Newsletter of Whistleblowers Australia PO Box U129, Wollongong NSW 2500

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Newsletter of Whistleblowers Australia PO Box U129, Wollongong NSW 2500 “All that is needed for evil to prosper is for people of good will to do nothing”—Edmund Burke The Whistle NO. 47, JULY 2006 Newsletter of Whistleblowers Australia PO Box U129, Wollongong NSW 2500 Fred Gulson, tobacco industry whistleblower (see p. 3) Media watch AWB whistleblower If AWB continues to play hardball are suspicious, with penalty for failing with Mr Hogan, the taxpayer may end to comply.” left high and dry up footing at least part of his bill. However, Dr Paul Nisselle, senior on the fees front Mr Hogan is unemployed, having adviser in risk management for the Caroline Overington been unable to work since he collapsed Medical Defence Association of The Australian, 10 April 2006, pp. 1-2 with a stress-related disorder shortly Victoria, stressed that the law was before the war in Iraq broke out in more about the protection, rather than Dominic Hogan suffered a nervous 2003. He survives on a weekly the prosecution, of potential whistle- breakdown while working for AWB. workers compensation payment, and blowers. He says it was caused by the stress of must attend regular medical appoint- “How would any lawyer prove that knowing money was being funnelled ments to deal with depression. a doctor had a suspicion about possible to Saddam Hussein’s regime. AWB spokesman Peter McBride abuse but failed to report it? In the vast Exhausted and torn apart by guilt, said: “We have agreements with all majority of cases that would be he quit the monopoly wheat exporter former employees to cover reasonable impossible. shortly before war broke out in 2003. costs.” He said Mr Hogan had decided “If it is introduced it is going to Earlier this year, he agreed to blow not to sign the original agreement “and offer statutory protection to those the whistle on AWB. It is largely so my understanding, as of last Friday doctors who report potential incidents because of his evidence that commis- is, we are still negotiating.” of abuse in good faith from being sued sioner Terence Cole QC has been able for defamation. This is going to to uncover the truth about Australia’s empower GPs. wheat deals with Iraq. Now AWB — “I think the way the referral system which is covering the legal costs of Whistleblowers is set up there is an expectation from most, if not all, other former employ- will be protected the aged care homes that the GP is somehow beholden to them. This will ees — appears to have decided that his Paul Smith allow doctors, where they have bills can take care of themselves. Gary Australian Doctor, concerns about a resident, to demand Taylor, of Melbourne-based solicitors 10 March 2006, p. 16 Clark and Toop, said Mr Hogan had action from an aged care facility or else threaten a formal complaint.” been unable to get AWB to agree to GPs who alert authorities to suspected “any reasonable offer to cover the abuse of elderly patients will be fees.” “He appears to have been left offered legal protection should out,” Mr Taylor said. “AWB is paying campaigners win the battle for Words of mass deception the legal fees of its other employees, mandatory reporting of abuse in aged Rod Barton blew the whistle on and its other former employees. care facilities. Australian, US and British lies about “Our question is, why not our Next week a national summit, Iraq’s hidden weapons cache. And the client?” convened by the Federal Government, Australian Government has made sure In a controversial move, AWB will meet to discuss elderly abuse and he pays a high price for his stand. originally offered to pay legal fees up the possibility of introducing a Hamish McDonald reports to $50,000 for all former employees, mandatory reporting system. provided there was no “adverse find- The Elder Abuse Prevention Sydney Morning Herald, ings against them.” Association, which supports the push, 13 May 2006, p. 35 Mr Hogan refused this deal, estimated there were about 80,000 claiming it was designed to stop him cases of elderly abuse taking place in For a decade Rod Barton knew the turning whistleblower. He wanted to nursing homes every year — the vast special loneliness of a United Nations tell the truth, which involved admitting majority still going unreported. weapons inspector in Iraq, teasing out that he was aware that UN sanctions The group’s executive director, Ms clues from one of the world’s nastiest were being busted, and millions were Lillian Jeter, claimed that mandatory regimes about biological weapons of flowing to Saddam in exchange for a reporting requirements would mean unspeakable effect. lucrative wheat trade. GPs working in aged care facilities He worried about assassination by Clark and Toop have since put could be prosecuted if