Showing posts with label corruption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label corruption. Show all posts
Friday 28 April 2017
A Russian government think tank controlled by Vladimir Putin developed a plan to swing the 2016 U.S. presidential election to Donald Trump
Reuters, 19 April 2017:
(Reuters) - A Russian government think tank controlled by Vladimir Putin developed a plan to swing the 2016 U.S. presidential election to Donald Trump and undermine voters’ faith in the American electoral system, three current and four former U.S. officials told Reuters.
They described two confidential documents from the think tank as providing the framework and rationale for what U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded was an intensive effort by Russia to interfere with the Nov. 8 election. U.S. intelligence officials acquired the documents, which were prepared by the Moscow-based Russian Institute for Strategic Studies [en.riss.ru/], after the election.
The institute is run by retired senior Russian foreign intelligence officials appointed by Putin’s office.
The first Russian institute document was a strategy paper written last June that circulated at the highest levels of the Russian government but was not addressed to any specific individuals.
It recommended the Kremlin launch a propaganda campaign on social media and Russian state-backed global news outlets to encourage U.S. voters to elect a president who would take a softer line toward Russia than the administration of then-President Barack Obama, the seven officials said.
A second institute document, drafted in October and distributed in the same way, warned that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was likely to win the election. For that reason, it argued, it was better for Russia to end its pro-Trump propaganda and instead intensify its messaging about voter fraud to undermine the U.S. electoral system’s legitimacy and damage Clinton’s reputation in an effort to undermine her presidency, the seven officials said.
The current and former U.S. officials spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the Russian documents’ classified status. They declined to discuss how the United States obtained them. U.S. intelligence agencies also declined to comment on them.
Putin has denied interfering in the U.S. election. Putin’s spokesman and the Russian institute did not respond to requests for comment.
The documents were central to the Obama administration's conclusion that Russia mounted a “fake news” campaign and launched cyber attacks against Democratic Party groups and Clinton's campaign, the current and former officials said.
“Putin had the objective in mind all along, and he asked the institute to draw him a road map,” said one of the sources, a former senior U.S. intelligence official.
Trump has said Russia’s activities had no impact on the outcome of the race. Ongoing congressional and FBI investigations into Russian interference have so far produced no public evidence that Trump associates colluded with the Russian effort to change the outcome of the election.
Four of the officials said the approach outlined in the June strategy paper was a broadening of an effort the Putin administration launched in March 2016. That month the Kremlin instructed state-backed media outlets, including international platforms Russia Today and Sputnik news agency, to start producing positive reports on Trump’s quest for the U.S. presidency, the officials said.
Russia Today did not respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson for Sputnik dismissed the assertions by the U.S. officials that it participated in a Kremlin campaign as an “absolute pack of lies.” “And by the way, it's not the first pack of lies we're hearing from 'sources in U.S. official circles'," the spokesperson said in an email.
Pro-Kremlin Bloggers…..
The report said Russia Today and Sputnik “consistently cast president elect-Trump as the target of unfair coverage from traditional media outlets."…..
Cyber Attacks
Neither of the Russian institute documents mentioned the release of hacked Democratic Party emails to interfere with the U.S. election, according to four of the officials. The officials said the hacking was a covert intelligence operation run separately out of the Kremlin.
The overt propaganda and covert hacking efforts reinforced each other, according to the officials. Both Russia Today and Sputnik heavily promoted the release of the hacked Democratic Party emails, which often contained embarrassing details.
Five of the U.S. officials described the institute as the Kremlin’s in-house foreign policy think tank……..
Read the full article here.
Thursday 23 February 2017
Adani Mining Pty Ltd: allegations of "black money" and environmental degradation
“The Indian government’s Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) is currently investigating a number of Adani Group entities, including Adani Enterprises Ltd (AEL), which is the ultimate holding company of Adani Mining Pty Ltd, the proponent of the Carmichael Mine, for illegally overvaluing imports of coal and capital equipment in order to siphon funds offshore, a practice that creates “black money.” A detailed report from a reliable media source also indicates that for more than a decade the DRI has also been investigating Adani Group entities for tax evasion and money laundering whilst trading in diamonds.”
Major Reports, February 2017:
The Adani Brief
If it proceeds, the Adani Group’s Carmichael Coal Mine and Rail Project in the Galilee Basin in Queensland will be among the largest new coalmines in the world. The associated rail infrastructure and expansion of the coal export terminal at Port of Abbot Point adjacent to Queensland’s Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area would facilitate the shipping of coal through the Great Barrier Reef’s waters from the Carmichael Mine.
The Adani Brief: What governments and financiers need to know about the Adani Group’s record overseas suggests that governments and private stakeholders should give serious consideration to:
* the Adani Group’s global legal compliance record which demonstrates numerous serious breaches with adverse consequences for the environment and local people; and
* the possibility that if this track record continues in Australia, then supporting the Adani Group’s Carmichael Mine and the Abbot Point Port may expose governments and private
stakeholders to reputational and financial risks.
Read The Adani Brief (PDF, 1.53MB)
Read the Overview of The Adani Brief (PDF, 160KB)
Report/submission Type:
Topics:
Labels:
corruption,
environmental vandalism,
mining,
multinationals
Saturday 11 February 2017
There would be a particularly nervous class of Australian investors right now - perhaps even Mr. Harbourside Mansion himself
The Guardian, 11 February 2017:
The founders of Mossack Fonseca, the law firm at the centre of the Panama Papers scandal, were arrested in Panama City on Thursday as the country’s attorney general launched a probe into their alleged connections with Brazil’s sprawling Lava Jato corruption scandal.
Juergen Mossack and his colleague Ramon Fonseca, a former adviser to Panama’s president Juan Carlos Varela, were taken into custody and transferred to police cells in the capital overnight for further questioning on Friday, their defence attorney Elías Solano was quoted telling reporters.
Panamanian prosecutors raided the offices of Mossack Fonseca on Thursday. In a press conference on Kenia Porcell, Panama’s attorney general, said she had information that identified Mossack Fonseca “allegedly as a criminal organisation that is dedicated to hiding money assets from suspicious origins”.
