Archive

Archive for January 5, 2012

EYE-BALL NovelZone’s Zombie-Leaks – 1982 Documents – Part 1

January 5, 2012 Comments off
The-EYE-BALL-JokeZone
EYE-BALL Zombie-Leaks –
1982 Document Uploads Part 1.
Updated 6th Jan 2012
Hello – this page forms a part of the Document upload database as a part of the State Bank of NSW – (SBNSW) and NSW Government’s – (NSWG) Corporate RAPE of the State Building Society – (SBS) in 1988.

The Documents linked below were obtained under FOI applications and relate to the SBNSW and NSWG efforts to get the entity structure right both in terms of the Building Society Acts i.e. there were three NSW Acts in play – 1901, 1923, and 1967 – the mix sought was to allow the SBNSW and NSWG to retain complete control over the Management and Board of the SBS.   These documents go some way to exposing how pressure was bought to bare on the Office of Fair Trading and the Minister, the Registrar, and Deputy Registrar.

Below the table of links – some of the image files have been pasted and commentary is made as to what the Letter means in the overall scheme of the SBNSW and NSWG’s intentions.

Uploaded Documents – 1982 – Part 1:
Date: Link: Information:
06/01/2012: 1982 Docs – PDF

1982 Docs – Word

(17Mb …)
These files include all 1982 files.

The documents included in this file are a mixture of Administrative, Ministerial, Co-Operatives, Permanent Building Societies Assoc, State Bank, SBS Rules amendments, private notes, and State Treasury  files.

Some files have deliberately been left out – you can guess the reasons right … but rest assured they will appear when proceedings dictate.

______________________________

First image posted from the 1982 stack is a letter from The Minister Mr Sheahan to the MD of the SBNSW – Mr Nick Whitlam.

Comments:

Almost six years to the day after this letter was written – Nick Greiner won the NSW Election in a minority Government.  Six weeks after that the whole Co-Operative industry was in uproar over the planed end-game merger between the SBNSW and the SBS.   The new Minister Mr Gerry Peacocke saw the merger as a result of the ‘conflict of interest’ that existed with the SBS Board being controlled by the SBNSW appointed Directors.

Now I would fathom at a guess that these men serving the NSW Government in 1982 were clever – they obviously weren’t stupid – but given that Minister Peacocke’s 1988 Amendment Bill as a result of the planned merger – did cause the SBNSW and NSWG to abandoned the merger and pursue a sale option – there has to be some argument that the SBS ‘entity’ was a flawed structure all along.

What is obvious in the different era’s is that in 1982 – the court battle with the CSB was in its infancy – and in 1988 the SBNSW and NSWG had won and been compensated to the tune of $330 million.  The merger of the SBS with SBNSW as their Savings Bank as the end-game solution was always going to be the final slap in the face to the CSB.

But at the first hurdle of resistance over the merger in May 1988 – and offered by someone whose integrity demanded that he stand up for the SBS members – Minister Peacocke bought down the merger plan within days of the announcement by John O’Neill as the new CEO of the SBNSW and having replaced Nick Whitlam some eight months earlier.  The new Premier Greiner joined in on the merger talk and conducted several media interviews lending his support to the merger.  [See linked Media uploads for more information.]

One has to ask how did this ‘ENTITY’ structure pass all the checks and balances in 1981-82?

Given the Legal Opinions delivered by the State Crown Solicitor’s Office, The Attorney General, Independent lawyers – Mallesons Stephen Jaques – (MSJ), during May 1988 in confrontation to the merger agenda – how could they be so right in Law and force the SBNSW and Premier Greiner to back down – when all that transpired in 1981-82 had to go through the same offices – [i.e. except MSJ].

The Solicitor most responsible for all the legislative process in 1981-82 was the SBNSW Legal Counsel –  Paul Kearns.  It was his consult that was responsible for all the internal opinions supporting the SBS’s structure and formation.  It could be said that the NSWG was ‘hoodwinked’ into believing there was no ‘conflict of interest’ and willingly so because the motive in overturning the 1931 Agreement was just too tempting.  Paul Kearns also sat as second chair all during the 5 year court battle with the CSB – so his involvement was as ‘dirty-handed’ as it gets.

This whole saga began as a ‘pay-back’ opportunity over events that happened back in 1931 – and ended up as ‘scrambled eggs’ on a floor with nobody in the Greiner Government wanting to stand up for the SBS members and staff at the final hurdle.   Minister Peacocke’s posturing’s in May ’88 were nowhere to be seen by Aug ’88 when the sale to St George went through.

