- Subsection (1) does not authorise the Committee:
- to investigate a corruption issue or an ACLEI corruption issue; or
- to reconsider the Integrity Commissioner’s decisions or recommendations in relation to a particular corruption issue or ACLEI corruption issue; or
- to reconsider a special investigator’s decisions or recommendations in relation to an ACLEI corruption issue.
Thank you for your email. I am the Chair of the Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on ACLEI. The Committee has a relatively narrowly prescribed role as a parliamentary body that looks to review and support the structures, resources, jurisdiction, and outcomes of ACLEI.
The ACLEI Committee itself does not have investigative powers, and it is neither possible nor appropriate for me to address the questions you pose.
As you would be aware, there are clear avenues (through ACLEI and other agencies) for raising issues of corruption, and I encourage you to bring your concerns to the appropriate agencies on that basis.
I have met with and assisted WA supporters of Shapelle Corby on more than one occasion, and I understand their distress. I continue to support the effort to reach a prisoner exchange program with Indonesia which might in time allow Australian prisoners in Indonesia to serve their time here in Australia, and vice versa.
And Yep, I guess Melissa's "Narrowly prescribed role" suits her quite nicely, lots of kudos and cash, with zero responsibility for fighting corruption. Tony, your scorching words of less than three months ago are right on the mark.
And Melissa, while we're here, can you please tell me why you think Schapelle should be a "Prisoner" in this country? And that's not a rhetorical question, I'm looking for a formal response. I'll phone your office to confirm receipt of this missive, and get an estimate of how long it will take you to reply. I'm looking for . . .
1. CCTV evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag.
2. Direct physical & forensic evidence from the Australian premises of Schapelle, that connects her to the drugs found in her bag.
3. Luggage weight evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag.
4. Phone and banking record evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag.
5. Finger print and human DNA evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag.
Because, Melissa, these very reasonable standards of evidence, especially in the light of these very high level and public accusations, and this very well known corrupt activity at Sydney Airport, would be absolutely basic to any safe conviction in an Australian court.
So Melissa, I very much look forward to receipt of that evidence from you, and/or an explanation if it's "Missing."
And again, please take note that Schapelle's human rights were severely breached, and this issues will be taken directly into the International arena if necessary. Please frame your requested reply with that in mind.
Addit to the above Monday 31st May 2010
I rang Melissa's office (around 1.06pm), and spoke to a gentleman who refused to tell me his name, or his formal position. However, he did formally confirm that the above communication/questions had been received by Melissa. But when I asked for an estimate re an approximate time frame for a reply he said (direct verbatim quote), "You're not in a position to require a further response from anyone." So when I said did that mean I could formally say I was unable to get a reply from Melissa, he responded "That's fine. Goodbye."
However, due to the extreme seriousness of the above issues, I am still expecting a reply from Melissa - and as a tax payer who helps fund her wages, I'm sorry sweetheart, but yes, I am "In a position" to require a reasonable response to reasonable questions. Therefore, if I hear nothing back within the next 4 weeks, I'll call Melissa's office again, and they can either confirm that arrogant silence (once more), or decide to carry out their public responsibilities.