear the sound of their own voice, much as the
wearer of the horizontal tee from Albury Wodonga. She had a freedom to speak,
and then as now I have freedom to decide how I respond, and these days I choose
writing and filmmaking. Just as I did a decade ago, I can continue to
acknowledge a wilfully blind point of view, and embrace the Aboriginal
experience.
BIO
Siv Parker is an award winning writer, blogger and
tweets from @SivParker. Her next publication is in a new anthology being
launched at the Melbourne Emerging Writers Festival in May 2014.
For more opinion by Siv Parker on racism and the RDA, please
read.
Repealing the race hate laws isn't
'freedom' to Indigenous people
Demonising people of colour is no way to
make society safer
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/14/sexual-assault-western-sydney-race?CMP=ema_632&commentpage=2
Labels:
Australian society,
endurance,
history,
human rights,
racism,
storytelling
A new unconventional gas threat on the horizon for New South Wales?
On 9 September 2008 the Newcastle Herald reported on the proposal for a NSW in situ coal gasification project which was finally rejected in 2010:
Energie Future has applied under the Commonwealth Offshore Minerals Act for four mineral exploration licences that cover a total of 5940 square kilometres from Stockton Bight to Stanwell Park.
Energie spokesman Rick Somerton told The Herald that his company wanted to extract energy from seabed coal in a process called gasification.
However, in 2014 the NSW Coalition Government still lists in situ underground coal gasification (UCG) as a clean coal technology.
The UCG process involves using air or oxygen to ignite coal while it is still in the coal seam to produce gas. This process produces waste water/chemical by-products as well as a commercial gas often primarily composed of hydrogen, carbon monoxide and methane.
To date there appears to have been only four or five UCG pilot projects in eastern Australia. None have been in New South Wales. Three have been involved in serious environmental breaches.
In Chinchilla, Queensland, Linc Energy Ltd is decommissioning its UCG plant following a 2013 investigation by the state environmental agency.
According to ABC News on 16 April 2014:
Linc Energy is facing four charges of "wilfully and unlawfully" causing serious harm, each of which carries a fine of more than $450,000 or five years' jail…
The ABC understands one of the charges relates to a so-called overburden fracture, a crack in the layers of rock and soil that sit above the coal seam.
In some cases this can lead to the escape of gases into the air or allow groundwater into the cavity.
The Australian Financial Review on 24 September 2013 stated:
Cougar Energy [now known as Moreton Resource Pty Ltd] has been fined $75,000 for releasing a cancer causing chemical into groundwater at its coal seam gas trial project in Queensland.
The company's $550 million underground coal gasification (UCG) trial at Kingaroy was shut down by the Queensland government in January 2011 after the cancer causing chemical benzene was found in nearby bores.
Prosecutor Alan MacSporran QC told Brisbane Magistrates Court on Tuesday that Cougar had failed to install a production well in line with agreed environmental conditions and later released benzene into the local groundwater.
Mr MacSporran said Cougar also failed to notify authorities about the benzene release as soon as reasonably practicable.
Cougar pled guilty to three counts of contravening conditions of an environmental authority for a licence earlier in 2013….
Queensland Government media statement 6 December 2012:
Carbon Energy, which has a plant located between Dalby and Chinchilla, was fined $60,000 and its executive officer, Andrew Dash, was fined $2,000 for breaching their environmental conditions [by releasing contaminated water] and failing to notify the department….
Carbon was also ordered to pay $40,000 in legal and investigative costs.
Mr Powell said the company was charged following an investigation in 2010.
ABC News 8 July 2011:
The Queensland Government has dropped a controversial gas project in the state's south.
The underground coal gasification pilot in the South Burnett region has been shut down permanently after an investigation found it posed an unacceptable risk to underground water near the site.
Locals are relieved and are warning communities near other pilot projects to be vigilant.
Cougar Energy's underground coal gasification project is based at Kingaroy - a rich agricultural region in southern Queensland.
Terry Wall from Queensland's Department of Environment and Resource Management says the project was temporarily closed last year when traces of cancer-causing chemicals were found in water bores at the site.
"We found readings of chemicals, of benzene, toluene, ethyl-benzene and xylene, known as BTEX chemicals. The most one of concern there was benzene," he said.
The Kingaroy project is one of three underground coal gasification testing plants in Queensland.
The State Government approved the plants to explore the viability of the new technology, which converts coal to gas using heat and chemicals.