She said the firm’s Brazilian representative had allegedly been instructed to conceal documents and to remove evidence of illegal activities related to the Lava Jato case.
“Put simply, the money comes from bribes, circulated via certain corporate entities to return bleached or washed to Panama,” said Porcell. She explained charges had been formulated against four individuals, including the Mossack Fonseca partners.
Porcell thanked the authorities in Brazil, Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, Switzerland and the United States for their part in a collaboration which she said began over a year ago.
The Panama Papers, which consist of millions of documents belonging to Mossack Fonseca and leaked in April 2016, provoked a global scandal after showing how the rich and powerful used offshore corporations to avoid paying taxes.
Australian Financial Review, 14 June 2016:
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's merchant bank Turnbull & Partners received an estimated $3 million in 1995 and 1996 from the sales of shares held through offshore companies administered by notorious Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca.
Turnbull & Partners received up to $7 million from share sales and advisory fees from Mr Turnbull's time as a director of a listed mining company, Star Mining, which had an interest in a Siberian gold deposit.
Documents obtained by The Australian Financial Review, which first revealed Mr Turnbull's link to a Mossack Fonseca company last month, show heavy selling of Star Mining shares by offshore companies in 1995 after a series of favourable decisions by Russian politicians and bureaucrats boosted the Star Mining share price.
One of the key figures who helped obtain Star's Siberian mining leases, Ludmila Melnikoff, accuses Star director Ian MacNee, who died in 2008, of paying bribes of more than $US2 million to secure these decisions.
Labels:
Australian corporations,
corruption,
multinationals,
taxation
Friday 2 December 2016
Former Queensland LNP politician found guilty of fraud
What started with this……
CITATION:
|
Hockings v Queensland Retail Traders and Shopkeepers Association (Industrial Organization of Employers) [2014] QIRC 037
|
PARTIES:
|
Hockings, John Norman
(Applicant)
v
Queensland Retail Traders and Shopkeepers Association (Industrial Organization of Employers)
(Respondent)
|
CASE NO:
|
B/2013/18
|
PROCEEDING:
|
Application to re-open proceedings
|
DELIVERED ON:
|
19 February 2014
|
HEARING DATES:
|
12 and 26 April 2013
30 May 2013
|
MEMBER:
|
Deputy President Bloomfield
|
ORDERS :
|
1. Matter No. RIO/2012/155 be re-opened on the Commission's own initiative.
2. Orders in Matter No. RIO/2012/155, issued on 10 September 2012 and formalised on 5 December 2012, be vacated.
3. Mr Scott and Mrs Emma Driscoll be referred to the Queensland Police Service for investigation.
4. Mr Scott Driscoll be referred to the Speaker of Queensland Parliament for possibly misleading Parliament.
|
Ended with this…….
Brisbane Times, 25 November 2016:
Former Queensland politician Scott Driscoll has admitted to soliciting thousands of dollars in secret commissions and falsifying records during his term as the Member for Redcliffe.
Driscoll was expected to stand trial in the Brisbane District Court next week but on Friday pleaded guilty to 15 charges, including fraud.
The 41-year-old was released on bail and is due to be sentenced next year on March 6.
The former Liberal National Party MP won office in the Newman government's landslide in the March 2012 election victory.
Driscoll resigned in disgrace from State Parliament in November 2013for misleading the House about his financial interests and his role in the Queensland Retail Traders and Shopkeepers Association.
A year later, Driscoll was charged by the Crime and Corruption Commission for soliciting secret commissions worth at least $400,000 on behalf of the QRTSA from Wesfarmers and Woolworths in October 2012 while he was in office……
Driscoll did not speak to the media as he left the court with his wife Emma, who was sentenced in September to three years jail, wholly suspended, for multiple counts of falsifying a record and making a false declaration.
Labels:
corruption,
fraud,
law,
Liberal Party of Australia
Tuesday 18 October 2016
NSW ICAC Operation Cavill: former NSW Liberal MP for Gladesville & former Ryde Mayor committal hearing on charges of blackmail and misconduct in public office
The Sydney Morning Herald, 16 October 2016:
A former Liberal state MP and Sydney mayor will face court on Monday to determine if he should be committed to stand trial for blackmail and misconduct in public office.
Ivan Petch was Ryde mayor when, in 2012, a controversial redevelopment of the Ryde Civic Centre triggered a series of flash points that later became the subject of a two-week hearing by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC).
Mr Petch now faces a range of charges arising from the inquiry, including two counts of blackmail, misconduct in public office and giving false or misleading evidence to ICAC.
Mr Petch lashed out at the corruption watchdog last week for having "discoloured" his "whole career in one fell swoop".
"I have spent 37 years serving the people and, in that time, I have always acted in the interests of the community," he said. "I have stood by them all the way through."
After losing his state seat of Gladesville in the 1995 election to Labor's John Watkins by the narrow margin of 250 votes, Mr Petch became an independent councillor who went on to serve six terms as Ryde mayor.
However, in 2013, ICAC investigated Mr Petch over the alleged release of confidential council information "on many occasions for various reasons" but most notably to "undermine" council employees such as the former general manager John Neish.
During the inquiry, a phone tap was played of Mr Petch threatening to "destroy" Mr Neish. It emerged that, a short time later, sensitive material was leaked in a bid to discredit the council's head, after he refused to delay a high-rise residential redevelopment plan for council's ageing civic centre.
Mr Petch, who is charged with one count of misconduct in public office for allegedly releasing that material, has also been charged with "being an accessory before the fact of a count of blackmail" in relation to the alleged threat, for which property developer John Goubran is also facing a blackmail charge.
Mr Petch is also facing a separate charge of blackmail for allegedly attempting to improperly influence Mr Neish's acting replacement Danielle Dickson after her predecessor quit.
The then mayor allegedly threatened Ms Dickson that councillors, including himself, would block her application for the permanent position if she failed to resolve an ongoing Supreme Court costs dispute in their favour.
Mr Petch's three-day committal hearing will be heard in Sydney Local Court by Deputy Chief Magistrate Jane Mottley.
