What the Duck !@!
Am I dreaming or this Australia? Land of the 'fair go' and as democratic as it can possibly be?
Cribbed from Pprune - HERE - the outcry from a man who has been the victim of the CASA 'internal' defence mechanism. It is, and make no mistake, a powerful, fully supported stone wall: designed by intent to make any CASA 'judgement' above the rule of law; and far removed from the Australian spirit. The lengths CASA will go to know no bounds; we can provide anyone who cares to examine them, a couple of dozen 'cases' where the stone wall and 'rule of democratic' law meet: and a list of those permanently damaged in a quest for truth, honesty, integrity and justice 'in-law'. This is a democracy - or it was - I have trouble believing the following edict is from a Crown Minister, without a full explanation -:- IMO a clear, unequivocal reason for this act must be publicly stated along with the reasons (1 - 10) and why a Minister would issue such an edict? That, to me seems fair, reasonable and infinitely democratic. So Minister:-
PLEASE EXPLAIN! -
and in full detail how a constituent can be 'barred' from seeking an audience with the local member - about anything? And; where is the 'members' statement 'agreeing' to the King edict and an explanation of why?
"I have approached my Local MP Dr Carina Garland on this matter, however Minister King has sent a directive to the Office of Dr Carina Garland advising that my local MP is unable to assist me. I have concerns as to why a Minister would direct an MP not to assist a Constituent, nevertheless that action has been taken. As my MP will not meet with me, or assist me, the purpose of this correspondence is to ensure that there is at least an awareness within Parliament that these allegations have been made, and I have sent correspondence to the Attorney General on this matter."
Seriously - this is off the charts. What comes next, after this?
![[Image: D05ZtSnWoAAfBWZ.jpg]](https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/D05ZtSnWoAAfBWZ.jpg)
Am I dreaming or this Australia? Land of the 'fair go' and as democratic as it can possibly be?
Cribbed from Pprune - HERE - the outcry from a man who has been the victim of the CASA 'internal' defence mechanism. It is, and make no mistake, a powerful, fully supported stone wall: designed by intent to make any CASA 'judgement' above the rule of law; and far removed from the Australian spirit. The lengths CASA will go to know no bounds; we can provide anyone who cares to examine them, a couple of dozen 'cases' where the stone wall and 'rule of democratic' law meet: and a list of those permanently damaged in a quest for truth, honesty, integrity and justice 'in-law'. This is a democracy - or it was - I have trouble believing the following edict is from a Crown Minister, without a full explanation -:- IMO a clear, unequivocal reason for this act must be publicly stated along with the reasons (1 - 10) and why a Minister would issue such an edict? That, to me seems fair, reasonable and infinitely democratic. So Minister:-
PLEASE EXPLAIN! -
and in full detail how a constituent can be 'barred' from seeking an audience with the local member - about anything? And; where is the 'members' statement 'agreeing' to the King edict and an explanation of why?
"I have approached my Local MP Dr Carina Garland on this matter, however Minister King has sent a directive to the Office of Dr Carina Garland advising that my local MP is unable to assist me. I have concerns as to why a Minister would direct an MP not to assist a Constituent, nevertheless that action has been taken. As my MP will not meet with me, or assist me, the purpose of this correspondence is to ensure that there is at least an awareness within Parliament that these allegations have been made, and I have sent correspondence to the Attorney General on this matter."
Seriously - this is off the charts. What comes next, after this?