NSW Crown Solicitor Evidenced to Collude with a Local Council to Prevent Access to Freedom of Information Training Documents, Adding to Costs Accumulated, 24.05.2023
Port Stephens Council has made an Application for Legal Costs against an unrepresented party to administrative review proceedings in the NSW Civil & Administrative Tribunal (NCAT), providing a damning leger of accounts which shows numerous entries of the Office of the NSW Crown Solicitor (CSO) working with Council, sharing submissions, checking each other’s documents, and covertly billing the other party for the privilege.
Such behaviours easily qualify as collusion.
Port Stephens Council was the respondent in the proceedings for administrative review of its decision to partly release the requested information, a request lodged by Telina Webb of NSW Freedom of Information.
The application for costs concerns an appeal by Ms Webb who sought a review of the NCAT’s earlier decision to refuse access to current training documents made available to any NSW government agency.
The training documents related to the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, GIPA, and Ms Webb had sought access to that material, held by Port Stephens Council.
Port Stephens Council had provided Council records in response to an earlier request for information from Ms Webb, where she sought the list of training undertaken by all Council staff. It was that list that recorded the training of the Office of the NSW Crown Solicitor (CSO).
The CSO’s Kiri Sue Mattes, a solicitor since 2003 but not registered with the NSW Law Society, acted in the capacity as Second Respondent in the proceedings as the subject information originated from that government department.
Ms Mattes is documented to be a regular GIPA Trainer with government agencies, disclosing under oath during the substantive hearing she peddles those training services directly to key agency personnel via the member-exclusive NSW Right to Information & Privacy Practitioners Network (NIPPN), effectively bypassing legislated procurement processes.
The CSO also advertises that GIPA training on the NIPPN website, alongside other ‘select entrepreneurs’ who also have exclusive and direct access to agency personnel and contractual decision-makers or influencers for procurement of products and services.
Having lost her appeal, Ms Webb now faces Council’s application for costs supported by a Sworn Affidavit by one of Council’s legal representatives Jennifer Anne Chenhall, a solicitor since 2008, currently engaged by Lindsay Taylor Lawyers.
The (12) twelve-page Affidavit includes (9) nine pages of leger entries, disclosing the CSO is referenced a total of (8) eight times throughout.
There is no separate time allocated to the CSO, it’s all in the one basket, charged against the Appellant Ms Webb.
“If ever there was clear evidence of numerous officers of the court colluding against an unsuspecting unrepresented party, to align submissions and take advantage of that same unsuspecting party, this is the evidence. Not only is this a revelation of the most shocking kind, these officers of the court did not hesitate to provide the unredacted record of those actions to the judiciary for all to see. It is arrogance of the highest level. And Port Stephens Council evidently does fully expect the NCAT to accept it as a credible, honest, leger to justify a compensation payment,” stated Ms Webb.
“The fact Council arrogantly and repeatedly made applications for costs to the NSW Civil & Administrative Tribunal, knowing all along that no Legal Services Contract has existed between Lindsay Taylor Lawyers and Port Stephens Council since mid-222, that no Competitive Legal Services Tendering Process has been undertaken, and that the Office of the NSW Crown Solicitor has revealed it has colluded with Council to align submissions and compound the costs, might surprise some people but it does not surprise me in any way whatsoever.
I have personally and continually witnessed the manner in which the government agency Port Stephens Council chooses to do business, the way it treats the public, the way it ignores mandates, and the way it unconscionably wastes scarce public monies on disqualified contractors. It is public knowledge it has acted unlawfully in the exercise of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, fabricating allegations against members of the public to deny access to government information, and it has also written a false and misleading letter to the Office of the NSW Information & Privacy Commissioner. That false letter was then forwarded by Council to several other government agencies and later the judiciary, all with the specific and singular intention of influencing government and judicial decision makers.
Nothing would surprise me after what I’ve seen and read, most of which is on Council’s letterhead and often under the penmanship of Council’s Governance Manager / Corporate Policeman Tony Leslie Wickham.”
With the parties having lodged their documentation and submissions it’s now up to the NCAT to read between the lines and decide whether Port Stephens Council should be rewarded for its misconduct and most particularly for colluding with the Office of the NSW Crown Solicitor, and worse the Crown Solicitor colluding with it.
