The website is an ongoing project that has sparked a profound investigation into political corruption, kleptocrats, kuroi kiri, also known as "the black mist," and all related issues, such as corruption, bribery, crime, exploitation, extortion, fraud, graft, malfeasance, and nepotism. It has brought to light stories like the COT Cases, failed Telstra arbitration and mediation processes, and the British Post Office scandal, which is as compelling as any true crime story.

 

Copper Wire was not compatible.

(see Bad Bureaucrats File No/11 – Part One and File No/11 – Part Two)

 

On 9 December 1993, the Hon. David Hawker MP wrote to congratulate me for my “persistence to bring about improvements to Telecom’s country services. I regret that it was at such a high personal cost.”  (Arbitrator File No/82)

This was very affirming, as was another letter dated 9 December 1993 and copied to me from the Hon David Beddall MP, Minister for Communications, in the Labor government, who wrote:

“Let me say that the Government is most concerned at allegations that Telecom has not been maintaining telecommunications service quality at appropriate levels. I accept that in a number of cases, including Mr Smith’s there has been great personal and financial distress. This is of great concern to me and a full investigation of the facts is clearly warranted.” (Arbitrator File No/82)

 

Impacted on its business operations, causing losses and erosion of customer base

 

 

AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings, dated 4 March 1994, confirmed that my claims against Telstra were validated (see points 2 to 212 in that report). Another document Absentjustice-Introduction File 495 to 551 reveals that AUSTEL's (now called ACMA) adverse findings were already given to Telstra (the defendants in my arbitration) one month before Telstra and I signed the arbitration agreement.

Unfortunately, I did not receive a copy of these findings until November 23, 2007, 12 years after the conclusion of my arbitration process. Moreover, the government officials had already validated my claims as early as March 4, 1994, six weeks before I signed the April 21, 1994 arbitration agreement. But despite that, I was still required to pay over $300,000 in arbitration fees to prove something the government had already established.

Point 209 – “Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp has a history of service difficulties dating back to 1988. Although most of the documentation dates from 1991 it is apparent that the camp has had ongoing service difficulties for the past six years which has impacted on its business operations causing losses and erosion of customer base.”

Infringe upon the civil liberties.

 

On 27 January 1999, after having also read my first attempt at writing my manuscript absentjustice.com, File 658 - AS-CAV Exhibits 648-a to 700 Senator Kim Carr wrote:

“I continue to maintain a strong interest in your case along with those of your fellow ‘Casualties of Telstra’. The appalling manner in which you have been treated by Telstra is in itself reason to pursue the issues, but also confirms my strongly held belief in the need for Telstra to remain firmly in public ownership and subject to public and parliamentary scrutiny and accountability.

“Your manuscript demonstrates quite clearly how Telstra has been prepared to infringe upon the civil liberties of Australian citizens in a manner that is most disturbing and unacceptable.” 

Forced members to proceed with arbitration 

 

On March 23, 1999, the Australian Financial Review conducted a thorough investigation into the conduct of twenty-one arbitration and mediation processes, including my own, which had been finalized almost five years prior. The findings of their investigation prompted the Senate Estimates Committee to issue a statement.

“A Senate working party delivered a damning report into the COT dispute. The report focused on the difficulties encountered by COT members as they sought to obtain documents from Telstra. The report found Telstra had deliberately withheld important network documents and/or provided them too late and forced members to proceed with arbitration without the necessary information,” Senator Eggleston said. “They [Telstra] have defied the Senate working party. Their conduct is to act as a law unto themselves.”  

 

Persecuted hundreds of sub-postmasters -  Click here

The British Post Office wrongly prosecuted hundreds of sub-postmasters due to the faulty Horizon software between 1999 and 2015, causing many to lose their jobs, businesses, and homes and ruin them financially. Click here to watch the Australian Channel 7 television trailer for ‘Mr Bates vs the Post Office’, which went to air in Australia in February 2024. The latest update on this story is on the following YouTube: → https://youtu.be/MyhjuR5g1Mc.

