Both stories expose systemic corruption in government-owned organizations. When the story broke in 1993, Telstra was wholly owned by the Australian government. During twenty-one arbitration and mediation processes between 1994 and 1997, the government still owned Telstra when its public servants embarked on a national campaign to conceal from its citizens that there were more than 120,000 Casualties of Telstra type- of customer complaints being hidden when the John Howard government began privatizing Telstra. In simple terms, the shareholders involved in Telstra's privatization were not told the truth about the true condition of the Telstra network.

The actions of the Australian government's communication regulator towards Telstra customers are alarming. The regulator was willing to jeopardize the lives of over 120,000 individual customers while keeping vital information hidden from those affected. This has led to significant financial losses for many businesses and incorrect billing for telephone calls passing through Telstra's Ericsson-installed telephone exchanges. The Ericsson equipment has known faults that cause software billing problems, similar to the scandal with Britain's Post Office and their Fujitsu equipment. It is unacceptable that such problems were concealed and not addressed.

The US Department of Justice has accused Ericsson of bribery and corruption. Ericsson is the same company whose telecommunication equipment was under investigation by the COT arbitrator. As for bribery in the case against Telstra, Senate Evidence File No 21 Senate Hansard dated 27 Feb 1998 re kick-backs and bribes shows Telstra paid kickbacks and bribes to several Australian politicians and government bureaucrats. 

It is imperative to underscore the Ericsson link above as part of an ongoing effort to secure an impartial investigation by the Australian government regarding my claims against Telstra. Specifically, the government is requested to investigate whether it was appropriate for Ericsson to have procured Lane Telecommunications Pty Ltd during the period in which Lane was serving as the officially appointed arbitration technical consultant assigned to the COT arbitrator, whose task it was to determine the value of the COT cases' claims against Telstra.

It is alarming to discover that a company under investigation can acquire a witness in Australia, as with Lane Telecommunications. This situation raises serious concerns about the fairness and impartiality of the arbitration process. The COT Cases spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on technical consultant fees to prepare their arbitration submissions, which they provided to Lane Telecommunications and DMR Canada. They believed that their ongoing Ericsson telephone faults were affecting the viability of their businesses. Yet, Lane and DMR only found 'old historic' phone faults that had previously impacted the COT Cases businesses.

To make matters worse, Ericsson inherited all of the technical information via Lane once Lane was purchased for a bargain. This means that the COT Cases were victimized twice: first by Telstra, who denied the systemic problems in their network, and second by Ericsson, who hijacked their legitimate claims. This is unacceptable, and the government must immediately ensure this kind of injustice never happens again. The integrity of the arbitration process must be protected, and businesses and individuals must be able to trust that justice will be served fairly and impartially.

Therefore, it is strongly advised that the Australian government take this matter seriously and ensure justice is served.

Mr Bates vs The Post Office. Ending bribery corruption means holding the powerful to account. Absent Justice 

Several people who saw the first episode of Mr Bates vs the Post Office, which was released last on 17 February 2024, have made comments describing what happened to the British Post Office sub-contractors as having experienced hell on earth and how we assist them in receiving the compensation that has still not been rightly received.