BACKGROUND
NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC):
The ICAC investigated a number of allegations involving the former Mayor of the City of Ryde, Ivan Petch, and others, including the alleged release of confidential council information by Mr Petch on many occasions for various reasons, including in an attempt to undermine council employees, such as the former General Manager, Mr John Neish.
In its report on the investigation, made public on 30 June 2014, the Commission makes corrupt conduct findings against Mr Petch, John Goubran and Richard Henricus. The Commission is of the opinion that consideration should be given to obtaining the advice of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) with respect to the prosecution of Mr Petch, Mr Goubran, Anthony Stavrinos, John Booth and Mr Henricus for various offences.
The ICAC is of the opinion that consideration should be given to obtaining the advice of the DPP also with respect to the prosecution of Mr Petch, councillors Justin Li, Jeffrey Salvestro-Martin, Terry Perram and former councillor Victor Tagg for offences under the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 in relation to advertising published in The Weekly Times in August and September 2012. The Commission also recommends that the Office of Local Government gives consideration to disciplinary action against Mr Petch, with a view to his dismissal…..
Recommendations for prosecutions…..
The ICAC is of the opinion that the advice of the Director of Public Prosecutions should be obtained with respect to the prosecution of the following persons:
Ivan Petch
* The common law offence of misconduct in public office in relation to his handling of the discovery of adult material on Mr Neish's computer and his attempts to leak the material to the media.
* Five offences of giving false or misleading evidence pursuant to section 87 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 relating to the discovery of adult material on John Neish's computer.
* The common law offence of misconduct in public office in relation to his release of confidential advice from the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, and also internal Council emails concerning planning approvals.
* Making an unwarranted demand with menaces with the intention of influencing the exercise of a public duty pursuant to section 249K of the Crimes Act 1900 in relation to the approach to Danielle Dickson.
* Offences of accepting an indirect campaign contribution pursuant to section 96E of the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 in relation to advertising published in The Weekly Times on 1, 7, 15, and 22 August 2012, and also 29 August and 5 September 2012.
Full report here.
Labels:
corruption,
ICAC,
law,
Liberal Party of Australia,
NSW politics
Wednesday 31 August 2016
NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption 'Operation Spicer': you saw the telemovie now read the book
Operation Spicer hearings were a feature of nightly news reports and journalists' live tweeting during this period.
Given the number of legal challenges mounted against ICAC since those hearings ended the final inquiry report has only now been released to the general public.
Operation Spicer
investigation has exposed prohibited donations, fund channelling and
non-disclosures in the NSW Liberal Party’s 2011 state election campaign.
The Commission’s report, Investigation into NSW Liberal Party electoral funding for the 2011 state election campaign and other matters, was made public today. The ICAC’s findings include that Raymond Carter, Andrew Cornwell, Garry Edwards, the Hon Michael Gallacher MLC, Nabil Gazal Jnr, Nicholas Gazal, Hilton Grugeon, Christopher Hartcher, Timothy Koelma, Jeffrey McCloy, Timothy Owen, Christopher Spence, Hugh Thomson and Darren Williams acted with the intention of evading laws under the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (the election funding laws) relating to the disclosure of political donations and the ban on donations from property developers.
Messrs Grugeon, Hartcher, Koelma, McCloy, Owen, Thomson and Williams were also found to have acted with the intention of evading the election funding laws relating to caps on political donations. The Commission also found that Craig Baumann, Nicholas Di Girolamo, Troy Palmer and Darren Webber acted with the intention of evading the election funding laws relating to the disclosure of political donations and that Bart Bassett knowingly solicited a political donation from a property developer.
The ICAC found that during November and December 2010 the Free Enterprise Foundation was used to channel donations to the NSW Liberal Party for its 2011 state election campaign so that the identity of the true donors was disguised. A substantial portion of the $693,000 provided by the foundation and used by the NSW Liberal Party in the campaign originated from donors who were property developers and, therefore, prohibited donors under the election funding laws.
Undisclosed political donations were also channelled through a business, Eightbyfive, to benefit Liberal Party 2011 state election campaigns on the Central Coast. These donations included donations from property developers and donations in excess of the applicable caps on donations.
The ICAC also found that there were payments made by property developers, who were prohibited donors, to help fund NSW Liberal Party candidates’ campaigns in the Hunter. The true nature of these payments was disguised, for example, as consultancy services or funnelled through another company with the intention of evading the election funding laws.
The above are findings of fact, not findings of corrupt conduct. As explained in the Foreword to the report, the ICAC cannot make corrupt conduct findings in cases of failure to comply with the requirements of the election funding laws where, although those failures could have affected the exercise of official functions of the then Election Funding Authority of NSW, officers of that authority were not involved in any wrongdoing.
The ICAC makes a finding of serious corrupt conduct against Joseph Tripodi for, sometime prior to 16 February 2011, misusing his position as a member of Parliament to improperly provide an advantage to Buildev by providing to Darren Williams of that company a copy of the confidential 4 February 2011 NSW Treasury report, Review of Proposed Uses of Mayfield and Intertrade Lands at Newcastle Port.
The Commission’s report notes that at the relevant time proceedings for an offence under the election funding laws had to be commenced within three years from the time the offence was committed. As the Operation Spicer public inquiry did not conclude until September 2014, and the matters canvassed in the report occurred mostly from 2009 to 2011, a prosecution for relevant offences is now statute barred.
The Commission’s report, Investigation into NSW Liberal Party electoral funding for the 2011 state election campaign and other matters, was made public today. The ICAC’s findings include that Raymond Carter, Andrew Cornwell, Garry Edwards, the Hon Michael Gallacher MLC, Nabil Gazal Jnr, Nicholas Gazal, Hilton Grugeon, Christopher Hartcher, Timothy Koelma, Jeffrey McCloy, Timothy Owen, Christopher Spence, Hugh Thomson and Darren Williams acted with the intention of evading laws under the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (the election funding laws) relating to the disclosure of political donations and the ban on donations from property developers.
Messrs Grugeon, Hartcher, Koelma, McCloy, Owen, Thomson and Williams were also found to have acted with the intention of evading the election funding laws relating to caps on political donations. The Commission also found that Craig Baumann, Nicholas Di Girolamo, Troy Palmer and Darren Webber acted with the intention of evading the election funding laws relating to the disclosure of political donations and that Bart Bassett knowingly solicited a political donation from a property developer.