Likewise, the COT Cases, who ran telephone-dependent businesses in Australia, were also victims of government negligence and suffered financial losses. The Telstra Corporation, which was government-owned then, failed to settle its claims during the arbitration mediation and independent assessment process from 1994 to 2006. The COT Cases campaigned for justice, but only five of the twenty-one claims received the justice promised by the government that endorsed their arbitrations An Injustice to the remaining 16 Australian citizens. The similarities between the COT Cases and the British Post  Office scandal are striking, and reading both stories together is a testament to the devastating impact of government negligence on innocent people→ Mr Bates vs The Post Office-Absent Justice.

The publication "Absent Justice" and the corresponding website "absentjustice.com" present a comprehensive account of the campaign against the COT Cases. As the author, the circumstances that led to the sale of my business and residence were not of my own doing but rather the result of external forces beyond my control. The evidence in my publication and website provides undeniable proof of the injustice the remaining sixteen COT Cases experienced. It is essential that the COT story and the evidence presented in my publication and website receive the attention they deserve, and those responsible for the campaign against the COT Cases should be held accountable.

My story serves as a testament to the need for transparency and accountability in business and public life.

Obtain a complimentary e-book of "Absent Justice" from a reputable publishing company. Merely hover over the cover page below to acquire your copy.

 < Absent Justice is accessible with just one click!

 

It is the only system which conceals evidence 

The lawyer-run adversary system used in Britain and its former colonies, including the US, India, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia does not try to find the truth. It is the only system which conceals evidence 

 Evan Whitten

This website boldly exposes the rampant corruption within the government bureaucracy during the COT arbitrations, leaving no stone unturned. It also fearlessly uncovers the identities of the culprits responsible for these despicable crimes and their current positions within the government. The arbitration and mediation processes endorsed by the Australian government were marred by misconduct in public office, revealing a deeply ingrained culture of systemic corruption. It is a clear violation of the law that none of the arbitrations was conducted according to the agreed ambit of the Arbitration Act. Despite this rule not being adhered to by the arbitration, the government chose to turn a blind eye and shield the arbitrator and his arbitration consultants, who were secretly exonerated from all liability for their negligent acts (Refer to Part 2 → Chapter 5 Fraudulent conduct.

 

 

During the second Australian Federal Police interview with me at my business on 26 September 1994, while they were investigating these bugging issues, they asked me 93 questions as the Australian Federal Police Investigation File No/1 transcripts from their interview show where all questions surrounding the interception of my telecommunication services conversations were discussed including the single club questioning.

My holiday camp was losing revenue due to ongoing telephone problems, and the Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp, bush-walking, canoeing, and horse-riding (over-forties-social-club) were also part of the revenue being lost due to my ongoing telephone problems. Telstra had separately recorded the names and phone numbers of various female Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp members, and the AFP was investigating how Telstra had obtained this information when it had only been sent by fax or discussed over the telephone. Given the sensitive and confidential nature of the information, the defendants should have disclosed how they obtained it. As of 2024, Telstra has been allowed not to disclose how they knew so much about my business and private matters.

The potential Over Forties Single Club patrons’ testimonials are also referred to in the AUSTEL (government communications regulator) investigation into my business losses they note in AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings, at Point 85 in their report of 3 March 1994:

“As Mr Smith points out, the RVA message had the potential to severely damage his business. An important point in relation to the possible financial impact of the RVA message on the Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp service is the camp’s dependence on group bookings. In June 1992 the camp tariffs ranged from $1500 to $6000 per week, so the loss of even one booking because of the RVA problem could mean a substantial financial loss.”  p33, point 85, Open Letter File No/6)

I also demonstrated to AUSTEL when their representatives visited my venue that singles club customers would regularly buy souvenirs before they left: purchasing printed Cape Bridgewater t-shirts, sweatshirts, postcards, headscarves and crafted driftwood plant arrangements. Schoolchildren didn’t have that sort of money and typically only bought postcards. FHCA ignored all the income I lost from lost singles-club bookings, i.e., the profit I made on the souvenirs and the $120 to $165 tariff per person for these customers.

