Chapter 4 Bad Bureaucrats
Extra Chapters Coming Soon
Statement of Claim
By a Former British-Australian Merchant Navy Ship's Cook & Steward and COT Case Claimant
1. Introduction: The Logbook as a Beacon of Truth
In 1789, the HMS Bounty departed Portsmouth, England, on a mission to transport breadfruit trees from the South Pacific to the British Isles. That voyage became infamous—not for its botanical ambitions, but for the mutiny that erupted in 1787. Captain William Bligh’s logbook, meticulously maintained, became the definitive record of what truly transpired, far more reliable than any dramatised film adaptation.
I share this historical parallel because I, too, have lived through a journey where the truth was buried, and the logbook—the one that could have vindicated me—was deliberately withheld.
2. Background: The COT Arbitration and the Promise of Transparency
As one of the sixteen claimants in the Casualties of Telstra (COT) arbitration process, I was assured that the telephone exchange logbooks from our local exchanges would be made available to the arbitrator once we signed our agreements. These logbooks were essential. They documented fault complaints, technical issues, and service failures—evidence that could have substantiated our claims.
Six months before arbitration began, four of us submitted a Freedom of Information (FOI) request for these records. We were told they would be provided. They never were.
3. The Portland and Cape Bridgewater Logbooks: Evidence Denied
In my case, the Portland and Cape Bridgewater exchange logbooks were critical. A covert copy of extracts from these logs was used by AUSTEL (now ACMA) in a March 1994 report. That report validated my claims against Telstra across 210 points. Yet, during arbitration, neither I nor the arbitrator received access to this evidence.
Had the arbitrator, Dr Gordon Hughes, reviewed these extracts, I believe the award issued on May 11, 1995, would have been three to four times greater. The significance of these logbooks cannot be overstated.
4. Institutional Failures and Obstruction
Even the Commonwealth Ombudsman sought access to the logbooks from Telstra’s CEO. No response. If a government watchdog couldn’t obtain them, what chance did I have?
Between 1995 and 1997, with the help of John Wynack, Director of Investigations at the Ombudsman’s office, I pursued Telstra’s arbitration file under FOI. Telstra claimed it was destroyed. Mr. Wynack did not accept this explanation.
I also requested the same file from the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO), who was legally required to retain all arbitration documents for six years. On January 10, 1996, TIO John Pinnock responded:
Why was I denied access to the very documents that could have proven my case?
5. Security Breaches and Privacy Violations
Former Telstra Principal Security Officer Des Direen investigated suspected illegal interference at the Portland exchange. He was told to back off—because my business was part of the COT Cases. This is documented in File 766.
One individual under investigation was Gordon Stokes, a former Telstra employee. He allegedly shared my private business contacts with a third party and was implicated in setting up a clandestine recording device. The logbook that would have recorded its installation was never presented during arbitration.
6. AUSTEL’s Withholding of the Report
AUSTEL’s draft report was provided to Telstra in March 1994. I didn’t receive my copy until November 2007—thirteen years later. This delay was not accidental. It was a deliberate act of suppression.
Meanwhile, I spent over $300,000 in arbitration fees trying to prove a case that the government had already validated—using evidence I was denied.
7. Tampering With Evidence
Let me tell you what really happened. From January to November 1993, I submitted complaint after complaint about my phone faults. One of the most disturbing involved my outgoing line—055 267230. Customers told me they could still hear me after I’d hung up. I didn’t act on it until 26 April 1994, when my son couldn’t reach me.
That day, I ran tests with Cliff Mathieson from AUSTEL. I hung up and counted aloud—he heard every number. We swapped phones and repeated the test. Same result. It wasn’t the phone. It was the network.
Cliff told me to report it to Peter Gamble, Telstra’s chief engineer. What I didn’t know was that Gamble had been named in a Senate hearing as someone tasked with stopping the first five COT claimants—including me—from proving our cases “at all costs.”
I called Gamble and ran the same tests. He arranged to collect the phone the next day.
The Portland exchange logbook would have recorded:
- The exact time my phone was collected
- When it left the exchange
- Faults reported by other customers using the same TF200 model
But that logbook was never provided.
FOI documents show Telstra knew the EXICOM TF200 had issues in moisture-prone areas like Cape Bridgewater. Yet, in their December 1994 defence, they blamed the fault on my phone—and claimed it was caused by beer.
Their lab report said the phone's interior was sticky and smelled of beer, implying I was responsible. But they ignored the fact that Cliff Mathieson and I had already tested two different phones on that line and found the same fault.
FOI folio D01026/27 confirms Telstra knew about lock-up problems in EXICOM T200S manufactured after week seven of 1993. One side effect? The line stayed open after a call ended, allowing the other party to hear room noise. Instead of pulling these phones from service, Telstra redeployed 45,000 units to areas the technicians believed wouldn’t be affected by moisture.
8. Conclusion: A Call for Transparency and Accountability
I served for 28 years in the British Australian Merchant Navy. I understand the value of a logbook. It is not just a record—it is a lifeline to truth.
The Portland and Cape Bridgewater logbooks were withheld from me, the arbitrator, and the Commonwealth Ombudsman. This obstruction undermined the integrity of the arbitration process and denied me justice.
I call upon the relevant authorities to release these documents in full. Let the public examine the evidence. Let the truth be known. Only then can we begin to restore faith in our institutions and ensure that no other citizen is forced to fight blind in pursuit of justice.