The ICAC found that during November and December 2010 the Free Enterprise Foundation was used to channel donations to the NSW Liberal Party for its 2011 state election campaign so that the identity of the true donors was disguised. A substantial portion of the $693,000 provided by the foundation and used by the NSW Liberal Party in the campaign originated from donors who were property developers and, therefore, prohibited donors under the election funding laws.
Undisclosed political donations were also channelled through a business, Eightbyfive, to benefit Liberal Party 2011 state election campaigns on the Central Coast. These donations included donations from property developers and donations in excess of the applicable caps on donations.
The ICAC also found that there were payments made by property developers, who were prohibited donors, to help fund NSW Liberal Party candidates’ campaigns in the Hunter. The true nature of these payments was disguised, for example, as consultancy services or funnelled through another company with the intention of evading the election funding laws.
The above are findings of fact, not findings of corrupt conduct. As explained in the Foreword to the report, the ICAC cannot make corrupt conduct findings in cases of failure to comply with the requirements of the election funding laws where, although those failures could have affected the exercise of official functions of the then Election Funding Authority of NSW, officers of that authority were not involved in any wrongdoing.
The ICAC makes a finding of serious corrupt conduct against Joseph Tripodi for, sometime prior to 16 February 2011, misusing his position as a member of Parliament to improperly provide an advantage to Buildev by providing to Darren Williams of that company a copy of the confidential 4 February 2011 NSW Treasury report, Review of Proposed Uses of Mayfield and Intertrade Lands at Newcastle Port.
The Commission’s report notes that at the relevant time proceedings for an offence under the election funding laws had to be commenced within three years from the time the offence was committed. As the Operation Spicer public inquiry did not conclude until September 2014, and the matters canvassed in the report occurred mostly from 2009 to 2011, a prosecution for relevant offences is now statute barred.
Here are excerpts from the final report, INVESTIGATION INTO NSW LIBERAL PARTY ELECTORAL FUNDING FOR THE 2011 STATE ELECTION CAMPAIGN AND OTHER MATTERS: ICAC REPORT AUGUST 2016:
Chapter 34 of this
report contains statements made pursuant to s 74A(2) of the ICAC Act that the
Commission is of the opinion that consideration should be given to obtaining
the advice of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) with respect to the
prosecution of the following persons:
* Samantha Brookes for
two offences of giving false or misleading evidence under s 87 of the ICAC Act
• Andrew Cornwell for two offences of giving false or misleading evidence under
s 87 of the ICAC Act [Wife of former Liberal MP for
Charlestown Andrew Cornwell]
* Timothy Gunasinghe for
an offence of giving false or misleading evidence under s 87 of the ICAC Act [GM /Director at Commercialhq]
* Christopher Hartcher
for an offence of larceny [former Liberal MP
for Terrigal & NSW Minister for State, Minister for Resources and Energy,
Minister for Central Coast]
* Timothy Koelma for
three offences of giving false or misleading evidence under s 87 of the ICAC
Act [Proprietor, Eightbyfive]
* William Saddington for
an offence of giving false or misleading evidence under s 87 of the ICAC Act [Director, PW Saddington & Sons Pty Ltd]
* Joseph Tripodi for the
common law offence of misconduct in public office. [former Labor MP for Fairfield]
Note: My red annotations
Excerpt Two:
Set
out below are some of the principal factual findings made by the Commission.
*
Sometime shortly prior to 16 March 2011, Nathan Tinkler offered to make a
political donation to Jodi McKay’s election campaign. In making this
offer, Mr Tinkler was attempting to induce Ms McKay to accept a donation from a
person she knew to be a prohibited donor and which would be falsely disclosed
to the Election Funding Authority as coming from private individuals. Mr
Tinkler knew at the time he made the offer that he was a prohibited donor and
was not able to make a political donation and that Ms McKay was not able
to accept a political donation from him (chapter 11).
*
Each of Mr Williams, David Sharpe and Ann Wills of Buildev played an active
part in the “Stop Jodi’s Trucks” mailout campaign, which was designed to damage
Ms McKay’s prospects of re-election. Given its inherent political nature, the
expenditure on the leaflets amounted to “electoral communication expenditure”,
as defined by the Election Funding Act. This expenditure was incurred in the
period between 1 January 2011 and the end of the polling day for the 2011 NSW
state election and was therefore incurred within the “capped expenditure
period” as defined in s 95H of the Election Funding Act. As the electoral
communication expenditure exceeded $2,000 in a capped expenditure period,
Buildev was operating as a “third-party campaigner” as defined in s 4 of the
Election Funding Act. Buildev failed to register as a third-party campaigner as
required by s 96AA of the Election Funding Act and failed to disclose to
the Election Funding Authority its electoral communication expenditure as
required by s 88(1A)(a) of the Election Funding Act (chapter 11).
*
Mr Tripodi played a central role in the Stop Jodi’s Trucks campaign by
nominating the printer for the mailout pamphlets and involving himself in the
drafting and design process for the pamphlets (chapter 11).
*
During November and December 2010, the Free Enterprise Foundation was used to
channel donations to the NSW Liberal Party for its 2011 NSW state election
campaign so that the identity of the true donors was disguised. A substantial portion
of the $693,000 provided by the Free Enterprise Foundation and used by the NSW
Liberal Party in its 2011 state election campaign originated from donors who
were property developers and, therefore, prohibited under the Election Funding
Act from making political donations (chapter 15).
*
Each of Simon McInnes, Paul Nicolaou and Anthony Bandle knowingly used the Free
Enterprise Foundation to channel political donations, including political
donations from property developers, to the NSW Liberal Party to fund its
2011 state election campaign so that the identity of the true donors was
disguised from the Election Funding Authority (chapter 15).