they failed to Saddam Hussein’s secret services, not forward a copy of their bill, and say it report suspicions of abuse. an unrealistic fear. He felt the derision is nowhere near the amount other “For those working with older of the ascendant hawks in Washington, lawyers are charging, although it is persons, if they saw suspicious confident they knew better than the believed to be in six figures. circumstances, under the law they UN inspectors about Saddam’s secret “We’ve put forward what we would be required to report it,” she weapons. consider to be a reasonable offer, but said. “There needs to be a statutory Now Barton is suffering a new kind we just haven’t had a response,” Mr requirement to report situations that of isolation after turning whistleblower Taylor said. on how the American, British and PAGE 2 THE WHISTLE, #47, JULY 2006 Australian leaders distorted intelli- George Bush, Britain’s Tony Blair and Government something that’s gence to justify their invasion of Iraq Australia’s John Howard was false. unpopular,” he says. and how they condone the torture of Blair and Howard knew it was One bit of unwelcome reporting by Iraqi prisoners. false, Barton says. Bush may not have Barton, to Australia’s Defence De- Back home in Canberra, Barton is known, because his intelligence partment, was the first indication of the ostracised and unemployed in his old agencies were reporting what he special “purgatory” centre being run intelligence profession, to which at 58 wanted to hear. by US Special Forces at Camp Nama, and still formidably incisive, he could When shown the Australian intelli- next to Baghdad Airport. still contribute a lot. He looks at the gence assessment, Howard even asked: “High value” prisoners selected for view of the Brindabellas. He roams the “Is that all there is?” disorientation before interrogation world’s trouble spots on Google Earth, Barton saw both the British and have a hessian bag put over their heads the satellite imagery website. The Australian intelligence assessments for up to 72 hours, and are deprived of house could not be any tidier, nor the about Saddam’s weapons of mass food, water and sleep, made to stand garden crammed with any more destruction before the March 2003 up for long periods, exposed to intense shrubs. invasion. Saddam had at most a few heat or cold, and bashed at random Barton made waves and is being chemical and biological weapons left intervals. Unlike the improvised punished. In March 2004, he and over from the 1980s, and no means of brutality by US soldiers exposed at the another Australian, the Foreign Affairs delivering them. There was no Abu Ghraib prison, all this is sanc- disarmament specialist John Gee, evidence he had resumed WMD tioned by the US Administration, resigned in protest from the Iraq programs after UN weapons inspectors which claims it does not amount to Survey Group, set up by the US were kicked out in 1998. torture. “That’s what makes it so much Central Intelligence Agency to find the It was no grounds for war, so the worse,” Barton says. Iraqi nuclear, chemical and biological intelligence was doctored — notably in “We went to war on WMD, which weapons that had been the excuse for the British “dossier” published on the is withdrawn now. And now the casus invasion. The CIA was refusing to face orders of the British Joint Intelligence belli is to bring democracy and human the truth that Saddam’s weapons had Committee chairman, John Scarlett, rights — yet we, the coalition, are been destroyed in 1991. which claimed Saddam had chemical detaining people without trial, and we In February last year, Barton went and biological weapons deployable the coalition are using torture tech- public on ABC television. Now he has “within 45 minutes of an order to use niques,” Barton says. “As a member of written a devastating book about it, them.” the coalition we have a responsibility. The Weapons Detective (Black Inc. Howard cited the British dossier in We, the Australians, should be telling Agenda, $29.95). His security clear- assuring the Australian public and our American colleagues: This is just ances withdrawn, Barton knows he Parliament his Government had not acceptable; if you want us as a will not be getting any more contracts “compelling evidence” that Saddam member of the coalition, to continue from his old employer, the Defence possessed these weapons. “Is it a lie or our presence there, then we ask you to Intelligence Organisation, which he is it a spin or what?” Barton said. “But stop this practice. had joined as a young microbiologist it’s certainly misleading the people.” “But of course this Government in 1972. The liars and spin doctors have doesn’t want to upset the Americans, Old colleagues at the intelligence prospered, the whistleblowers have so we won’t do that.” organisation have been warned not to been shafted.