It is interesting to note from Chapter 2 - Inaccurate and Incomplete that NONE of my singles club's lost revenue due to my ongoing proven telephone faults was ever recorded by Dr Hughes (arbitrator) or Ferrier Hodgson Corporate Advisory (arbitration financial unit) in their final Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp findings. Nor were the phone and fax hacking privacy issues recorded in Dr Hughes's findings. The threats I had received from Telstra's lawyers, Freehill Hollingdale & Page Telstra's lawyers, and Telstra's central arbitration liaison officers Steve Black and Paul Rumble were also concealed from Dr Hughes's award. 

 

Threats were made by Telstra's Steve Black and Paul Rumble. 

Two rabid dogs 

These threats were carried out. 

Page 180 ERC&A, from the official Australian Senate Hansard, dated November 29 1994, reports Senator Ron Boswell asking Telstra's legal directorate why were my FOI documents being withheld from me during my arbitration:

“Why did Telecom advise the Commonwealth Ombudsman that Telecom withheld FOI documents from Alan Smith because Alan Smith provided Telecom FOI documents to the Australian Federal Police during their investigation?”

After receiving a hollow response from Telstra, which the senator, the AFP and I all knew was utterly false, the senator states:

“…Why would Telecom withhold vital documents from the AFP? Also, why would Telecom penalise COT members for providing documents to the AFP which substantiate that Telecom had conducted unauthorised interceptions of COT members’ communications and subsequently dealt in the intercepted information by providing that information to Telecom’s external legal advisers and others?” (See Senate Evidence File No 31)

As I have reiterated throughout this website, the threats against me during the arbitration proceedings came to fruition, and the withholding of pertinent documents is deeply concerning. Regrettably, neither the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO) nor the government has investigated the detrimental impact of this malpractice on my overall submission to the arbitrator. Despite assisting the Australian Federal Police (AFP) in their investigation into the illicit interception of phone conversations and arbitration-related faxes, I was severely disadvantaged during the civil arbitration.

On 11 November 1994, John Wynack, Commonwealth Ombudsman Office, wrote to Telstra’s CEO Frank Blount, noting:

“At the request of Ms Geary (Telstra), I am notifying you of the details of the complaints made to the Ombudsman by Alan Smith;

• Telecom claimed that documents given to Telecom by Mr Smith in 1992 had been destroyed or lost.
• Telecom has lost or destroyed a number of files relating to his contacts with Telecom prior to 1991.
• Telecom unreasonably delaying providing access to many documents.
• Telecom unreasonably refused to provide the Portland/Cape Bridgewater Log Book associated with the RCM at Cape Bridgewater’ for the period 2 June 1993 to 6 March 1994″
• Telecom unreasonable refused to provide documents allegedly referring to discussions Mr Smith had with three Telecom officers conerning a discussion Mr Smith had with Malcolm Fraser. Telecom unreasoanbly deleted information from documents released." File 114 → AS-CAV Exhibit 92 to 127 

I reiterate that the Australian Federal Police and the arbitrator were never provided with the documentation that the Commonwealth Ombudsman officially requested in the above letter or under the designated arbitration discovery process. 

I also took the initiative to inform the Melbourne Collingwood CEPU Telstra employees' union rooms and two Union officials, Peter Aberheart and Ian Cooper, that the COT Cases were seeking answers from the Board of Management of Telstra and that we were not attacking their rank-and-file technicians. Furthermore, I was very concerned that my private discussions with The Hon. Malcolm Fraser about my experiences in Communist China had been leaked to the Portland telephone exchange, which was connected to my business. The evidence provided by the AFP confirmed that a device had been set up in the exchange for this purpose. I want to emphasize how serious I was about Telstra's arbitration officials having deleted my discussions with The Hon. Malcolm Fraser.

I strongly believe that the deleted discussion material was provided to Telstra's lawyer, Wayne Morris Condon from Freehill Hollingdale & Page, who signed off Telstra's arbitration witness statement of their clinical psychologist, Ian Jobln, without allowing Mr Joblin to sign it (refer below).

 

It bore no signature of the psychologist

As shown in government records, the government assured the COT Cases (see point 40 Prologue Evidence File No/2), Freehill Holingdale & Page would have no further involvement in the COT issues the same legal firm which when they provided Ian Joblin, clinical psychologist's witness statement to the arbitrator, it was only signed by Maurice Wayne Condon, of Freehill's. It bore no signature of the psychologist.