*
Timothy Koelma used his business, Eightbyfive, to receive and channel political
donations for the benefit of Christopher Hartcher, Christopher Spence, Darren
Webber and the NSW Liberal Party for the 2011 Central Coast election campaign
with the intention of evading the election funding laws relating to disclosure
of political donations, the ban on donations from property developers, which
operated from 14 December 2009, and, in relation to payments made after 1
January 2011, the applicable cap on donations. The funds obtained and
channelled in this way were used for the purposes of the NSW Liberal Party 2011
election campaigns in the seats of Terrigal, The Entrance and Wyong. Mr Koelma
directly benefited from the donations through Eightbyfive, as he was able to
draw from those funds to give himself a salary, thereby, enabling him to work
for Mr Hartcher on the 2011 NSW state election campaign. Mr Koelma subsequently
obtained full-time employment in Mr Hartcher’s ministerial office after the 2011
election (chapter 17).
*
Mr Hartcher was involved in the establishment of Eightbyfive and took an active
part in using Eightbyfive to channel political donations from Australian Water
Holdings Pty Ltd, Gazcorp Pty Ltd and Patinack Farm Pty Ltd for the benefit
of the NSW Liberal Party, himself, Mr Spence and Mr Webber with the
intention of evading the election funding laws relating to disclosure of
political donations, the ban on donations from property developers (in the case
of Gazcorp) and, in relation to payments made after 1 January 2011, the
applicable cap on donations. Mr Hartcher benefited from this arrangement
because part of the funds channelled through Eightbyfive enabled Mr Koelma to
work for him on the 2011 NSW state election campaign at no cost to Mr Hartcher,
while other funds channelled through Eightbyfive ensured that
Mr Hartcher’s likeminded political colleagues were funded to campaign for
the Central Coast seats of Wyong and The Entrance (chapter 17).
*
Mr Hartcher was a party to an arrangement with Nicholas Di Girolamo and Mr
Koelma, whereby Mr Di Girolamo made regular payments through Australian Water
Holdings to Eightbyfive. Under this arrangement, between April 2009 and May
2011, Eightbyfive received $183,342.50 from Australian Water Holdings. These
payments were ostensibly for the provision of services by Eightbyfive to
Australian Water Holdings but were in fact political donations made to assist
Mr Hartcher by providing funds to Mr Koelma so that Mr Koelma could work for Mr
Hartcher in the lead up to the 2011 NSW state election. Mr Hartcher and the
others involved in this arrangement intended to evade the election funding laws
relating to the disclosure of political donations. The payments totalling
$36,668.50, made after 1 January 2011, exceeded the applicable cap on political
donations (chapter 18).
*
Mr Hartcher, Nabil Gazal Junior, Nicholas Gazal, Mr Koelma and Mr Spence (the
NSW Liberal Party candidate for the seat of The Entrance) were parties to an
arrangement whereby, between May 2010 and April 2011, Gazcorp made payments
totalling $121,000 to Eightbyfive. These payments were ostensibly for the
provision of services by Eightbyfive to Gazcorp but were in fact political
donations which were mainly used to help fund Mr Spence so that he could
work on the Central Coast election campaign and on his campaign for the seat of
The Entrance. Mr Hartcher, Nabil Gazal Jnr, Nicholas Gazal, Mr Koelma and Mr
Spence intended by this arrangement to evade the disclosure requirements of the
Election Funding Act and the ban on the making and accepting of political
donations from property developers. The payments totalling $33,000, made
after 1 January 2011, exceeded the applicable cap on political donations
(chapter 19).
*
Mr Hartcher, Mr Koelma, the Hon Michael Gallacher MLC, Troy Palmer and Mr
Williams were parties to an arrangement whereby, between July 2010 and March
2011, Patinack Farm made payments totalling $66,000 to Eightbyfive. These
payments were ostensibly for the provision of services by Eightbyfive to
Patinack Farm but were in fact political donations to help fund the NSW Liberal
Party 2011 Central Coast election campaign. The parties to this
arrangement intended to evade the disclosure requirements of the Election
Funding Act. The payments made after 1 January 2011, totalling $33,000,
exceeded the applicable caps on political donations. Although the payments to
Eightbyfive were made by Patinack Farm, the arrangement was organised through
Buildev, a property developer (chapter 20).
*
Mr Koelma and Mr Webber (the NSW Liberal Party candidate for the seat of Wyong)
were parties to an arrangement whereby, between 2010 and 2011, Mr Koelma’s
business, Eightbyfive, made payments totalling at least $34,650, and up to
$49,500, to Mr Webber. These payments were ostensibly for the provision of
services by Mr Webber to Eightbyfive but were in fact political donations to
help fund Mr Webber’s 2011 election campaign for the seat of Wyong. The
parties to this arrangement intended to evade the disclosure requirements of
the Election Funding Act. The payments made after 1 January 2011 exceeded the
applicable caps on political donations (chapter 20).
*
Raymond Carter used the Free Enterprise Foundation to channel political
donations to the NSW Liberal Party for its 2011 NSW state election campaign so
that the identity of the true donor was disguised from the Election Funding
Authority. A portion of this money was from property developers (chapter 21).
*
Mr Carter and Mr Koelma entered into an arrangement to use Mr Koelma’s
business, Eightbyfive, to channel political donations to the NSW Liberal Party
for the 2011 Central Coast election campaign with the intention of evading the
Election Funding Act laws relating to disclosure to the Election Funding
Authority of political donations and the ban on accepting political donations
from property developers. The political donations obtained by Mr Carter
under this scheme included $5,000 from each of LA Commercial Pty Ltd, Yeramba
Estates Pty Ltd and Brentwood Village Pty Ltd, and $2,200 from Crown Consortium
Pty Ltd (chapter 21).
*
In March 2011, Mr Carter used a business, Mickey Tech, with the intention of
evading the Election Funding Act laws relating to disclosure of political
donations by disguising from the Election Funding Authority political donations
of $2,000 from INE Pty Ltd and $2,000 from Maggiotto Building Pty Ltd. In each
case, the money was sought and received by Mr Carter as a political donation
for the 2011 NSW state election campaign. Although at the time Mr Carter
received the money he intended to apply all the money for the purposes of the
election campaign, he eventually only applied $2,400 for this purpose, the
balance being applied to private use (chapter 21).