Recommended publications
  • The Environment of International Business
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-67546-9 - Dynamics of International Business: Asia-Pacific Business Cases Edited by Prem Ramburuth, Christina Stringer and Manuel Serapio Excerpt More information Part I The Environment of International Business 1 AWB and the Iraqi Oil-for-Food scandal: Just a cost of doing business? Peter K Ross ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Walking the blurry line in China: Negotiating deals and staying out of jail Cheryl Rivers ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • AWB Scandal Timeline
    COPYRIGHT AND USE OF THIS THESIS This thesis must be used in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. Reproduction of material protected by copyright may be an infringement of copyright and copyright owners may be entitled to take legal action against persons who infringe their copyright. Section 51 (2) of the Copyright Act permits an authorized officer of a university library or archives to provide a copy (by communication or otherwise) of an unpublished thesis kept in the library or archives, to a person who satisfies the authorized officer that he or she requires the reproduction for the purposes of research or study. The Copyright Act grants the creator of a work a number of moral rights, specifically the right of attribution, the right against false attribution and the right of integrity. You may infringe the author’s moral rights if you: - fail to acknowledge the author of this thesis if you quote sections from the work - attribute this thesis to another author - subject this thesis to derogatory treatment which may prejudice the author’s reputation For further information contact the University’s Copyright Service. sydney.edu.au/copyright MEDIATING JUSTICE INVESTIGATING THE FRAMING OF THE 2006 COLE INQUIRY Nonée Philomena Walsh Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for a Master of Arts (Research) within the Department of Media and Communications, School of Letters, Art, and Media, The University of Sydney 2015 © Nonée Walsh CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP I hereby certify that the thesis entitled, Mediating justice: Investigating the framing of the 2006 Cole Inquiry, submitted to fulfil the conditions of a Master of Arts (Research), is the result of my own original research, except where otherwise acknowledged, and that this work has not been submitted previously, in whole or in part, to qualify for any other academic award.
    [Show full text]
  • Ublic Policy Cover-8
    50993 Public Policy Text 25/7/07 1:47 PM Page 44 PUBLIC POLICY VOLUME 2 NUMBER 1 2007 44 – 57 Deregulating Australia's Wheat Trade: from the Australian Wheat Board to AWB Limited Geoff Cockfield University of Southern Queensland Linda Courtenay Botterill The Australian National University In 2006 in Australia there was an inquiry into allegations of kickbacks being paid to the former Iraqi regime by the grain trading company AWB Limited. The inquiry and its aftermath provided an opportunity for proponents of unregulated trade in wheat to press for the removal of the AWB’s control of export sales. This article is a review of the history of the development and dismantling of wheat marketing regulation in Australia, treated as a case study to illustrate two things: the shift in the prevailing values in Australian agricultural policy over the last 35 years; and the way in which legislative cycles, reviews, institutional change and particular events provide opportunities for policy advocates to press for change, in this case over at least 40 years. It is argued here that the dominant paradigm for trading agricultural commodities shifted from one based on agrarian collectivism and sectoral stabilisation to a less regulated system with the focus on the values of efficiency and competitiveness. In November 2005 the Australian Government established an inquiry with the powers of a Royal Commission headed by Terence Cole to investigate allegations that the corporation AWB Limited1 (formerly the statutory authority Australian Wheat Board) had made payments to Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq through a Jordanian-based transport company in order to secure wheat sales, accusations originally raised by the UN Oil-for-Food inquiry headed by Paul Volker.
