Please find attached the front page headline and page 4 article from yesterday's The Advertiser Wednesday 3rd September (apologies for terrible alignment, that last word is 'government')...I choose at this time to not make any specific comment on the contents of this particular article or any of the other interviews, etc, over the last couple of days...at this time I do not feel disposed to explain my decision to not comment...I can only apologise to genuine blog availees for these 2 decisions and assure that I'm doing what I can to be in a position to change my mind...(unfortunately that makes perfect sense-Ed)...don't it though...
However...(ahh boy, here we go-Ed)...no, not 'here we go'...cool ya' jets champ...I'm just going to quote/highlight some of the points in this article...not comment, quote...and I quote;
"Mr Lander said his office had not identified any systemic corruption in SA since opening
a year ago.
"There is considerable evidence of opportunistic corruption with different people motivated
by greed or power or whatever, but there is no evidence, as there has been in other states,
of systemic corruption of the kind in NSW, in Victoria and Queensland with it's police or
in Western Australia with WA Inc." he said."
(But you said that there's institutionalised pro-paedophile corruption starting from the Premier's desk on down...you're always bangin' on about it-Ed)...let's focus on what the Commissioner says, and he's saying that after a year of thorough and appropriate investigation he's established that South Australia is a beacon of probity in a sea of corruption, where all other states have corruption problems, but not SA...
I also note that the Commissioner has 'Coercive Powers' which means if you refuse to answer questions you can face charges, and has powers "including telephone intercepts, surveillance of targets, search warrants..."...and the paragraphs re the "secrecy provisions" are to my understanding erroneous because these 'provisions' actually preclude anyone talking about any corruption at any time because it 'might' end up in the ICAC 'at some time'...
There are several sections of the ICAC Act 2012 that refer to these 'provisions' but I believe the specific one that Mr Lander is referring to is Section 56, and I quote;
"A person must not, except as authorised by the Commissioner or a court hearing proceedings
for an offence against this Act, publish, or cause to be published--
(a) information tending to suggest that a particular person is, has been, may be, or may
have been , the subject of a complaint, report, assessment, investigation or referral
under this Act;"
And so on and so forth, there are several more dot points, but that's the crux of it...
(But that effectively says that no-one's ever allowed to discuss corruption, make allegations of corruption, report corruption in the media, etc, ever, because that corruption/ person might be looked at by the ICAC at some point in the future-Ed)...well that's a fairly rough summation that's roughly fair...it does read like that to a layperson like myself...(I'd love to see a specific legal definition of exactly what all that means-Ed)...me too Ed, me too, but I cannot help you with that because as I understand it no such animal exists, there is no definition, the Act is in and of itself...but I'm not a lawyer, so I may be wrong...(but you're not, are you? wrong I mean-Ed)...dunno, just sayin' what I'm lookin' at mate...
At this point in time I choose to not discuss these issues any further than the above quotes...other than to point out that the SA ICAC has powers to enforce "reporting restrictions" re the media, and the justification is that the SA ICAC structure is so different to other states...(other states where corruption is being exposed?-Ed)...yes I believe that be they...
Oh, and I also note that Mt Gambier City Council has modified it's Graph of Staff, it's Tower of Power, it's Deployment of Employment, it's...(orr for gourd sake, get on with it-Ed)...just saying that Council has revised it's staffing chart as per the one that I recently referenced that identified former Council CEO Greg Muller as Manager Projects (1.0)...(ah yeah, the chart from August 2013-Ed)...yep...(with the position that Council created specifically for Greg to go to straight from CEO in late 2011-Ed)...uh huh...(and that you like to call MCDJ CEO Part 2 (1.0), the Business As Usual Remix-Ed)...yes, yes I do like to call it that...
But seriously, I do consider that position to be exactly that, a pseudo-CEO position to allow Greg Muller to keep his hands on the reigns, his foot on the throat, and all the balls in the air...quite an act...(and then you love to do that hilarious thing about 'It Ain't Star Wars, But I Think I See 3CEOs' because earlier this year it appeared that Council had a series of rolling CEOs, going from Mighty Marky Mark McShenanigans, over to Grant Humphries and back again, and back again-Ed)...and again...(where are we up to now?-Ed)...no idea...
Tomorrow: Shenanigans, At A Guess
(I'd suggest that's gunna' be a very good guess-Ed)...um, yup...
I am Nick Fletcher and this is my blog...cheers and laters...
No comments:
Post a Comment