*
In March 2011, Mr Hartcher received three bank cheques payable to the NSW
Liberal Party totalling $4,000. They were received by Mr Hartcher for the
benefit of the NSW Liberal Party for the March 2011 state election campaign. In
November 2011, some eight months after the election, Mr Hartcher arranged for
the cheques to be paid into the trust account of Hartcher Reid, a legal firm,
and for that firm to draw a cheque for $4,000 in favour of Mickey Tech, a
business owned by Mr Carter’s partner. After the $4,000 was deposited into that
account, it was withdrawn in cash by Mr Carter and given to Mr Hartcher.
These steps are inconsistent with an intention on the part of Mr Hartcher to
apply the $4,000 for the benefit of the NSW Liberal Party (chapter 23).
*
In about November 2010, Mr Gallacher sought a political donation from Mr Sharpe
of Buildev by inviting him to attend a New Year’s Eve political fundraising
function for which Mr Sharpe or Buildev would make a payment. Mr Gallacher knew
that they were property developers, and he sought the political donation with
the intention of evading the election funding laws relating to the ban on
property developers making political donations (chapter 25).
*
In late 2010, Mr Gallacher, Mr Hartcher and Mr Williams of Buildev were involved
in an arrangement whereby two political donations totalling $53,000 were
provided to the NSW Liberal Party for use in its 2011 election campaigns for
the seats of Newcastle and Londonderry. To facilitate this arrangement, on 13
December 2010, Mr Palmer, a director of Boardwalk Resources Limited, a company
of which Mr Tinkler was the major shareholder, drew two cheques totalling
$53,000 payable to the Free Enterprise Foundation. These were provided to Mr
Hartcher who arranged for them to be sent to Mr Nicolaou. Mr Nicolaou sent the
cheques to the Free Enterprise Foundation. The Free Enterprise Foundation
subsequently sent money to the NSW Liberal Party, which included the $53,000.
Of the $53,000, some $35,000 was used to help fund Timothy Owen’s 2011 election
campaign in the seat of Newcastle and $18,000 was used towards the purchase of
a key seats package for Bart Bassett’s 2011 election campaign in the seat of
Londonderry. Although the cheques for the donations were drawn on the account
of Boardwalk Resources, they were made for Buildev, a property developer. Each
of Mr Gallacher, Mr Hartcher and Mr Williams entered into this arrangement with
the intention of evading the Election Funding Act laws relating to the accurate
disclosure to the Election Funding Authority of political donations (chapter
26).
*
In about February 2011, Jeffrey McCloy gave HughThomson $10,000 in cash as a
political donation to fund Mr Owen’s 2011 election campaign for the seat of
Newcastle with the intention of evading the Election Funding Act laws relating
to the ban on the making of political donations by property developers and the applicable
cap on political donations. By not reporting the donation, he intended to evade
the disclosure requirements of the Election Funding Act. In accepting the
political donation, Mr Thompson intended to evade the Election Funding Act laws
relating to the ban on accepting political donations from property developers
and the applicable cap on political donations. By not ensuring the donation was
disclosed, he intended to evade the disclosure requirements of the Election
Funding Act (chapter 27).
*
In early 2011, Mr McCloy gave Mr Owen $10,000 in cash as a political donation
to fund Mr Owen’s 2011 election campaign. In making the payment, Mr McCloy
intended to evade the Election Funding Act laws relating to the ban on the
making of political donations by property developers and the applicable cap on
political donations. By not reporting the donation, he intended to evade the
disclosure requirements of the Election Funding Act. In accepting the political
donation, Mr Owen intended to evade the Election Funding Act laws relating to
the ban on accepting political donations from property developers and the
applicable cap on political donations. By not ensuring the donation was
disclosed, he intended to evade the disclosure requirements of the Election
Funding Act (chapter 27).
*
In early 2011, Hilton Grugeon gave Mr Thomson $10,000 in cash as a political
donation to fund Mr Owen’s 2011 election campaign. In making the payment, Mr
Grugeon intended to evade the Election Funding Act laws relating to the ban on
the making of political donations by property developers and the applicable cap
on political donations. By not reporting the donation, he intended to evade the
disclosure requirements of the Election Funding Act. In accepting the political
donation, Mr Thompson intended to evade the Election Funding Act laws relating
to the ban on accepting political donations from property developers and the
applicable cap on political donations. By not ensuring the donation was
disclosed, he intended to evade the disclosure requirements of the
Election Funding Act (chapter 27).
*
Services provided by Mezzanine Media Australia Pty Ltd for Mr Owen’s 2011
election campaign were paid for, in part, by a political donation of $5,000
made by Keith Stronach, a property developer. The payment evaded the
Election Funding Act laws relating to the ban on the making of political
donations by property developers. The political donation was not disclosed as
required by the Election Funding Act. Mr Owen and Mr Thomson were aware that Mr
Stronach was a property developer and were aware that Mr Stronach paid money
towards Mr Owen’s election campaign (chapter 27).
*
Services provided by Mezzanine Media Australia for Mr Owen’s 2011 election
campaign were paid for, in part, by a political donation of $14,190 organised
by Mr Williams on behalf of Buildev, a property developer. In organising the
payment, Mr Williams intended to evade the Election Funding Act laws
relating to the ban on the making of political donations by property developers
and the applicable cap on political donations. By not reporting the donation he
intended to evade the disclosure requirements of the Election Funding Act. Mr
Owen and Mr Thomson were aware that Buildev was a property developer and
that it had paid money towards Mr Owen’s election campaign (chapter 27).
*
Mr Gallacher was responsible for proposing to Mr McCloy and Mr Grugeon an
arrangement whereby each of them would contribute to the payment of Luke Grant
for his work on Mr Owen’s 2011 election campaign. He did so with the
intention that the Election Funding Act laws in relation to the prohibition on
political donations from property developers and the requirements for the
disclosure of political donations to the Election Funding Authority would be
evaded (chapter 27).
*
Mr Owen, Mr Thompson, Mr Grugeon and Mr McCloy were parties to an arrangement
whereby payments totalling $19,875 made to Mr Grant for his work on Mr
Owen’s 2011 election campaign were falsely attributed to services allegedly
provided to companies operated by Mr McCloy and Mr Grugeon. Those involved
in this arrangement intended to evade the Election Funding Act laws in relation
to the prohibition on political donations from property developers and the
requirements for the disclosure of political donations to the Election Funding
Authority. The payments were also in excess of the caps imposed on
individual donors (chapter 27).
*
Services provided by Joshua Hodges for Mr Owen’s 2011 election campaign
were paid for, in part, by a political donation of $3,998.50 made by William
Saddington of PW Saddington & Sons Pty Ltd. The payment was disguised as
being for consultancy services provided to that company. The payment had the
effect of evading the disclosure requirements of the Election Funding Act. Mr Owen
and Mr Thomson were aware that Mr Saddington was contributing to Mr Owen’s
election campaign expenses by paying Mr Hodges. They did not ensure that the
donation was disclosed as required by the Election Funding Act (chapter 27).
*
Services provided by Australian Decal Sales and Manufacturing Co Pty Ltd for
Mr Owen’s 2011 election campaign were paid for in August 2011 by a
political donation of $3,198.80 organised by Mr Williams on behalf of Buildev,
a property developer. By organising the payment, Mr Williams intended to
evade the Election Funding Act laws relating to the ban on the making of
political donations by property developers and the disclosure requirements of
the Election Funding Act. Mr Owen and Mr Thomson were aware this political
donation had been made by a property developer and participated in this
arrangement with the intention of evading the Election Funding Act laws
relating to the ban on accepting political donations from property developers.
They did not ensure the donation was disclosed as required by the Election
Funding Act (chapter 27).
*
During the 2011 NSW state election campaign, a third-party campaign known as
“FedUp” was conducted by Rolly De With, Neil Slater and Paul Murphy using the
name of a local business association, the Newcastle Alliance. The purpose of
the campaign was to assist in defeating the sitting member for the seat of
Newcastle, Ms McKay, in the 2011 NSW state election. In March 2011, a
payment of $50,000 was arranged by Mr Williams of Buildev and authorised by Mr
Tinkler to fund the campaign. The payment was ostensibly made by Serene Lodge
Racing Pty Ltd but was in fact money from Mr Tinkler and was made for Buildev,
a property developer. The $50,000 payment was a political donation and was in
excess of the $2,000 cap on political donations made for the benefit of a
third-party campaigner. The political donation was not disclosed to the
Election Funding Authority by Buildev, Serene Lodge Racing or Mr Tinkler
(chapter 28).
*
On 6 October 2010, Mr McCloy paid $10,000 in cash to Andrew Cornwell, the NSW
Liberal Party candidate for the seat of Charlestown, as a political donation
for Andrew Cornwell’s 2011 election campaign. By making the donation, Mr McCloy
intended to evade the Election Funding Act laws relating to the ban on property
developers making political donations and the requirement for the disclosure of
political donations. By accepting the donation Andrew Cornwell intended to
evade the Election Funding Act requirement relating to the ban on property developers
making political donations and the requirement for the accurate disclosure of
political donations (chapter 29).
*
Andrew Cornwell, his wife, Samantha Brookes, and Mr Grugeon were parties to an
arrangement involving the pretence that a payment of $10,120 made in early 2011
by Mr Grugeon, a property developer, was for a painting. The $10,120 was in
fact a political donation made by Mr Grugeon to fund Andrew Cornwell’s
2011 NSW state election campaign. In participating in this arrangement, Mr Grugeon
intended to evade the Election Funding Act laws relating to the ban on the
making of donations by property developers and the requirement for disclosure
of political donations. In participating in this arrangement, Andrew Cornwell
intended to evade the Election Funding Act laws relating to the ban on
accepting political donations from property developers, and the requirement for
accurate disclosure of political donations received. The payment exceeded the
applicable cap on political donations (chapter 29).
*
During the 2011 NSW state election campaign, Garry Edwards, the NSW Liberal
Party candidate for the seat of Swansea, received a political donation by way
of a cash payment of about $1,500 from Mr McCloy, a property developer. Mr
Edwards accepted the donation with the intention of evading the election
funding laws relating to the ban on accepting political donations from property
developers and the requirements for disclosure of political donations. Mr
McCloy knew he was making a political donation and that, as a property
developer, he was prohibited from making such a donation (chapter 30).
*
In 2007, Craig Baumann, the NSW Liberal Party candidate for the seat of Port
Stephens, entered into an arrangement with Mr McCloy and Mr Grugeon to
disguise from the Election Funding Authority the fact that companies associated
with Mr McCloy and Mr Grugeon had donated $79,684 towards Mr Baumann’s 2007 NSW
election campaign. As part of this arrangement, a company associated with
Mr McCloy made a political donation of $32,604 and a company associated
with Mr Grugeon made a political donation of $47,080. These political donations
were paid to Mr Baumann’s company, Mambare Pty Ltd, which, in turn, paid the
money to the Medowie branch of the NSW Liberal Party to be used for Mr
Baumann’s 2007 election campaign. Mr Baumann caused Mambare to lodge a
declaration with the Election Funding Authority that falsely claimed that it
had donated the money to the NSW Liberal Party. Mr Baumann did so with the
intention of evading the election funding laws relating to the accurate
disclosure of political donations (chapter 31).
*
In about November 2010, Mr Baumann entered into an arrangement with Vincent
Heufel with the intention of evading the Election Funding Act laws relating to
the truthful disclosure of political donations. Under this arrangement, Mr
Heufel made a donation of $100,000 for Mr Baumann’s election campaign and Mr
Baumann reduced the amount his company, Mambare, charged for building Mr
Heufel’s house by that amount. This was done so that Mr Heufel could falsely
represent that he was responsible for making the political donation, rather
than Mr Baumann’s company and so that Mambare could evade disclosing that it
had made a political donation for Mr Baumann’s 2011 NSW state election campaign
(chapter 31).