In the end the SBNSW and NSWG striped the value of the SBS reserves – some $60 million plus the added goodwill value from the SBS members when they sold their $3.050 million of fixed-capital to St George for $75 million.  Right up to the end – the SBNSW appointed Directors to the SBS Board were acting in and from a ‘conflict of interest’ position – yet nobody intervened on behalf of the SBS Members and Staff … this is the FRAUD and Corporate RAPE that John O’Neill and Nick Greiner are most responsible for.

In the letter from Minister Sheahan above – he was also serving as ‘Minister Serving the Premier’ – within that arrangement it became Minister Sheahan’s role to get done what the Premier wanted done.  This whole matter sits fairly and squarely at the office of The NSW Premier and his associates and agents in crime – through three NSW Premiers …

______________________________

Comments:

This is more pandering and glossing over of the real issues that were overlooked – Minister Sheahan had to have been getting legal advice from the Crown Solicitor’s office – those documents are conveniently absent from the FOI – there is no assertion that documents were not forwarded under the FOI – they were never there in the first place.   Apart from the obvious – the above document is of little importance …

______________________________

Comments:

Mr Whitlam gets his hands dirty in this little exchange … he is writing to the Registrar of Permanent Building Societies – he kept it impersonal and did not name the Registrar – but at this stage it was still Mr Horton.   This letter can be likened to a ‘bushranger’ having corralled all the ‘booty’ and was now telling the Law what the rules were to resolve the ‘heist’.

Given Mr Whitlam’s run in with the NRMA Board and his narrow escape – there is evidence of a pattern in how Mr Whitlam does business … wink-wink … can’t say too much … I like the Whitlam family and think Gough got a raw deal …  but as ‘heist’s’ go this was a masterpiece in planning and up until it faltered with the merger agenda some 6 years later – it still ended up with a $75 million heist result – and to this day nobody has given a rats-ass.

To any observer this is an example where crime does pay – particularly when you’re the Premier of a State Government and you have people around you who are loyal to a cause – anybody with half a brain knew the ‘conflict of interest’ was always there – even Mr Whitlam.

______________________________

Comments:

The first paragraph of page 2 gives further evidence that the SBS was to be structured so that it was believed owned by the NSWG and controlled by its agents the SBNSW.  This is ego and malice all thrown in together – the almost $400 million of members funds in the merged RBIS and RSL-MPBS are not even thought of  as shareholders.  The SBNSW and NSWG were swaggering around thinking that their $3.050 million of fixed-capital gave them rights over and above ‘natural-justice’, and against every principal pertaining the to Co-Operatives Industry – this was hubris in the extreme and poor little Johnny O’Neill got his face smeared all over it for a while.

But in the end he pulled a rabbit out of a hat with Premier Greiner’s help and they still got to laugh all the way to the Bank.  Well the wheel has turned and it is now time for those ‘crooks’ to be rounded up and put before their peers to allow judgement for their past deeds.  One could hope for Kama – but that might be a hit or miss happenstance  – for the SBS members and staff – public exposure and a nice big fat settlement would better suit those who were robbed.

______________________________

More 1982 Documents Part 2 will be uploaded next –

Back to EYE-BALL NovelZone Zombie-Leaks home page

______________________________

Please – if you want to stay in touch with developments – please complete the FORM below.   The FORM submission allows you to register your details and comments if you so wish. Your registration will place you on a mailing list for all future updates relative to document uploads and other matters being pursued in this dispute.   You can unsubscribe from this Mailing list at any time – and just a confirmation reminder that all your details will be kept private and confidential.

______________________________

Advertisements

EYE-BALL NovelZone’s Zombie-Leaks – 1981 Documents

January 5, 2012 Comments off
The-EYE-BALL-JokeZone
EYE-BALL Zombie-Leaks –
1981 Document Uploads.
Updated 5th Jan 2012
Hello – this page forms a part of the Document upload database as a part of the State Bank of NSW – (SBNSW) and NSW Government’s – (NSWG) Corporate RAPE of the State Building Society – (SBS) in 1988.

The Documents linked below were obtained under FOI applications and relate to the SBNSW and NSWG efforts to get the entity structure right both in terms of the Building Society Acts i.e. there were three NSW Acts in play – 1901, 1923, and 1967 – the mix sought was to allow the SBNSW and NSWG to retain complete control over the Management and Board of the SBS.   These documents go some way to exposing how pressure was bought to bare on the Office of Fair Trading and the Minister, the Registrar, and Deputy Registrar.