During my original meeting with Ian Joblin in September 1994, I raised with him that my stress levels were high, that I had discussed this with Mr Barnard, a fellow psychologist in Melbourne, and my local Portland psychologist who was treating me for my China flashbacks which again had surfaced after being placed under Telstra that all my registered phone complaints had to be in writing with Denise McBurnie of Freehill Hollingdale & Page who was treating me as if I was the enemy instead of a person trying to run a telephone dependent business which did not have a reliable phone service. 

My Joblin was adamant he would mention in his findings to Freehill Hollingdale & Page that it was not a proper and fit way for Telstra to treat me and that Telstra's methods of assisting me needed to be reviewed. 

I wonder if Maurice Wayne Condon removed or changed any reference to Ian Joplin's original writing, where he stated that I was of sound mind but suffering PSD due to the anger of being partly responsible for supplying wheat to North Vietnam. At the same time, Australia's soldiers were being killed and maimed by the North Vietnamese. When I informed Mr Joblin about the redaction of my conversation with The Hon Malcolm Fraser by Telstra, which included a detailed account of the atrocities I witnessed in China, he was sympathetic to my distress as I had to endure the memory of these horrific events.

I would like to know if Mr Joblin's signed witness statement mentioned my PSD and if it was removed. Is this why only Wayne Morris Condon's signature, who employed him, was on the witness statement when it was submitted to arbitration by Freehill Hollingdale & Page on behalf of Telstra?

On 21 March 1997, twenty-two months after the conclusion of my arbitration, John Pinnock (the second appointed administrator to my arbitration) wrote to Telstra's Ted Benjamin File 596 - AS-CAV Exhibits 589 to 647 asking: 

1...any explanation for the apparent discrepancy in the attestation of the witness statement of Ian Joblin [clinical psychologist’s].

2...were there any changes made to the Joblin statement originally sent to Dr Hughes [the arbitrator] compared to the signed statement?" 

It is unacceptable that, despite spending over $300,000 in arbitration fees, I, as the claimant, have not been provided with Telstra's response regarding the changes made to Ian Joblin's witness statement as requested by John Pinnock. This clearly demonstrates that Australia's arbitration system of justice is only meant for the powerful elite and not for the common citizens.

 

 

In 1994/95, I went through arbitration proceedings. During that time, I shared with the Australian Federal Police a collection of newspaper articles that featured two separate telephone conversations with The Hon. Malcolm Fraser, who had previously served as the Prime Minister of Australia. Page 12 of the transcripts from my interview with the AFP's Australian Federal Police Investigation File No/1 reveals that the AFP and I discussed my conversation and correspondence on September 18, 1967, after my return from China.

“FORMER prime minister Malcolm Fraser yesterday demanded Telecom explain why his name appears in a restricted internal memo.

“Mr Fraser’s request follows the release of a damning government report this week which criticised Telecom for recording conversations without customer permission.

“Mr Fraser said Mr Alan Smith, of the Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp near Portland, phoned him early last year seeking advice on a long-running dispute with Telecom which Mr Fraser could not help.” (See Senate Evidence File No/53)

I'm curious to know why someone at Telstra Corporation needed to document my phone call with former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser.

 

 

My China story is an essential part of my COT story. It is a story of Telstra gaining access to my phone conversations and using this information to threaten me. Even after my wife left the holiday camp, the China Flashbacks continued throughout my arbitration to haunt me. 

Back in 1967, when I returned from China, I was interviewed by a journalist in Sydney. The journalist advised me that my story had been blocked and that I would be a marked man by supporters of Bob Menzies, Australia's prime minister at the time, who was known for his hatred of the communist Seamans Union of Australia. The downloaded evidence files show the extent of the injustice I faced through this ordeal. I had no option but to include my China story in my COT story to provide a comprehensive picture of the many unlawful happenings against me and other COT cases. The many threats, lies, and mistreatment I faced were unacceptable. I hope my story will warn others who may think arbitration is their answer to an expensive court case.

As a concerned citizen, I had previously alerted the then-Minister of the Army, Malcolm Fraser, about China's redeployment of Australian wheat to North Vietnam in 1967. The wheat was used to feed North Vietnamese soldiers who were at war with Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. However, despite my warning, Australia continued to sell wheat to China, as shown in Chapter 7- Vietnam-Vietcong.