Contact:
Kiri Sue Mattes, (02) 9474 9538
Tony Wickham, (02) 4988 0187
Jennifer Chenhall, (02) 8235 9712
Such behaviours easily qualify as collusion.
Port Stephens Council was the respondent in the proceedings for administrative review of its decision to partly release the requested information, a request lodged by Telina Webb of NSW Freedom of Information.
The application for costs concerns an appeal by Ms Webb who sought a review of the NCAT’s earlier decision to refuse access to current training documents made available to any NSW government agency.
The training documents related to the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, GIPA, and Ms Webb had sought access to that material, held by Port Stephens Council.
Port Stephens Council had provided Council records in response to an earlier request for information from Ms Webb, where she sought the list of training undertaken by all Council staff. It was that list that recorded the training of the Office of the NSW Crown Solicitor (CSO).
The CSO’s Kiri Sue Mattes, a solicitor since 2003 but not registered with the NSW Law Society, acted in the capacity as Second Respondent in the proceedings as the subject information originated from that government department.
Ms Mattes is documented to be a regular GIPA Trainer with government agencies, disclosing under oath during the substantive hearing she peddles those training services directly to key agency personnel via the member-exclusive NSW Right to Information & Privacy Practitioners Network (NIPPN), effectively bypassing legislated procurement processes.
The CSO also advertises that GIPA training on the NIPPN website, alongside other ‘select entrepreneurs’ who also have exclusive and direct access to agency personnel and contractual decision-makers or influencers for procurement of products and services.
Having lost her appeal, Ms Webb now faces Council’s application for costs supported by a Sworn Affidavit by one of Council’s legal representatives Jennifer Anne Chenhall, a solicitor since 2008, currently engaged by Lindsay Taylor Lawyers.
The (12) twelve-page Affidavit includes (9) nine pages of leger entries, disclosing the CSO is referenced a total of (8) eight times throughout.
There is no separate time allocated to the CSO, it’s all in the one basket, charged against the Appellant Ms Webb.
“If ever there was clear evidence of numerous officers of the court colluding against an unsuspecting unrepresented party, to align submissions and take advantage of that same unsuspecting party, this is the evidence. Not only is this a revelation of the most shocking kind, these officers of the court did not hesitate to provide the unredacted record of those actions to the judiciary for all to see. It is arrogance of the highest level. And Port Stephens Council evidently does fully expect the NCAT to accept it as a credible, honest, leger to justify a compensation payment,” stated Ms Webb.
“The fact Council arrogantly and repeatedly made applications for costs to the NSW Civil & Administrative Tribunal, knowing all along that no Legal Services Contract has existed between Lindsay Taylor Lawyers and Port Stephens Council since mid-222, that no Competitive Legal Services Tendering Process has been undertaken, and that the Office of the NSW Crown Solicitor has revealed it has colluded with Council to align submissions and compound the costs, might surprise some people but it does not surprise me in any way whatsoever.
I have personally and continually witnessed the manner in which the government agency Port Stephens Council chooses to do business, the way it treats the public, the way it ignores mandates, and the way it unconscionably wastes scarce public monies on disqualified contractors. It is public knowledge it has acted unlawfully in the exercise of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, fabricating allegations against members of the public to deny access to government information, and it has also written a false and misleading letter to the Office of the NSW Information & Privacy Commissioner. That false letter was then forwarded by Council to several other government agencies and later the judiciary, all with the specific and singular intention of influencing government and judicial decision makers.
Nothing would surprise me after what I’ve seen and read, most of which is on Council’s letterhead and often under the penmanship of Council’s Governance Manager / Corporate Policeman Tony Leslie Wickham.”
With the parties having lodged their documentation and submissions it’s now up to the NCAT to read between the lines and decide whether Port Stephens Council should be rewarded for its misconduct and most particularly for colluding with the Office of the NSW Crown Solicitor, and worse the Crown Solicitor colluding with it.
Contact:
Kiri Sue Mattes, (02) 9474 9538
Tony Wickham, (02) 4988 0187
Jennifer Chenhall, (02) 8235 9712