My YouTube Video
.
Arbitration
The arbitrator, whose actions seemed designed to shield the government during the COT case arbitrations, asserted that there were no ongoing issues impacting the operations of the Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp. However, in his award issued on May 11, 1995, the arbitrator only referenced historical and anecdotal faults associated with Telstra, failing to acknowledge the ongoing and significant problems that persisted. Had the arbitrator been informed of the staggering 120,000 ongoing faults reported throughout Telstra’s network, he might have pursued further investigation by his arbitration technical consultants to verify whether my claims regarding these persistent telephone faults were legitimate.
This situation raises critical questions about whether the approximately 120,000 COT-type customers scattered across Australia—detailed in Falsification Report File No/8—were facing comparable significant disruptions. These ongoing problems could be directly linked to issues concerning the Ericsson AXE telephone exchange, which had garnered attention from AUSTEL, as well as complications arising from both the CAN and AXE systems.
Moreover, the response of Telstra’s General Manager to the two letters dated April 8 and 9, 1994, addressed to Robin Davey of AUSTEL, was troubling and should have been handled differently. Acting on these letters in the manner he did—essentially minimising the scope and severity of the reported faults—was inadequate and potentially damaging. By concealing the accurate scale of the problems affecting countless individuals within Telstra’s service area, the GM's actions had a profoundly negative impact on many lives.
Additionally, the issue of households being overcharged for telephone calls was merely one dimension of a much larger crisis. Many of these 120,000 COT-type customers were not just regular residential users but also included vital businesses. The interruptions and lost calls experienced by these businesses often had dire financial consequences, leading to bankruptcies. This was particularly evident in the twelve COT cases that are currently under arbitration, highlighting the urgent need for a fair and thorough examination of the ongoing issues within Telstra's operations.
BCI and SVT reports - Section One
Who hijacked the BCI and SVT Reports
In the ongoing discourse surrounding the National Broadband Network (NBN) in Australia, a critical issue has yet to receive adequate attention: Did the country’s copper telecommunications network fulfil the original mandatory regulatory requirements set by the government at the time of Telstra's privatisation?
In my specific case, the COT arbitrator was presented with nine separate sworn witness statements from Telstra. These statements asserted that my telephone service was compliant with the established network standards, indicating that there were no continuing issues. This raises an essential question: were these nine sworn testimonies truthful or misleading?
An honest answer to this inquiry is of profound significance; it has the potential to influence billions of dollars in Commonwealth spending and could suggest that Telstra provided false information to the arbitrator during the course of my case, thereby limiting its financial liability. It is particularly concerning that, despite the arbitrator ruling in Telstra's favour, my phone issues persisted for an additional eleven years, suggesting that the network problems had not been resolved as vividly detailed in Chapter 4, The New Owners Tell Their Story, and Chapter 5, Immoral - Hypocritical Conduct.