But after the Kingaroy site was found to be contaminated, Cougar Energy was asked to explain and provide plans to prevent it happening again.
Mr Wall says the department was not convinced by Cougar's explanation.
He says the site has been shut down and the company must come up with a plan to nurse it back to health.
"To ensure that the groundwater actually is rehabilitated to its normal state and that equipment and other activities are removed from the site and the site is actually put back to its appropriate state," he said….
Labels:
environment,
environmental vandalism,
gas industry,
health,
mining,
NSW government,
pollution,
safety
Monday 21 April 2014
The Great NSW Crown Roads Scam
Suppose that by some historical mishap a section of
your neighbours' land been included into your block. In farming communities this
can happen due to a bad sense of direction while fencing.
It is up to the owner of the land to have the land
surveyed and the cost of fencing the area properly are shared 50-50 between the
neighbours.
Once this land is returned to the legal owner it is
up to the owner to control weeds and feral pest.
Not so if the land in question are crown roads
belonging to the state government.
The state government has decided that you the land
holder have to pay for the land surveyed then pay for all the fencing and once
this is done you are still responsible for weeds and feral pest.
Talk about a bad neighbour, you cannot even take
them to court to achieve a fairer settlement.
I suppose I should explain what crown roads are,
they are in reality lines that were drawn on maps to accommodate for population
expansion, or access to plots of land.
No investigation was done to find out the need or suitability
of these roads. The result is that there are roads going through wetlands,
floodplains, through steep gullies and even up cliff faces.
For years the rent was very low, then the state
government had a problem with the crown roads around the Sydney harbour area. Millionaires
renting foreshore crown roads for $5 per year so KPMG the financing firm were
brought in to investigate and report on the crown road systems.
The result was the rent for these crown roads went
through the roof, it all depended how many blocks of land you own and how many
crown roads are within the blocks. Increases in rent from $50 per year to $800
per year are common.
If this was residential land you could go to the
rental board and protest the large rental increase. but since the state
government is the landlord you do not have any options for redress.
I agreed to buy the crown roads on my land 7 years
ago when I received their offer of purchase, but because of the inactivity of
the Department of Trade & Investment Crown Lands it has taken them 7 years
to present me with their final offer.
All this time I was forced to pay them rent on the
roads. Since it was no fault of mine that the process took so long I thought
that at least some of that rent money should be credited towards the sale.
Not so the state governments reply.
Then we come to the purchase price of the crown
roads, this process has followed the same reasoning that caused the roads to be
created.
Neverland thinking has decided that the valuer
generals estimation of property value should be used regardless of the market
value of the land or its production potential.
This means that cliff faces can cost $7,000 per
hectare, and is included if you wish to fence the area out.
Wetlands are another source of problems, these areas
come under the state government Wetland policy SEPP 14, with all the
restrictions to land use that are under
this act, but when the price of crown roads is concerned it makes no
difference.
An example of this is a lower Clarence farmer who
owns land that is a wetland. He has been told that the crown roads on his
property will cost him $7,243 hectare.
When he pointed out that his neighbour who has flood free prime cropping land has had his place on the market for 3 years for $3,000 per hectare and has still not been able to sell his land, he was told that it was not relevant and the price of the crown roads in his farm would remain at the price the department demanded.
When he pointed out that his neighbour who has flood free prime cropping land has had his place on the market for 3 years for $3,000 per hectare and has still not been able to sell his land, he was told that it was not relevant and the price of the crown roads in his farm would remain at the price the department demanded.
Back to my gripes with this process - it has taken
the state government 7 years to come to the party and give me a price for the
crown roads on my property yet they give me a deadline of 30 days to accept or
decline the offer.
It seems that I have no right to negotiate a more
realistic price for this land based on market value or production potential or
restriction imposed by the state government. If I refuse to buy the roads I
have two options:
- Pay for surveying the land and fencing it out of my property, and then still be responsible for weeds and feral pests on this land. Not to mention that the road would cut the property into two portions which would make the farm management very hard.
- Pay the rent that the state government demands, which has no basis in land use or land value. Currently the state government rent on 2 hectare on a 97 hectare property is more than a third of my council rates. I am sure that this rent will increase exponentially.
So what can you do when the state government, who
makes the rules and enforces them, extorts farmers to pay for a historical
stuff-up of the government's making.