Below the table of links – some of the image files have been pasted and commentary is made as to what the Letter means in the overall scheme of the SBNSW and NSWG’s intentions.

Uploaded Documents – 1981:
Date: Link: Information:
05/01/2012: 1981 Docs – PDF

1981 Docs – Word

The documents included in this file are all Administrative files but do include a selection of files that highlight the pressure the Office of Fair Trading – or Co-Operatives as it was known in 1981 – was exposed to by the SBNSW and NSWG in forming the SBS.

______________________________

First image of the rack is a declaration by the Deputy Registrar – Ron Baker dated 31 July 1981.

Comments:

This note in the FOI documents went unnoticed for some time – but a refresh look and closer inspection ignited suspicion – attempts to find ore documents surrounding this note are ongoing but the researcher is told that it is unlikely that further connective documents will be found.

In essence the words included in this declaration –

“Notwithstanding that the consents in writing of the holders of two-thirds of the whole number of the shares of each of the societies hereunder have not been sought …”

This would suggest that the Deputy Registrar was under instruction to approve the ‘transfer of engagements’ even though all the Legislative process’ had not been met.  This is just another of the unanswered questions in how the Government of the day – the Ministers and back benches collectively could allow an ‘entity’ to be formed when defying all the Administrative urgings to the contrary.

The Premier wanted it done and just what was his motivation and who was pulling his chains?

______________________________

Comments:

This is a copy of a memo under the heading – ‘Government Objectives and Undertakings’ and covers comments relating to the formation of a Society and the Legislative requirements needed. In the fourth paragraph of the yellow highlighted section – there is clear evidence that the proposed Building Society was targeted as being the ‘Savings Bank’ arm of the SBNSW. It also confirms that in pursuing this ‘entity’ that the 1931 Amalgamation Agreement – (1931 Agreement) – might be called to account. The Bank officer refered to at the State BAnk is Mr Paul Kearns – head of the State Banks Legal Department. Mr Kearns hands are all over this formation strategy and he was largely responsible for the SBNSW winning the Court case against the Commonwealth Savings Bank.

There is no doubt that the aim if the formation of the SBS as an ‘ENTITY’ was with the intent to bring about a legal challenge to the 1931 Agreement.

The Green highlighted section gives insight to the motivation of the NSWG and the SBNSW – they were preparing to amend Llegislation to allow for the SBS to be formed. There is much history in how this whole idea became a live agenda. That history is still being researched and all that can be said at the moments that sources close to Premier Wran have indicated that the Jack Lang influence and how the Government Savings Bank was forced into the 1931 Agreement back in 1931 had a lot to do with the motive.

Men’s ego’s and the carnage they can engineer.

______________________________

Comments:

This note is an extract from Hansard records – it gives the Minister for Housing, Minister for Co-Operative Societies, and Minister Assisting the Premier – Mr Sheahan – views on how the SBS will be structured.

What is of note is that the Minister claims that the SBS will be separate from the Rural Building and Investment Society (RBIS) previously known as the Tamworth Building and Investment Society – (TBIS) – yet only nine months later the SBS was merged with the RBIS and then the name was changed to the State Building Society. It was a switcheroo purely to get the SBS structured under a Legislative structure where the SBNSW and NSWG retained all the fixed-capital – and then had the rules changed to allow the NSWG and the SBNSW to control the SBS via 4 of the 8 SBS Board numbers with the Chairman also to be appointed by the SBNSW.

This ‘ENTITY’ was structured in such a way that it circumvented the 1967 Building Societies Act, it required specific Legislation to be enacted to allow it to be stry=uctured the way it was – and in doing so – the aim was to make it the ‘Savings Bank’ arm when the 1931 Agreement was overturned. One could easily say a premeditated action given that the court battle with the CSB had not even started as yet – someone knew something about how the court case was going to go …

Are you all confused yet – sorry my fault – as stated earlier this is a complex story and its framework and sub-plots would render its understanding to those who only have a committed interest. Hope you can stay with the roll-out – it gets better – or more involved depending on how you like it.