Australia knowingly sold wheat to China, aware China was redeploying it to North Vietnam while North Vietnam soldiers were killing and maiming Australian, New Zealand and USA troops fighting in North Vietnam. I ask every visitor to this website to read footnotes 82 to 89 of the paper FOOD AND TRADE IN LATE MAOIST CHINA, 1960-1978, prepared by Tianxiao Zhu. ​​

 In September 1967, a group of British merchant seamen quit their ship, the Hope Peak, in Sydney and flew back to London. They told the press in London that they quit the job because of the humiliating experiences to which they were subjected while in Chinese ports. They also claimed that grain shipped from Australia to China was being sent straight on to North Vietnam. One of them said, “I have watched grain going off our ship on conveyor belts and straight into bags stamped North Vietnam. Our ship was being used to take grain from Australia to feed the North Vietnamese. It’s disgusting.” 83 (my emphasis). The Minister of Trade and Industry received an inquiry about the truth of the story in Parliament, to which the Minister pointed out that when they left Australia, the seamen only told the Australian press that they suffered such intolerable maltreatment in various Chinese ports that they were fearful about going back. But after they arrived in London, Vietnam was added to their story. Thus the Minister claimed that he did not know the facts and did not want to challenge this story, but it seemed to him that their claims about Vietnam seemed to be an “afterthought.”84

The reason why China became a big market for Australia partially resulted from the competition with the Americans in the world market because of the P. L. 480 plans. Since the U.S. was still on a full embargo with China in the 1960s, Australia had to grab the opportunity. What upset many ordinary Australians in the wheat deals was that the price of wheat sold to China was low, at least lower than the price paid to Australian growers. In April 1965, a resident in Western Australia wrote to the Parliament, saying that “I was surprised to learn recently that a large sale of wheat had been made to communist China at a price of 13/7 per bushel. I understand that the guaranteed price to the farmer is 1/- per bushel above this price and that the Commonwealth Government (ourselves) needed to find an amount of £4,000,000 to make up the difference...We have apparently reached the stage where we are prepared to supply cheap wheat to strengthen an enemy who has sworn to destroy us.”  89  

 

The following three statements taken from a report prepared by Australia's Kim Beasly MP on 4 September 1965 (father of Australia's former Minister of Defence Kim Beasly) only tell part of this tragic episode concerning what I wanted to convey to Malcolm Fraser, former Prime Minister of Australia when I telephoned him in April 1993 and again in April 1994 concerning Australia's wheat deals which I originally wrote to him about on 18 September 1967 as Minister for the Army.

Vol. 87 No. 4462 (4 Sep 1965) - National Library of Australia https://nla.gov.au › nla.obj-702601569 

"The Department of External Affairs has recently published an "Information Handbook entitled "Studies on Vietnam".  It established the fact that the Vietcong are equipped with Chinese arms and ammunition"

If it is right to ask Australian youth to risk everything in Vietnam it is wrong to supply their enemies. The Communists in Asia will kill anyone who stands in their path, but at least they have a path."

Australian trade commssioners do not so readily see that our Chinese trade in war materials finances our own distruction. NDr do they see so clearly that the wheat trade does the same thing."     

The underlying inquiry is to ascertain the government's rationale for deliberately deceiving the general public and jeopardising the country's troops whose lives were being lost in the conflict in North Vietnam.  Murdered for Mao: The killings China 'forgot'

Until the late 1990s, the Australian government wholly owned Australia’s telephone network and the communications carrier, Telecom (today privatised and called Telstra). Telecom held the monopoly on communications and let the network deteriorate into disrepair. When four small business owners had severe communication problems, they went into arbitration with Telstra. The arbitrations were a sham: the appointed arbitrator not only allowed Telstra to minimise the casualties of Telstra (COT) members’ claims and losses but also bowed down to Telstra and let the carrier run the arbitrations. Telstra committed serious crimes during the arbitrations, yet the Australian government and the Australian Federal Police have not held Telstra, or the other entities involved in this deceit, accountable. 