    [Show full text]
  • Royal Commissions Amendment Bill 2006
    Parliament of Australia Department of Parliamentary Services Parliamentary Library BILLS DIGEST Information analysis and advice for the Parliament 7 June 2006, no. 149, 2005–06, ISSN 1328-8091 Royal Commissions Amendment Bill 2006 Sue Harris Rimmer Law and Bills Digest Section Contents Purpose.............................................................. 2 Background........................................................... 2 Legal Professional Privilege ........................................... 2 The Cole Inquiry.................................................... 4 The Federal Court finding ............................................. 5 ALP policy position ................................................. 6 Main provisions........................................................ 7 Schedule 1 – Amendment of Royal Commissions Act 1902 ....................7 Concluding Comments.................................................. 10 Endnotes............................................................ 11 www.aph.gov.au/librarwww.aph.gov.au/library www.aph.gov.au/library 2 Royal Commissions Amendment Bill 2006 Royal Commissions Amendment Bill 2006 Date introduced: 25 May 2006 House: House of Representatives Portfolio: Prime Minister Commencement: Sections 1 to 3 commence on the day of Royal Assent. Schedule 1 commences the day after Royal Assent. Purpose This Bill is to amend the Royal Commissions Act 1902 (the Act) to clarify the operation of the Act in respect of claims of legal professional privilege (LPP). Amendments were requested by
    [Show full text]
  • Working Paper 17
    SEA POWER CENTRE AUSTRALIA The New South Wales Reserve Naval Legal Panel – 40 Years of Service Working Paper No. 17 © Copyright Commonwealth of Australia 2004 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission from the Department of Defence Announcement statement-may be announced to the public. Secondary release-may be released to the public. All Defence information, whether classified or not, is protected from unauthorised disclosure under the Crimes Act 1914. Defence Information may only be released in accordance with the Defence Protective Security Manual (SECMAN 4) and/or Defence Instruction (General) OPS 13-4-Release of Classified Defence Information to Other Countries, as appropriate. Requests and inquiries should be addressed to the Director, Sea Power Centre - Australia, CANBERRA, ACT, 2600. National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication Entry Horobin, Judith. The New South Wales Reserve Naval Legal Panel: 40 Years of Service ISBN 0 642 29609 X 1. Australia. New South Wales Reserve Naval Legal Panel. 2. Naval Law - New South Wales - History. I. Renwick, James, 1963- . II. Australia. Royal Australian Navy. Sea Power Centre. III. Title. (Series: Working paper (Australia. Royal Australian Navy. Sea Power Centre ); no.17). 343.94019 i Disclaimer The views expressed are the authors’ and not necessarily those of the Department of Defence. The Commonwealth of Australia will not be legally responsible in contract, tort or otherwise for any statement made in this publication. Sea Power Centre - Australia The Sea Power Centre - Australia (SPC-A - formerly the Maritime Studies Program) was established to undertake activities which would promote the study, discussion and awareness of maritime issues and strategy within the RAN and the defence and civil communities at large.
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF Read More
    ALRC 2009–10 R E P O R T 113 ANNUAL REPORT Requests and inquiries regarding this report should be addressed to: The Executive Director Australian Law Reform Commission GPO Box 3708 Sydney NSW 2001 Telephone: (02) 8238 6333 Fax: (02) 8238 6363 Email: [email protected] This report is also accessible online at: www.alrc.gov.au ISBN 978-0-9807194-3-7 Print Post Approval Number: PP255003/02228 © Commonwealth of Australia 2010 This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in whole or part, subject to acknowledgement of the source, for your personal, non- commercial use or use within your organisation. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), all other rights are reserved. Requests for further authorisation should be directed to the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Copyright Law Branch, Attorney-General’s Department, Robert Garran Offices, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600. Alternatively, an online request form is available at <www. ag.gov.au/cca>. Printed by Union Offset Printers ii Professor David Weisbrot AM ProfessorProfessor Rosalind David WeisbrotF Croucher AM PresPresidentident President The Honourable Robert McClelland MP The Honourable Philip Ruddock MP TheAttorney-General Honourable Philip Ruddock MP Attorney-General Attorney-GeneralParliament House Parliament House Parliament House CanberraCanberra ACT ACT 2600 2600 Canberra ACT 2600 2219 OctoberSeptember 2007 2010 19 October 2007 Dear Attorney-General Dear Attorney-General Dear Attorney-General On behalf of the members of the Australian Law Reform Commission, I am pleased to present the On behalf of the members of the Australian Law Reform Commission, I am pleased to present the Annual Report of the Australian Law Reform Commission for the period 1 July 2006 to 30 June Annual Report of the Australian Law Reform Commission for the period 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Matter of the Queensland Floods Commission of Inquiry 2011