Then the state government demands fees and charges
of over $1,700 which are not negotiable on each transaction.
Who do you go to get some justice? Who has the money
to take this to the courts? Not me.
This process is a classic standover practice
commonly used by criminal gangs but because it is the state government using
this process it is deemed legal, with no thought given to fairness or justice.
I wonder if they’ll accept that interesting bottle of Grange I
found on my doorstep this morning in lieu of those dollars........
Labels:
land,
NSW government,
NSW politics,
rural affairs
Siv Parker: Part One - On the RDA & opposing the repeal of 18c
If you have an interest in Australian
politics, you’d be aware that a Senator from Queensland who is also currently
Australia’s Attorney-General generated a flood of opinion when he
responded to a Question in the Senate with ‘People
have a right to be bigots, you know’.
Some days later, following an interview
with one of the Australian Human Rights Commissioners, an outspoken ‘repeal
advocate’ – the journalist followed the Commissioners line of argument with the
obvious question… culminating in the N-word
trending nationally.
In the weeks since, public debate has
moved from emotional gut reaction, to personal disclosures of victims and
observers, and now we’ve arrived at the theoretical, touching on:
– the merits of bigotry (so
far nil that I could see);
– the risk to free speech
(those with the most strenuous complaints to the threats to their freedom of
speech, continue to have more access to speech, the means to pursue defamation
and at worst at slight risk of racial abuse);
– the case that was cited as central to
efforts to repeal (was lost because as per the finding the offending
articles 'included 19 errors of fact and one gross error of fact)'; and
– ‘what is freedom of speech?’ (falsely
attributed to Voltaire, and confusion around what John Stuart Mills actually
meant by ‘freedoms’ because few have actually read first hand, preferring
to be falsely informed or take a wild guess).
So how is your Easter? I’d wanted to use
my guest blog spot to share some of my thoughts on Indigenous story telling,
and what I think a person would do well to keep in mind when making use of the
new technology that continues to come our way.
But the furore
surrounding the proposed repeal of section 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act
has eclipsed my literary pursuits, with no sign of waning on Twitter – my usual
platform for commentary - until at least the deadline
for submissions. [30 April 2014]
Social media can’t force people read,
but it can give a voice to both the marginalized and the powerful. It magnifies
the cycle that surrounds many Indigenous issues – outrage, division, retreat –
because it is so easy to tap out a tweet, a blog or an opinion piece. However
Indigenous issues compete with 24 hour news cycles, engaging commentators and
professional provocateurs of social media, ensuring a constant flow of
tantalizingly, easily accessible information.
In short, people get bored or readily
distracted. If you’re not directly affected – if you can comfortably expect to
never be racially abused, and to very rarely be called upon to intervene when
you see it happen in front of – you have the luxury of taking quite a relaxed
point of view.
Yes, it pollutes your view of the world,
but how you engage in it, what depths you need to navigate to keep your chin
above its murky depths is a choice you get to make.
Indigenous people, especially those who
look a certain way – and depending on the situation it could be due to the
darkness or the lightness of their skin – are in perpetual readiness for
something to happen.
It may just be that comment – that you
have heard week in, week out for your entire life. It could be more pointed,
and depending on what circles you move in, it could feel like an interrogation
at a writers festival in front of an audience of two hundred people.
Or perhaps you wrote an opinion piece
that was shared on Facebook over 600 times and a whole lot of people wanted to
tell you what they thought about it, starting with ..I’m not racist but, or I
don’t agree that…, or ‘the author is deficient’ in some way – lets count them,
because of not fighting back and giving up (vague criticism); being too
conservative (vague again); being too opinionated; using the wrong tone;
suspected of merely having ‘a short term political agenda’; or my personal
favourite (not really) that I have ‘missed the real question’ altogether, despite
it being my opinion and my life.
It is just so…wearisome. In fact, if the
Indigenous person would just stop talking about it, we could all focus on
something more positive. Or lately, isn’t it better that people get to say
whatever vile lie that pops into their head. Isn’t that better than just
thinking it?
Well, no. It’s not. And the only people
with staying power in the racism debate are the victims of racial abuse, and
the people who think treating some people with the rough end of free speech is
what makes for a better society.
Rather than listen to someone tell me how
bereft they feel at not being able to racially insult people, I’d rather
discuss story telling. Stories that would have people less inclined to tolerate
and on occasion contribute to the continued ‘not racist but’ dehumanization of
Indigenous people.