My name is Alan Smith, and I have been fighting against a telecommunications giant and the Australian Government since February 1988. My battle has spanned various government departments, regulatory bodies, the judiciary, and the Australian telecommunications giant Telstra (formerly known as Telecom). Despite all of the challenges I have faced, I have remained steadfast in my quest for justice. After reading my story and watching the videos on this website, you will be moved to support me in producing a documentary that exposes the truth. This documentary will shed light on how financial professionals, forensic accountants, and high-ranking lawyers turned arbitrators were swayed into committing criminal acts or allowed such acts to be perpetrated against a group of small business operators.

Please join me and the other Telstra casualties in our fight for justice. Together, we can produce a powerful documentary that exposes the truth and hold those responsible for their actions accountable. I can be contacted by leaving a message on → Contact - Government Corruption.

To truly drive my point home, I highly recommend you Click here to watch the Australian television Channel 7  link: https://youtu.be/MyhjuR5g1Mc and  http://rb.gy/8399e3 Mr Bates vs the Post Office. This powerful story highlights the immense influence that the government can wield in such processes and how their wrongful decisions can be swept under the rug, with citizens being unfairly portrayed as villains. If you want to delve deeper into the topic of the stories about the casualties of Telstra, then all you need to do is click on the various exhibits being uploaded daily.

 

 

As a senior advisor to the Australian government, independent politician Andrew Wilkie stood up against the misinformation being spread by the John Howard Australian government about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He strongly believed Australia should not go to war based on mere hearsay. Despite this, Australia went ahead with the invasion of Iraq without any concrete evidence of the alleged weapons of mass destruction. https://shorturl.at/bctGK

Andrew Wilkie took a bold step and left his position in government to prove that the claims were false. Since then, he has served the people of Australia with great dedication as an independent politician in Hobart, Tasmania, far surpassing his potential as a government bureaucrat. Andrew Wilkie's unwavering commitment to truth and justice is a remarkable example of how one person can make a difference and inspire others to do the same.

It is important to note that the Australian Liberal National Party government was willing to go to war in Iraq based on false information, regardless of the consequences. The government chose to ignore the fact that there was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction and initiated a war that resulted in the loss of countless lives. If you keep reading my story, you will see that back in the 1960s, the same Liberal-Country Party government was willing to sell wheat to communist China despite knowing that China was sending some of this wheat to North Vietnam. This occurred while Australian, New Zealand, and USA soldiers were fighting and dying in the jungles of Vietnam Chapter 7- Vietnam - Vietcong

The government's priority was not the welfare of its citizens but rather its own interests. The conduct of the Liberal-National Party government in these two examples shows a lack of honesty and integrity towards its citizens. I have used these shocking incidents in my story to illustrate how unethical some public servants of the Liberal National Party can be when dealing with ordinary Australian citizens. This type of behaviour has left sixteen casualties of Telstra in a state of limbo for more than two decades, as the stories of the casualties of Telstra demonstrate COT cases that have suffered significant injustice An Injustice to the remaining 16 Australian citizens.

Our tireless efforts to expose their actions have revealed that the government has broken its commitment to us. We were promised a resolution for our unresolved non-supply of FOI documents, similar to the five litmus test cases once validated by the Senate—which did happen. This validates our statements and holds the government accountable for its negligence.

During a visit to my business, Telstra officials left an open briefcase on my premises. Was this done intentionally? Were Telstra technicians hoping for me to uncover the true extent of the appalling Telstra telecommunications network? The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), known as AUSTEL, saw the briefcase's contents and confirmed that my claims were valid. They praised my persistence in achieving a reliable telephone service for the whole region of my holiday camp in Portland, South West Victoria Manipulating the Regulator.

I have irrefutable evidence that points 2 to 212 in AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings were deliberately withheld from the arbitration process, confirming that the government validated my claims. It baffles me why the government allowed me to spend over $300,000 in arbitration fees for thirteen months to prove something they had already validated in March 1994, just six weeks before my arbitration commenced.  

The government and media lauded me and the other three COT Cases (two of whom have since passed away, and one of whom has dementia) for our dedication and hard work. We agreed to cease our campaign for the Senate to investigate the matter in exchange for the government's promise to ensure that Telstra would address ongoing telephone problems as part of a government-endorsed arbitration process. The government must uphold its end of the bargain and address the issues the remaining sixteen COT cases face.

