The problem with habitual bullies is that it always comes as a bit of a shock to them when their intended victim tells them where to stick it.
On Tuesday 1st June 2010, Brook Hastie from this department rang me up and quite bluntly told me that I could be prosecuted for "Contempt of the Queensland Parliament" for simply making my complaint to these people public, and publishing correspondence.
But when I asked Brook to send me a public extract of the Queensland law relating to this charge, he refused. He said I was getting that info in a "Letter," which they could prosecute me for if I published. So quite sensibly, I said that "Law" has to be public, otherwise people can't follow it, because they wouldn't know about it . . . So could he PLEASE direct me to the "Law." But I got no co-operation or help on this point, which pushed me into doing my own research.
I rang these people, and spoke to a Mr. Rollason, who was extremely helpful and interested (thank you Mr. Rollason, very much appreciated). Anyway, I told him I was expecting the above mentioned "Letter" from the PCMC, and he said he'd be interested in getting a copy. No problems, I was happy to oblige. So I rang Brook Hastie back (he wasn't available), and left a message to say that Terry O'Gorman's office wanted a copy of that letter, so could they email it to me as a pdf copy ASAP. That was before I left for work, around 12.30pm on Wednesday 2nd June 2010. I got home around 11.30pm that night, and checked my email. No letter. Bugger.
Anyway, this morning I got up around 10am (didn't get to sleep until late), made myself a cup of coffee, and checked my email again. Still no letter. But in the meantime, I'd also had a chance to check out exactly what "Contempt of Parliament" means (myself, due to Brook's refusal to just direct me to the appropriate law on-line), and came across this (scroll down to page 27). And then my mouth hung open in disblief (read it, you'll see what I mean).
Anyway, after a few sips of the aforementioned coffee, I decided to give Brook a call. He wasn't available, no-one was available, so I started to write this blog post. Then the phone rang. It was Brook. He wasn't happy, said I'd "Mis-represented" him. He said he hadn't "Threatened" me with "Contempt" of Parliament, which was news to me - because until I spoke to him the day before yesterday, I didn't even know the law existed, so I was hardly likely to make it up.
But wait, here goes, Brook said he'd told me my blog could "Amount" to a "Contempt of the Parliament." Well sorry Brook, but when you call ordinary members of the public and start bandying legal threats around (whilst bluntly refusing to simply and quickly direct me to law in question), those subtle differences tend to get lost in translation. All I heard was the weight of the entire Queensland Government, falling on my head from a great height - because sweetheart, you and your lot have great deal more cash than me, which (from what I gather), is how Anna Bligh's Government usually trashes its intended victims.
Anyway, things got a bit heated on the phone. Brook kept talking over me, and wouldn't listen, so I raised my voice quite a few notches to get heard. No deal. Communication just wasn't happening. And due to (Brook said), my "Mis-representation," his department was formally refusing to have any further contact with me on the phone. Well, maybe Brook, if you hadn't taken it into your head to call an ordinary member of the public, and suggest they could be the first person ever in Australia to be formally prosecuted for "Contempt of the Parliament," thing might have got off to a more cordial start. In my book, that's called "Bullying," and I don't take too kindly to it.
Further, Brook is still refusing to email me the "Letter." He said it's in the post. Good, because when it arrives, it's going straight on-line - as is my original complaint. Then, if Anna Bligh wants to prosecute me for "Contempt of the Parliament," she can damn well go for it, and I'll see her in court.