    IN THE MATTER OF THE QUEENSLAND FLOODS COMMISSION OF INQUIRY 2011 A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY UNDER THE COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY ACT 1950 AND PURSUANT TO THE COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY ORDER (No. 1) 2011 WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF QUEENSLAND BULK WATER SUPPLY AUTHORITY 2 CONTENTS I INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 3 II GOVERNING PRINCIPLES............................................................................. 6 III CONSCIOUS SELECTION AND USE OF STRATEGIES........................... 9 IV THE INDIVIDUAL FLOOD ENGINEERS..................................................... 19 Introduction........................................................................................................... 19 Mr Ruffini.............................................................................................................. 21 Mr Ayre................................................................................................................. 39 Mr Tibaldi.............................................................................................................. 48 Mr Malone............................................................................................................. 49 Documents and communications relied upon against the flood engineers........... 50 V COLLUSION....................................................................................................... 59 VI COMPLIANCE WITH THE MANUAL.........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Work Undertaken by the Australian Federal Police's Oil for Food
    Chapter 2 Background 2.1 Following the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) imposed sanctions on Iraq. The sanctions, under Resolution 661, required all states to prevent their nationals from trading with, or making funds available to, the government of Iraq or persons or bodies within Iraq, except in relation to the provision of materials for medical or humanitarian purposes and foodstuffs, in humanitarian circumstances.1 2.2 As a consequence of Resolution 661, Iraq was deprived of hard currency limiting its capacity to purchase food. By 1995, the Iraqi population were faced with a serious nutritional and health situation. In response, the Security Council passed Resolution 986, establishing the Oil-for-Food Programme (OFF program). The OFF program allowed for the limited importation of petroleum and petroleum products originating from Iraq, at market rates. The resolution required that payment for these products be made into an escrow account, which could then be used to pay for medicine, health supplies, foodstuffs, and other materials and supplies to satisfy essential civilian needs.2 2.3 In 2004, in response to concerns about fraud and corruption in the administration and management of the OFF program, the UNSC passed Resolution 1538, welcoming the decision of the UN Secretary-General to establish an independent high-level inquiry chaired by Mr Paul Volcker to investigate the administration and management of the OFF program, the Independent Inquiry Committee into the United Nations Oil-for-Food
    [Show full text]
  • Cabinet - Subjects for Consideration, 09 September 2002 11:00 Am
    CABINET - SUBJECTS FOR CONSIDERATION, 09 SEPTEMBER 2002 11:00 AM 1 New Initiatives/Policy Matters Not Relevant 107 MIR-WPS008/02TC1CS Cole Royal Commission - Proposed South Australian Government Position and Representation and Indemnification of Subpoenaed South Australian Government Officers APPROVED (WITH AN AMENDMENT TO 3.12 OF THE SUBMISSION) All Ministers CABINET COVER SHEET 1. TITLE: COLE ROYAL COMMISSION — PROPOSED SOUTH AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT POSITION AND REPRESENTATION AND INDEMNIFICATION OF SUBPOENAED SOUTH AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT OFFICERS 2. MINISTER: Hon Jay Weatherill MP Minister for Administrative Services Acting Minister for Industrial Relations 3. PURPOSE: To seek Cabinet approval in relation to various matters regarding the Cole Royal Commission into the Building and Construction Industry. 4. RESOURCES REQUIRED Costs to the State could include both internal and FOR IMPLEMENTATION external legal representation and advice, the extent of which is not clear. 5. RELATIONSHIP TO Consistent with Government policy that State GOVERNMENT POLICY: Government officers be indemnified while performing required duties as directed. 6. CONSULTATION: • Department of Treasury and Finance • Department of the Premier and Cabinet • Crown Solicitor's Office • WorkCover 7. URGENCY: Cole Royal Commission is expected to hold hearings in Adelaide in September. 8. IMPACT STATEMENTS Due to the timeframe given for the development of this Submission, the preparation of the required impact statements has not been undertaken. 9. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF Read More
    This Issues Paper reflects the law as at 27 March 2009. © Commonwealth of Australia 2009 This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in whole or part, subject to acknowledgement of the source, for your personal, non- commercial use or use within your organisation. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), all other rights are reserved. Requests for further authorisation should be directed by letter to the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Copyright Law Branch, Attorney-General’s Department, Robert Garran Offices, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 or electronically via www.ag.gov.au/cca. ISBN-978-0-9804153-5-3 Commission Reference: IP 35 The Australian Law Reform Commission was established on 1 January 1975 by the Law Reform Commission Act 1973 (Cth) and reconstituted by the Australian Law Reform Commission Act 1996 (Cth). The office of the ALRC is at Level 25, 135 King Street, Sydney, NSW, 2000, Australia. All ALRC publications can be made available in a range of accessible formats for people with disabilities. If you require assistance, please contact the ALRC. Telephone: within Australia (02) 8238 6333 International +61 2 8238 6333 TTY: (02) 8238 6379 Facsimile: within Australia (02) 8238 6363 International +61 2 8238 6363 E-mail: [email protected] ALRC homepage: www.alrc.gov.au Printed by Ligare Making a submission Any public contribution to an inquiry is called a submission and these are actively sought by the ALRC from a broad cross-section of the community, as well as those with a special interest in the particular inquiry.