If we talked more about the contribution
that Indigenous Australian’s have made to Australia, for instance. Not in the
thousands of deaths that made land available, but from the labour and land
management skills of the generations of Indigenous people that built
Australia’s prosperity.
An enduring example was the development
of the pastoral industry, and the proud tradition of Australian sheep and
cattle properties. Livestock only reached pastoral properties across Australia
because of the Indigenous jackeroos and jilleroos who drove on horseback from
one side of the country to the other, over the last hundred years.
My mother was a jillaroo, and came from
a family of station workers. Very few of them ever received a full wage, and
most died before the state (Qld,
NSW and WA) made arrangements to
make partial payment. Though ‘payment’ barely describes the paltry sums on
offer to workers, many of whom were already deceased.
But for some, this is ancient history – Stolen Wages,
which were only relatively recently settled, is an awkward conversation,
particularly if your family or industry benefited from enforced servitude, and
is another example of why some observers encourage Indigenous people to grow
another layer to that thick skin they suggest will make racial insults easier
to bear.
So let’s confine our conversations to
timeframes and events that people are comfortable talking about. Let’s start
with the Boer War, 1902, when 50 black trackers
were rounded up and sent to South Africa.
Technically
the majority weren’t enlisted, though it’s highly unlikely that in 1901 black
trackers – at least fifty of them – decided to move to South Africa of their
own accord. There are records that they left Australia, but no confirmation
that they returned. Research is limited but indicates that return travel was
impaired by the White Australia policy in operation at the time. People are
very cautious in the telling of this sorry story and – to my mind – truly
shocking treatment of Indigenous people. ‘Leave no man behind’ is a mainstay of
war stories, after all. Descendants of these Indigenous service men
certainly didn’t forget – how could you, that’s the sort of story that
people would continue to tell for generations, regardless of your heritage.
There’s been a history of those who
remain unconvinced certain events occurred. This was certainly the case with
the Stolen Generation though these days – post The
Apology - people accept more readily that children were removed and their
families deeply traumatized.
Bio
Siv Parker is an award winning writer, blogger and tweets from @SivParker.
Links
Hansard Senate March 24 2014 Questions
without notice Racial Discrimination Act Senators Peris & Brandis
‘People have a right to be bigots, you
know’.
Human Rights Commissioner Tim Wilson
says race hate laws are bizarre, unequal
Amendments to the Racial Discrimination
Act 1975
Stolen Wages
Aboriginal pastoral workers seeking
compensation for years of unpaid labour
New project to shed light on legacy of
Indigenous diggers
Claims 50 Aboriginal trackers left
behind during the Boer War
Labels:
Abbott Government,
Australian society,
history,
human rights,
racism
Sunday 20 April 2014
Japanese parliamentary committee wants Southern Ocean whaling to continue "as the only country in the world with a scientific approach"
Photograph of Japanese whale hunt found at Sky News
Will Japan’s internal politics go further than just encouraging its government to continue its Antarctic lethal research/commercial whaling venture?
Aljazeera 16 April 2014:
A Japanese parliamentary committee has unanimously passed a resolution urging the government to investigate all options to continue whaling, including "walking out of the (international whaling) convention".
The 40-strong fisheries committee, made up of a cross-section of members of the lower house, demanded on Wednesday the government redesign its "research" whaling programme to circumvent an international court ruling that described the programme as a commercial hunt dressed up as science.
It said the ruling earlier this month by the International Court of Justice that banned Japan's research whaling programme in the Southern Ocean was "truly regrettable" but "does not necessarily prevent Japan's whaling, which is a unique tradition and culture".
The panel demanded the government find a way to continue the research operation "so as to play a responsible role as the only country in the world with a scientific approach", according to AFP news agency.
The parliamentarians also demanded the government swiftly draw up a plan to replace the banned Antarctic whaling operation and fully prepare for a new programme while circulating "whale meat - a by-product of research whaling - appropriately as before".
Although it is a signatory to the International Whaling Convention (IWC), which bans the commercial hunting of the mammals, Japan has used a loophole that allows for "lethal research".
It said it was perfectly proper for people to consume the meat that was the inevitable by-product of the killing….