*
In 2010, for the purposes of his 2011 NSW state election campaign, Mr Bassett,
the NSW Liberal Party candidate for the seat of Londonderry, solicited a
political donation from Buildev, a property developer. This culminated in the
drawing of a cheque, dated 13 December 2010, for $18,000 on the account of
Boardwalk Resources, which was payable to the Free Enterprise Foundation. The
Free Enterprise Foundation subsequently sent money to the NSW Liberal Party,
which included the $18,000. The $18,000 was used towards the purchase of
a key seats package for Mr Bassett’s 2011 election campaign in the seat of
Londonderry. Although the cheque for $18,000 was drawn on the account of
Boardwalk Resources, the donation was made for Buildev. Mr Bassett was aware at
the time he solicited the political donation that Buildev was a property
developer and knew it was not able to make a political donation and he was not
able to accept a political donation from a property developer (chapter
32).
Full 172 page report here.
Thursday 26 May 2016
Australian Federal Election 2016: alleged corruption in Border Force ranks
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull
17 May 2015
The Age, 19 May 2016:
A network of Australian border security officials is allegedly working for organised criminals, including drug and tobacco smugglers, in the most serious corruption scandal to ever hit the nation's border agencies.
A Fairfax Media investigation has uncovered multiple cases of alleged corruption involving staff from the Australian Border Force and the Department of Agriculture, along with maritime industry employees with government clearances…..
The allegations come as the government makes a virtue of its strength on border security, with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull claiming the opposition "lack the commitment to keep our borders secure".
However, the federal government and customs chiefs, including the nation's top border security official, Michael Pezzullo, have been repeatedly warned over four years in high-level confidential briefings about significant suspected corruption in the Border Force's ranks, especially in NSW.
Evidence, including NSW police briefing notes and testimony from crime figures, suggests that one of the most vital border security facilities, the NSW Customs Examination Facility, has been compromised by corrupt insiders, enabling criminals to import large amounts of drugs and tobacco undetected. Staff at the facility are responsible for searching containers suspected to contain contraband.
A small network of Department of Agriculture officials responsible for clearing imports into Australia have also been assisting and liaising with known drug traffickers for at least the past five years…..
Fairfax Media has delayed reporting on the border corruption scandal for several months at the request of authorities.
In NSW, evidence uncovered by Fairfax Media from multiple sources, including agency officials, government briefing files and figures with underworld ties, implicates Border Force officials in drug and tobacco trafficking, and leaking to the criminal underworld.
Criminal intelligence suggests one officer has been taking kickbacks of hundreds of thousands of dollars from traffickers, while another has been facilitating importations.
Suspected corrupt officers are still operating.
The latest scandal comes three years after a network of corrupt customs officers was identified at Sydney airport and charged by the federal police. At the time, Mr Pezzullo promised sweeping reforms, including many which have been implemented.
Top security and policing officials, along with corruption experts, called for the nation's federal police watchdog, the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI) to have its budget dramatically increased and said the Australian Border Force had failed to deal with corruption in its ranks.
Leading corruption expert and former senior judge Stephen Charles, QC, said ACLEI – which, with about 20 investigators out of a total of 55 staff, is among the smallest corruption fighting agencies in Australia – was badly outgunned. Mr Charles said Australia needed an anti-corruption agency with hundreds of staff……
One senior government source said the Australian Border Force was "incapable" of eradicating corruption in its ranks and sometimes dealt with internal integrity issues with departmental sanctions, such as demotion or sacking, rather than by conducting intensive probes that could expose corrupt networks……
Read the full article here.
One senior government source said the Australian Border Force was "incapable" of eradicating corruption in its ranks and sometimes dealt with internal integrity issues with departmental sanctions, such as demotion or sacking, rather than by conducting intensive probes that could expose corrupt networks……
Read the full article here.
* Photograph found at The Sydney Morning Herald
Monday 18 April 2016
Global corruption of democracy in the 21st Century
The Guardian UK, 11 April 2016:
Because at root, the Panama Papers are not about tax. They’re not even about money. What the Panama Papers really depict is the corruption of our democracy.
Following on from LuxLeaks, the Panama Papers confirm that the super-rich have effectively exited the economic system the rest of us have to live in. Thirty years of runaway incomes for those at the top, and the full armoury of expensive financial sophistication, mean they no longer play by the same rules the rest of us have to follow. Tax havens are simply one reflection of that reality. Discussion of offshore centres can get bogged down in technicalities, but the best definition I’ve found comes from expert Nicholas Shaxson who sums them up as: “You take your money elsewhere, to another country, in order to escape the rules and laws of the society in which you operate.” In so doing, you rob your own society of cash for hospitals, schools, roads…
“Those who exited our societies are now also exercising their voice to set the rules by which the rest of us live”
But those who exited our societies are now also exercising their voice to set the rules by which the rest of us live. The 1% are buying political influence as never before. Think of the billionaire Koch brothers, whose fortunes will shape this year’s US presidential elections. In Britain, remember the hedge fund and private equity barons, who in 2010 contributed half of all the Conservative party’s election funds – and so effectively bought the Tories their first taste of government in 18 years.
To flesh out the corrosion of democracy that is happening, you need to go to a Berlin-born economist called Albert Hirschman, a giant in modern economic thinking. Hirschman died in 2012 at the age of 97, but it’s his concepts that really set in context what’s so disturbing about the Panama Papers.
Hirschman argued that citizens could protest against a system in one of two ways: voice or exit. Fed up with your local school? Then you can exercise your voice and take it up with the headteacher. Alternatively, you can exit and take your child to a private school.
In Britain and in America, the super-rich have broken Hirschman’s law – they are at one and the same time exercising economic exit and political voice. They can have their tax-free cake and eat it……
Labels:
banks and bankers,
corporations,
corruption,
multinationals,
taxation
Thursday 14 April 2016
May is likely to be an interesting month in 2016
All around the world directors, shareholders, beneficial owners, mob bosses, drug lords, gun runners and owners of stolen art hiding within shell companies in low tax jurisdictions will be marking their calendars…..
AFR Weekend, 8 April 2016:
The ICIJ, which has said it will not provide data to regulators, plans to release the names of more than 200,000 Mossack Fonseca companies, trusts and foundations in May, including names of directors, shareholders and beneficial owners.
Tax authorities can use this data to seek further documents under tax treaties with many jurisdictions....
Labels:
corruption,
taxation
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)