The South Australian Attorney-General's numb reaction to my Court Determination.

On 29 June 2004, my good wife contacted your office in relation to a judgment handed down by the Equal Opportunity Tribunal in the District Court on 25 June 2004.


http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/sa/SAEOT/2004/1.html?query=mckibbin

Dated 30 September 2004, you responded to the Emails she had sent to the Premier, Mr Mike Rann, and to you at your Parliament House email address.

In part you said; “…The Premier has asked me to respond to your email as the matter falls within my area of responsibility. I have read all 22 pages of the judgment, slowly and carefully…”

Slowly and carefully? Let’s test that.

Simple. Let me deal with one piece of the Judgment, extracted from a written complaint signed off by three complainants at the Office of the Public Trustee. I was one of the three. I want you to note the word THREE as on Radio 5AA last week you gave listeners the impression that I was a solitary repeat-offending whinger who when not getting my way screamed that the investigate body(s) must be corrupt! Hang on, let me quote you:

“…the trouble with Mr McKibbin is that his allegations haven’t been sustained. They’ve been fully investigated and they haven’t been sustained, it hasn’t turned out the way he wants them to. Some of the things he raised with you, like sexual harassment and workplace bullying just don’t have any connection with corruption. When he doesn’t get his way his next move is to say … well there’s corruption here because I’m not getting my way…”

“…nothing will ever make them happy unless there is a finding in their favour, and if there’s not a finding in their favour then there’s something wrong with the body that did the investigation. (Smithson: But they’re entitled to have their say …) Of course they are…and they receive massive media coverage…(Smithson: And we are quite happy to air his views on this program, and we have.) … and I’m happy to come on and respond each time...”

Extracted from Judgment handed down 25 June 2004:

Sexual and Racial Harassment.

Persistent references to Muslims & Catholics.

Persistent reference to how the Indonesians severed penises off of Dutch soldiers and rammed them down their throats.

References to the ‘chopping off of heads of children’ & the showing of pictures sent to him.

Persistent ‘touching’ around the private areas in front of staff in main work area, and in privacy of office in front of staff.

Persistent sexual lewdness with various objects around the office. (Anything resembling a penis).

Disrupting a Person’s Work.

 

Constantly in the main work area talking sex & general crap.

 

Humiliating an individual through sarcasm, criticism or insults, sometimes in front of other employees or customers.

 

Constant critical references to the likes of EDS representatives and Protech representatives about Des O’Neill.

 

Relentless criticism about DJ.

 

Saying in front of DS and others that it is RMcK’s fault that I.T. is under the spotlight from DO’N and that RMcK is a troublemaker.

 

Persistent Nit-Picking or Unjustified Comments

 

Constantly telling the Help Desk & Support Services Supervisor that he should not be so friendly with staff, and that he should not be having lunch with them.

 

And that he is not a capable Manager of people.

 

Constant enquiries as to what we were talking to other Officers about, when seen by him shortly before.

Shouting and Screaming & Intimidating Aggressive Body Language

 

Various heated episodes with the CBIS Project Manager, RMcK, PU, and NA.

 

Telling various staff that various individuals can ‘get fucked’ whilst remonstrating loudly with extreme body language.”

 

And what was your reaction to just this little iddy-biddy bit? Back to your letter.

 

Firstly, as with the majority of ministerial responses involving a government agency, at least half of the content was a cut & paste from the Public Trustee’s response to your ministerial. This I know, because I SAW the response to your office.

 

That Public Trustee response, by the way, was CRAP!

 

Para 4: “…let me assure you that there has never been any suggestion that your husband has done anything wrong…”

Para 8: “…I understand the Manager who was the subject of the complaint has been formally counselled on many occasions…”

Para 9: “…the Public Trustee has provided all managers and staff with equal opportunity training…”

  

Counselled? Training?

Your muted response certainly suggests to me that your level of sensitivity is not up there with mine or with that of others, many others. I wonder had any of the actions described in the complaint extract (above) would have been managed had they occurred within your office or at Parliament House.

And what about the behaviour of Crown Law during that three-day Hearing in March of 2004. How I was subjected to the most vicious and cruel cross-examination over two days as your people battled to discredit me and to shift the paradigm of blame across to me.

And when it was revealed that I was sexually accosted as a twelve year old?

Beautiful, there was the event that triggered my over-reactions. Bloody unbelievable!

Do you ever wonder why I persisted over the years? Nothing to do with the vicitmisation that prevailed after I returned from Court? Why that even some years later I still feel the need to air my grievances? Why I believe that the system failed me and will more than likely continue to fail others?

No you don’t, you don’t wonder about it at all. Probably like many others that stand up to you and your Government, I’m seen as a bloody nuisance, aren’t I. I was a nuisance when I began to complain in March 2000, and I’m still a nuisance.

For goodness gracious sake, fess up, stop vilifying and destroying the lives of the honest ones, and learn from your past mistakes. Yeah….right!

And here's a teaser for a future Post.....where was my Union during these years of discontent?