I Touch Myself: breast cancer awareness campaign in 2014
You can help keep Chrissy's dream alive by spreading her message. Visit http://itouchmyself.org
'I Touch Myself' was the Divinyls' biggest hit and touched millions of fans around the globe. Released in December 1990, the single was No. 1 on the charts at home and reached the Top 5 in the US.
It is a song that celebrates female sexuality like no other. Like Chrissy, it is bold, brave, and brassy. It rocked our world. And when Chrissy developed breast cancer, it was a song she wanted to become an anthem for spreading awareness about the importance of touching ourselves for early detection of the disease.
As a tribute, Chrissy's family and friends, her husband Charley Drayton, fellow songwriters, Cancer Council NSW and supporters from around the globe have come together to make sure Chrissy's legacy lives on to remind women to be in touch with their bodies, and if something's not right, see their doctor.
Ten of Australia's greatest singers: Connie Mitchell; Deborah Conway; Kate Cerebrano; Katie Noonan; Little Pattie; Megan Washington; Olivia Newton-John; Sarah Blasko; Sarah McLeod; and Suze DeMarchi have come together to make Chrissy's final wish a reality.
'I Touch Myself' was the Divinyls' biggest hit and touched millions of fans around the globe. Released in December 1990, the single was No. 1 on the charts at home and reached the Top 5 in the US.
It is a song that celebrates female sexuality like no other. Like Chrissy, it is bold, brave, and brassy. It rocked our world. And when Chrissy developed breast cancer, it was a song she wanted to become an anthem for spreading awareness about the importance of touching ourselves for early detection of the disease.
As a tribute, Chrissy's family and friends, her husband Charley Drayton, fellow songwriters, Cancer Council NSW and supporters from around the globe have come together to make sure Chrissy's legacy lives on to remind women to be in touch with their bodies, and if something's not right, see their doctor.
Ten of Australia's greatest singers: Connie Mitchell; Deborah Conway; Kate Cerebrano; Katie Noonan; Little Pattie; Megan Washington; Olivia Newton-John; Sarah Blasko; Sarah McLeod; and Suze DeMarchi have come together to make Chrissy's final wish a reality.
Saturday 19 April 2014
A bottle of wine may be the least of the NSW Coalition Government's problems
It’s not just that then NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell denied in evidence before the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) that he had received a bottle of Penfold’s Grange wine worth almost $3,000 from Nick Di Girolamo on 20 April 2011, nor his failure to declare this gift on his member’s disclosure declaration, that caused him to resign.
The situation is more complex than that and, much of it centers around his friendship with Liberal Party fundraiser and lobbyist Nick Di Girolamo possibly intruding into his decision making in an official capacity.
In 2009 Australia Water Holdings Pty Ltd (AWH) donated $14,350 to the Liberal Party of Australia (NSW Division), in 2010 donations totalled $26,100.00 to the NSW Division and in 2010-11 it donated $61,603 in thirteen different parcels, according to disclosures lodged with the NSW Electoral Funding Authority.
Along the way the company also managed to spend $1,350 fundraising for an unspecified political campaign team.
In 2010-11 AWH also donated $2,200 to the Australian Labor Party (NSW Branch) and $10,000 to the National Party of Australia (NSW).
According to media reports, then Shadow Minister for Natural Resource Management and now NSW Minister for Primary Industries Katrina Hodgkinson passed that $10,000 donation straight onto the Nationals state branch.
On 6 June 2007 Nick and
Jodie Di Girolamo made a personal donation to the “Liberal Party”
of $2,500 and on 30 September 2010 Nick Di Girolamo made a personal donation to
the “NSW Liberal
Party” of $1,833.
In 2011 Australian Water Holdings contracted Liberal Party power broker Michael Photios, who was then acting as a government relations consultant, to supply advice to then CEO Nick Di Girolamo and lobby the O’Farrell Government on the company’s behalf for a fee of $5,000 per month.
On 18 January 2012 state-owned Sydney Water Corporation and Australian Water Holdings Pty Ltd signed a project management service contract and Liberal Party member/fundraiser and AWH part-owner Nick Di Girolamo was appointed to the board of State Water in July 2012 at which time Ms Hodgkinson was water minister with responsibility for the corporation.
In 2013 Mike Baird as Treasurer told an estimates hearing that all board appointments were made on merit and approved by cabinet.
In 2013 Mike Baird as Treasurer told an estimates hearing that all board appointments were made on merit and approved by cabinet.