The Australian government's endorsement of an arbitration process should have solved the ongoing telephone problems experienced by the COT Cases. Sadly, the government's written assurance that the specialized service verification testing during the arbitration would solve the problem was not fulfilled. Despite their best efforts, the COT cases were left with no resolution, and it is a tragedy that the government-endorsed process failed to address their ongoing telephone issues.

The COT Cases' struggle is not just a story; it's a reality that resulted in the bankruptcy of many businesses, including mine. It's an injustice that the new owners, Jenny and Daren Lewis, had to face after investing all their life savings in the company I sold them for land value. The federal court ordered them off the property, and their bankruptcy was the final blow. Chapter 4 The New Owners Tell Their Story

My story is not unique. It's one of twenty-one stories on absentjustice.com that show how government officials failed to help the COT Cases. The Senate reviewed five cases to determine if the government's actions were justified, with the remaining sixteen COT Cases left without a resolution. It's not too late for the government to make things right for all twenty-one COT Cases and show that they care about justice for all Australians.

 

 

The actions of the Liberal-National Party government have demonstrated their dishonesty towards its citizens in the two examples I have shown regarding China and Iraq. I have used this appalling, unimaginable conduct in my story to show how unethical some of the Liberal National Party government public servants are when it comes to dealing with ordinary Australian citizens. This type of conduct has left sixteen casualties of Telstra in limbo for more than two decades, as the stories of the casualties of Telstra show COT cases that have suffered much injustice to the remaining 16 Australian citizens.  

The government and media lauded me and the other three COT Cases (two of whom have since passed away, and one of whom has dementia) for our dedication and hard work. We agreed to cease our campaign for the Senate to investigate the matter in exchange for the government's promise to ensure that Telstra would address ongoing telephone problems as part of a government-endorsed arbitration process. The government must uphold its end of the bargain and address the issues the remaining sixteen COT cases face.

The Australian government's endorsement of an arbitration process should have solved the ongoing telephone problems experienced by the COT Cases. Sadly, the government's written assurance that the specialized service verification testing during the arbitration would solve the problem was not fulfilled. Despite their best efforts, the COT cases were left with no resolution, and it is a tragedy that the government-endorsed process failed to address their ongoing telephone issues.

This self-interest by the Liberal National Party Government became more of the same in September 1995, when I and the Hon David Hawker MP gave evidence to Senator Richard Alston in his office at Canberra Parliament House. Senator Alston requested that I provide further evidence confirming that the Cape Bridgewater Bell Canada International Testing process conducted at the Portland and Cape Bridgewater telephone exchange was significantly deficient (Refer to Telstra's Falsified BCI Report confirmed.

The Cape Bridgewater and Portland region, situated in the electorate of The Hon. David Hawker MP and the State of Victoria, was subject to our thorough investigation. We provided detailed information to Senator Richard Alston, who then passed it on to Paul Fletcher, then a senior Liberal bureaucrat, to evaluate, now submitted here as Open Letter File No/41/Part-One and File No/41 Part-Two and Telstra's Falsified BCI Report. Anyone reading Telstra's Falsified BCI Report and Open Letter File No/41/Part-One and File No/41 Part-Two will conclude Paul Fletcher should have acted upon those two reports. The fact that Senator Richard Alston advised The Hon. David Hawker MP (also a Liberal Government Minister) that my reports were being investigated, nothing eventuated.

Despite our persistent efforts, that investigation was abandoned after several public officials, including government ministers, accepted a free, paid-expense trip to the Atlantic Olympic Games in 1996 courtesy of Telstra, one of the games' sponsors Senate Evidence File No 21 Senate Hansard dated 27 Feb 1998 re kick-backs and bribes.

In 2021/22, I approached the Federal Member of Parliament, Dan Tehan MP, who preceded The Hon David Hawker, regarding the validation of my claims. At that time, Hon. Paul Fletcher was the Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities, and the Arts in the Morrison government. Despite the evidence he had already received, The Hon. Paul Fletcher declined to investigate this website. It's disheartening to see that even today, Paul Fletcher is still a serving minister in government in opposition.