    [Show full text]
  • Work Undertaken by the Australian Federal Police's Oil for Food
    Chapter 3 AWB Ltd in Iraq 3.1 This chapter describes AWB Ltd's involvement in the Oil-for-Food Programme (OFF program) and outlines the key events that took place between 1999 and 2003. 3.2 The Australian Wheat Board was established in 1939 as a government statutory authority to control the domestic and international marketing of Australian wheat. It was the sole marketer of wheat both domestically and internationally until the Wheat Marketing Act 1989 came into force, deregulating the domestic market. The Australian Wheat Board retained the sole right to export wheat from Australia and by 1 July 1999, when the Australian Wheat Board became AWB Ltd, an unlisted public company, it was the exclusive manager and marketer of all bulk wheat exports from Australia, conducted through a supply-pooling system known as the Single Desk. On 21 August 2001, AWB Ltd was placed on the Australian Stock Exchange, as a listed company limited by shares. The Single Desk was managed and operated by AWB (International) Ltd (AWBI), a wholly owned subsidiary of AWB Ltd.1 3.3 Australia has been exporting wheat to Iraq since 1948. Over the life of the OFF program, the Australian Wheat Board, and then AWB Ltd, was the single largest provider of humanitarian goods to Iraq receiving a total of more than US$2.3 billion in payments from the UN escrow account.2 Between 1997 and 2005, the Australian Wheat Board's (and AWB Ltd's) wheat sales to Iraq constituted a substantial part of the company's overall annual wheat sales and these sales were highly profitable.
    [Show full text]
  • Cartels Crush Wheat Board in Australia
    dreds, of Australian government officials were fully aware of the AWB’s $290 million in kickbacks to Saddam. Howard, however, rigged the terms of the “inquiry” so as to preclude Cartels Crush Wheat Cole from looking into the government’s role. Even the neo- con Rupert Murdoch’s national daily, The Australian, squealed about the blatant coverup: Board in Australia “Forget the spin, Prime Minister. The AWB kickbacks by Robert Barwick scandal will stand as a dark stain against the competence of the [Liberal/National party] Coalition, irrespective of the claims by John Howard and his senior ministers that they The Liberal/National government of Australian Prime Minis- were in the dark all along. The central question remains: How ter John Howard, in December 2006, stripped the Australian did the Government miss nearly $300 million paid in kick- Wheat Board (AWB) of its export monopoly of wheat, known backs to Saddam Hussein’s former regime?” as the “single desk.” Thus ended over six decades of regulated Howard parried that he had given Cole the right to expand wheat marketing for Australia’s wheat growers, who produce his inquiry to look into the government if he thought that were 15% of all world wheat exports. There are some 16,000 grain appropriate. Surprisingly, Howard’s hand-picked flunky farms in Australia, and 95% of those producing for export are chose never to do so, despite testimony pouring in from all in the state of Western Australia; 12,500 of the 16,000 are sides, that the government knew precisely what was afoot.
    [Show full text]