On 17 March 2014 it was reported that the Liberal Party of Australia intended to return to Sydney Water the $75,636 in AWH political donations which had been improperly billed to the state-owned water corporation as AWH administration fees.
Mr. Di Girolamo appears to have resigned from Sydney Water on the day the two NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) investigations Credo and Spicer were announced. He is also reported to have resigned from the board of Australian Water Holdings in 2013 and possibly divested himself of shareholdings in that company since then.
Di Girolamo gave evidence during the first investigation and, both the fact that AWH was blatantly gouging the state-owned water agency Sydney Water for millions of dollars and his high level of access to the NSW Coalition Government and then Premier Barry O’Farrell came to light.
When questioned in the NSW Parliament on 26 March 2014, Premier O’Farrell did not deny a 26 May 2011 meeting between himself, the former finance minister and Mr. Di Girolamo about AWH at which it was allegedly decided that Sydney Water should stop the public tender process and replace its managing director in the new tender process.
Neither did he deny writing a letter of support on 28 September 2010 in his capacity as Opposition Leader, in order to assist Australian Water Holdings in securing that lucrative contract with Sydney Water nor deny an earlier 12 August meeting with Di Girolamo and Obeid concerning his support of AWH’s bid for the Sydney Water contact and a September 2011 meeting with Di Girolamo.
On 16 April 2014 Barry O'Farrell resigned as NSW Premier after he was found to have mislead the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption.
On 16 April 2014 Barry O'Farrell resigned as NSW Premier after he was found to have mislead the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption.
That this level of contact between O'Farrell and Australian Water Holdings may not have been in the best interests of the people of New South Wales is indicated by the fact that barely one day into his new premiership Mike Baird stepped back from his previous 12 November 2013 support of board appointments; I am happy to stand in this Chamber and state clearly that we are very proud of the appointments we have made to our State-owned corporations. And I stand by every statement I have made and, his 2012 particular support as Treasurer of Nick Di Girolamo. Conceding that his backing as the then shareholding minister for State Water Corporation and cabinet’s backing of a Sydney Water board appointment for Di Girolamo were wrong moves; In hindsight, should that have been done? No.
However, according to Fairfax Media Premier Baird and former Premier O'Farrell also have a wider history with regard to political donations and board appointments:
However, according to Fairfax Media Premier Baird and former Premier O'Farrell also have a wider history with regard to political donations and board appointments:
In July [2012], Mr Massy-Greene was appointed chairman of Networks NSW, which will
manage the state-owned electricity networks, Ausgrid, Endeavour Energy and
Essential Energy, when they are merged into a single entity.
No executive search was undertaken
before the appointment, which was confirmed by Mr Baird in a press release on
July 2.
At a budget estimates hearing at State
Parliament today, opposition MPs revealed that Mr Massy-Greene's company,
Eureka Capital Partners, has donated $15,000 to Mr Baird's election campaigns.
According to NSW Election Funding
Authority records, Eureka Capital Partners donated $10,000 to Mr Baird in March
2007 and $5000 in March last year, shortly before the state election.
As chairman of Networks NSW, Mr
Massy-Greene reports directly to Mr Baird and the Finance and Services
Minister, Greg Pearce.
The Treasurer told the hearing he had
known Mr Massy-Greene "through the years as someone ... through
business".
Challenged by Labor MPs about whether
the appointment was appropriate, given the donations, Mr Baird insisted it was
made by the Premier, Barry O'Farrell.
"It's a Premier's decision, he
made the decision," Mr Baird said. "We are appointing people on the
basis of their merits."
ICAC is yet to hear evidence in the second investigation concerning allegations that between April 2009 and April 2012, former Liberal NSW Minister for Resources and Energy Christopher Hartcher and Liberal MPs Darren Webber and Christopher Spence, along with others including Timothy Koelma and Raymond Carter, corruptly solicited, received, and concealed payments from various sources in return for certain members of parliament favouring the interests of those responsible for the payments.
It is possible that a number of Liberal Party MPs and perhaps Liberal Senator Arthur Sinodinos may be called as witnesses during this investigation.
Mr. O’Farrell led a government that is likely to be judged as corrupt on a number of fronts by New South Wales voters whatever the final ICAC report concludes – in the meantime that bottle of wine has allowed him to escape the full glare of future media scrutiny while the political secrets still work their way into the light during Operation Spicer hearings.
NOTE: This post will be updated in the text whenever new information becomes known.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)