______________________________

Comments:

In reality – the Premier was wanting to set up a Building Society that was owned and operated by the NSWG under its existing agent – the SBNSW.  All the posturing to amend the legislation and merge, and transfer engagements back and forward, was all a strategy to allow the SBNSW and NSWG to keep the SBS under lock and key whilst they did battle in the courts with the CSB over the 1931 Agreement.

The idea was clever in that they wanted the fight.  The problem was that under Building Society Legislation – the NSWG and the SBNSW were not able to have the appearance of ownership – hence the ‘skullduggery’ employed to structure the ‘ENTITY’ with a flawed Constitution and Rules that formed a natural ‘conflict of interest’ to any long-term ownership issues.  At the time it appears that everybody in Government and other vested parties were being asked to turn a blind eye.

At no stage in these formation years is there any talk of ‘members entitlements’, or how the members will benefit from the SBS being formed other than a generalisation atached to an election promise to try and make housing cheaper.

This can only lead to a conclusion that the main game was the battle with the CSB over the 1931 Agreement.  The trail of evidence to support this is massive – they never even tried to cover their tracks – this was as premeditated an event to collude, to defraud, and to outright ignore the Law and obvious ‘conflict of interest’ warnings as could be put together.

The above letter from the Minister Mr Sheahan – gives some idea that he wanted his department out of the loop – he was trying to pass it on to Treasury – and as further documents in 1982 will show – Treasury did not want anything to do with it either.  In fact there is a letter from the Co-operatives Department that tee’s off at the SBNSW over their manhandling of Departmental staff.

It is noted that the Registrar David Horton left his position shortly after the SBS had been formed in late 1982.  One wonders what precipitated that exit – guilt or another involvement that required he leave his position.  Mr Horton has not been contacted as part of this research – efforts have been made but he is still to be found.

Mr Baker was found – he was the Deputy Registrar under Mr Horton and became the Registrar after Mr Horton left – his contact details came from a third-party and when he spoke to the researcher and was made aware of what the enquiry was about – some interesting things came forth – notes from that conversation appear below:

16th Mar 2010:  Spoke to Mr Baker… at the outset he indicated even after reading the letter to O’Neill [9th May 1988] … he has no recollection of ever writing the letter … he said it was his signature but recalled nothing about what prompted him to write the letter … he said that after the new Government [Greiner], he was shifted to the city from Parramatta to head up a new Dept that was an amalgamation of three other Dept’s that included the Dept Of Co-Operatives … he was still Registrar but indicated that he was only contacted on Co-Operative matters when he was required …

He vaguely remembers the sale to St George but after he read his letter he alluded that he thought its comments only related to the merger and not any future sale …

He mentioned that he really has no interest in any story … When asked further if he wanted to be kept informed he was indifferent … did not want to be rude and say no … but his life has moved on and all this is behind him….

16th Mar 2010:  Mr Baker rang back and requested a number of things:

Upon reflection and after he was offered an alias to keep his name out of the story, he wanted to accept that offer … his claim was that because the story was going to be critical of some parties, he did not want to be quoted or have his name used … He then indicated that he did not want any further contact … he said that I had to do what I had to do … but requested that I think about not using anything that refers to him in the story …

Summary:

A very strange call … he said that he had not spoken to anybody since he had spoke with me earlier … I asked the question about that … he sounded like he wanted to keep himself hidden because he feared what might happen if he was seen to be assisting in the research investigation …  That suggests that his promotion to a higher position under Greiner before the sale to St George went through … may have been linked in some way … there was no Government or Co-Operative intervention on any level after O’Neill resigned as Chairman in July 1988 …

There is no evidence of anything untoward – but that would be the case in anybody wanting to cover their tracks … what is not explained is the Unsigned Peacocke letter dated 25th Aug ’88 and three days after the sale to St George went through. Mr Baker would have been involved in that up to his eye-balls. Him nor wanting to speak was another red-flag … every other witness has been prepared to cooperate – Mr Baker’s position only inflames opinions as to how this hold sage played out.

______________________________

1982 Documents will ne uploaded next – there are 10 times the documents as compared with 1981 – 1982 documents will be a progressive upload process.

Back to EYE-BALL NovelZone Zombie-Leaks home page

______________________________

Please – if you want to stay in touch with developments – please complete the FORM below.   The FORM submission allows you to register your details and comments if you so wish. Your registration will place you on a mailing list for all future updates relative to document uploads and other matters being pursued in this dispute.   You can unsubscribe from this Mailing list at any time – and just a confirmation reminder that all your details will be kept private and confidential.

______________________________

%d bloggers like this: