.jpg)
Image Copyright Holyart.com
So today’s the date for the Respondents Webb, McEwan and DraftCom Pty Ltd to provide submissions in this precedent case; and they did so with gusto.
As has been with this husband and wife team, Webb acts as agent and self-represents in NCAT since 2016.
DCJ, PSC, GMC all colluding, each vying to secure the coveted Golden GIPA Chalice among NSW government agencies; a Section 110 Restraining Order designed to stop access applicants in their freedom of information tracks or seriously impede their efforts to exercise their legal rights and access beneficial legislation; no matter what the outcome, just as long as agencies are successful.
As has been with this husband and wife team, Webb acts as agent and self-represents in NCAT since 2016.
DCJ, PSC, GMC all colluding, each vying to secure the coveted Golden GIPA Chalice among NSW government agencies; a Section 110 Restraining Order designed to stop access applicants in their freedom of information tracks or seriously impede their efforts to exercise their legal rights and access beneficial legislation; no matter what the outcome, just as long as agencies are successful.
After all, all eyes are on those Applicants as they watch and learn how it’s done for future reference. The goal is to set a precedent and scoop up a group of individuals in the one net and it hasn’t been done before.
But who’s watching?
Who are the interested parties or agencies, eager to learn what methodology is successful and how to finally get Webb who has repeatedly and successfully defeated Section 110’s in the past? Which also begs the question just how many attempts should an agency be given? Is it ok to keep coming back time and time again until finally achieving success?! Apparently……….
Those interested parties are the whole of the state’s population of Right to Information and Privacy Officers, all members of the government cartel now known as NIPPN (NSW Right to Information & Privacy Practitioners Network), totalling approximately five hundred at last count (500).
They watch, they share information, they breach the public’s privacy, they meet to create ideas on how to control the public and eradicate them from every corner of government business, determined to ensure bad behaviour and corruption is concealed, and use of public monies avoids scrutiny.
The activities of NIPPN have been well documented here.
Going on the (3) three Affidavits from Wickham, Franklin and Timothy in these Section 110 proceedings, these people are so afraid, they have to express their fear confidentially, pleading with the Tribunal under the covers to make the best case possible as to why it should grant the orders sought………!! It’s hard to believe they behave in this manner against self-represented opponents.
Must be that Model Litigant Policy we’ve all heard so much about. And the Codes of Conduct. And the Codes of Ethical Standards. Blah, blah, blah. Try holding just one to account. All meaningless waffle.
Let’s be frank here; this Section 110 Application is pure retaliation for exposing corruption.
Anyway, today’s the day the Respondent’s get to file their submissions and evidence, and it’s not going to be pretty. They get one shot and so everything goes in the pot.
If these agency actors can drag up all kinds of irrelevant crap to use against the public, including those who are disqualified as Respondents, putting those victims to the trouble and effort of defending something that does not concern them, then the Respondents as a collective will give it to these criminal clowns both barrels the best they can.
The focus of the Respondents’ submissions is the Applicants’ Affidavits and Submissions. The Attachments or so-called evidence in the (3) three large boxes won’t even be touched; all that cost in collating and copying for nothing other than a homey bonfire watched with a warm glass of mulled wine. The bulk of the Applicants' documentation bureaucratic waste at its finest, easy when it’s not your money.
The Respondents don’t seek a confidential session.
They don’t make confidential affidavits. And they don't have a flotilla of solicitors or barristers to hide behind.
It’s all out in the open and there's no insulation. Webb has maintained the guts and fortitude to repeatedly call out corruption for what it is and this Section 110 Application has been the result.
Webb is acting as Agent for her husband and DraftCom Pty Ltd.
It makes sense; McEwan and DraftCom are totally disqualified as Respondents.
This is really Webb’s case.
And she’s fighting an army. And army that's pulled out every conceivable file and document possible, but one thing is blatantly missing: THE EVIDENCE! THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THE CLAIMED UNMERITORIOUS ACCESS APPLICATIONS ARE SO. NOT A SINGLE SCREEN SHOT, NOT A PRINT OUT, NO LOG OF ACTIONS, NO DIGITAL SEARCH RETURNS. NADA. ZILCH. DIDDLY SQUAT. ABSOLUTELY ZERO! That's right, there is no proof to support or justify the Section 110 Application................And all that public money too; what was it? Oh yes, almost three hundred thousand dollars.
Enclosed with her Submissions and Evidence, Webb includes an Application for Contempt for DCJ’s Justin Cahill who clearly deliberately misled the Tribunal on 05th November 2024, when he repeatedly stated QUOTE “we are within the bounds of 110(1)” UNQUOTE, knowing they were not.
Shame Cahill! Shame! Shame! Shame! And where, or where, is that Information Commissioner?!
Webb also included a secondary Misc Application for Dismissal, as the Member on 05th November 2025 did not actually dismiss the proceedings. She stated she would get advice. She left the hearing room supposedly to get that advice. However when she returned she went straight into Directions. So No; the matter had not been dismissed and there is no record of it being dismissed.
This matter will continue to be reported as a matter of public interest and for the general information of the public.
Webb’s submissions are available here, and yes they are a bit lengthy but worth the read if only for entertainment.
Contact:
Jodie Cobbin, Jodie.cobbin@dcj.nsw.gov.au
Justin Cahill, justin.cahill@dcj.nsw.gov.au
Michael McIntosh, Michael.mcintosh@dcj.nsw.gov.au
Jonathan Franklin, Jonathan.franklin@dcj.nsw.gov.au
Tony Wickham, tony.wickham@portstephens.nsw.gov.au
Lisa Marshall, lisa.marshall@portstephens.nsw.gov.au
Maria Timothy, maria.timothy@goulburn.nsw.gov.au
But who’s watching?
Who are the interested parties or agencies, eager to learn what methodology is successful and how to finally get Webb who has repeatedly and successfully defeated Section 110’s in the past? Which also begs the question just how many attempts should an agency be given? Is it ok to keep coming back time and time again until finally achieving success?! Apparently……….
Those interested parties are the whole of the state’s population of Right to Information and Privacy Officers, all members of the government cartel now known as NIPPN (NSW Right to Information & Privacy Practitioners Network), totalling approximately five hundred at last count (500).
They watch, they share information, they breach the public’s privacy, they meet to create ideas on how to control the public and eradicate them from every corner of government business, determined to ensure bad behaviour and corruption is concealed, and use of public monies avoids scrutiny.
The activities of NIPPN have been well documented here.
Going on the (3) three Affidavits from Wickham, Franklin and Timothy in these Section 110 proceedings, these people are so afraid, they have to express their fear confidentially, pleading with the Tribunal under the covers to make the best case possible as to why it should grant the orders sought………!! It’s hard to believe they behave in this manner against self-represented opponents.
Must be that Model Litigant Policy we’ve all heard so much about. And the Codes of Conduct. And the Codes of Ethical Standards. Blah, blah, blah. Try holding just one to account. All meaningless waffle.
Let’s be frank here; this Section 110 Application is pure retaliation for exposing corruption.
Anyway, today’s the day the Respondent’s get to file their submissions and evidence, and it’s not going to be pretty. They get one shot and so everything goes in the pot.
If these agency actors can drag up all kinds of irrelevant crap to use against the public, including those who are disqualified as Respondents, putting those victims to the trouble and effort of defending something that does not concern them, then the Respondents as a collective will give it to these criminal clowns both barrels the best they can.
The focus of the Respondents’ submissions is the Applicants’ Affidavits and Submissions. The Attachments or so-called evidence in the (3) three large boxes won’t even be touched; all that cost in collating and copying for nothing other than a homey bonfire watched with a warm glass of mulled wine. The bulk of the Applicants' documentation bureaucratic waste at its finest, easy when it’s not your money.
The Respondents don’t seek a confidential session.
They don’t make confidential affidavits. And they don't have a flotilla of solicitors or barristers to hide behind.
It’s all out in the open and there's no insulation. Webb has maintained the guts and fortitude to repeatedly call out corruption for what it is and this Section 110 Application has been the result.
Webb is acting as Agent for her husband and DraftCom Pty Ltd.
It makes sense; McEwan and DraftCom are totally disqualified as Respondents.
This is really Webb’s case.
And she’s fighting an army. And army that's pulled out every conceivable file and document possible, but one thing is blatantly missing: THE EVIDENCE! THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THE CLAIMED UNMERITORIOUS ACCESS APPLICATIONS ARE SO. NOT A SINGLE SCREEN SHOT, NOT A PRINT OUT, NO LOG OF ACTIONS, NO DIGITAL SEARCH RETURNS. NADA. ZILCH. DIDDLY SQUAT. ABSOLUTELY ZERO! That's right, there is no proof to support or justify the Section 110 Application................And all that public money too; what was it? Oh yes, almost three hundred thousand dollars.
Enclosed with her Submissions and Evidence, Webb includes an Application for Contempt for DCJ’s Justin Cahill who clearly deliberately misled the Tribunal on 05th November 2024, when he repeatedly stated QUOTE “we are within the bounds of 110(1)” UNQUOTE, knowing they were not.
Shame Cahill! Shame! Shame! Shame! And where, or where, is that Information Commissioner?!
Webb also included a secondary Misc Application for Dismissal, as the Member on 05th November 2025 did not actually dismiss the proceedings. She stated she would get advice. She left the hearing room supposedly to get that advice. However when she returned she went straight into Directions. So No; the matter had not been dismissed and there is no record of it being dismissed.
This matter will continue to be reported as a matter of public interest and for the general information of the public.
Webb’s submissions are available here, and yes they are a bit lengthy but worth the read if only for entertainment.
Contact:
Jodie Cobbin, Jodie.cobbin@dcj.nsw.gov.au
Justin Cahill, justin.cahill@dcj.nsw.gov.au
Michael McIntosh, Michael.mcintosh@dcj.nsw.gov.au
Jonathan Franklin, Jonathan.franklin@dcj.nsw.gov.au
Tony Wickham, tony.wickham@portstephens.nsw.gov.au
Lisa Marshall, lisa.marshall@portstephens.nsw.gov.au
Maria Timothy, maria.timothy@goulburn.nsw.gov.au
Contact us using this form to comment on this article.