from Independent Australia ….

Honest politician Graham Perrett is not letting the Federal Police fob off the Ashbygate conspiracy, writing them a new letter. Ross Jones reports.

You’ve got to hand it to Graham Perrett, MP; he doesn’t fob off easily.

In 21 December 2012, Mr Perrett wrote to the AFP commissioner Tony Negus, requesting a formal investigation into what has become known as Ashbygate, though is probably more accurately referred to as Brough-and-his-handlersgate.

Negus himself did not put fingers to the reply keyboard, but delegated the task to Commander Errol Raiser, Manager Special References (whatever that is), who managed to summon the effort to knock out a reply on 14 February 2013. Presumably by dint of an efficient internal mail service, this letter was not received by Mr Perrett’s office until 27 February 2013.

Raiser’s muddled response got facts wrong, but the politics right. After incorrectly stating the matter was subject to appeal and confusing the date of Peter Slipper’s costs hearing against Ashby, Raiser concluded the AFP could not possibly even consider whether they might consider evaluating the matter until, say, oh, sometime after 1 June?

Raiser concluded:

‘You will be advised of the outcome of the evaluation in due course.’

In other words, piss off.

Despite having one or two things on his plate, on 19 March 2013, Mr Perrett prepared and forwarded a reply, probably not what the AFP wanted. This letter, although addressed to Mr Negus, is probably still on Commander Raiser’s desk covered in Baygon.

It’s worth a read.

Paragraph 27 of Mr Perrett’s letter is a beauty:

‘I also wish to take this opportunity to bring to your attention further compelling evidence which links the highest echelons of the Federal Opposition to the conspiracy to destroy Mr Slipper and bring down the federal government.’

Quite rightly, Mr Perrett expresses a fear the alleged players in this matter – Brough, Bishop, Pyne, McArdle, Doane, Abetz and others – will have oodles of time to trash every bit of evidence:

‘There are significant risks associated with any delay because of the possibility of the destruction of diaries, computer hard drives and any other incriminating documentation associated with the preparation and planning of the conspiracy.’

No response yet - the Commander is evaluating.

Meanwhile, the players play on.

Ashby’s got a nice little sign business in Beerwah and a patron providing an entrée to the local business groups. Doane’s gone to ground but, our sources say (!), has got a trick or two left up her sleeve. Meanwhile, Brough remains the LNP candidate for Fisher with the continuing support of Abbott.

No need to refresh your memory regarding the recent efforts of the rest of the crew.

Letter from Graham Perrett MP to AFP Commissioner Mr Tony Negus

9 March 2013

Mr Tony Negus

Commissioner

Australian Federal Police

GPO Box 401

CANBERRA ACT 2601

Dear Tony,

Re: Conspiracy against Peter Slipper and Potential Commission of Criminal Offences

1. I refer to a letter from Commander Errol Raiser dated 14th February 2013 received by my office on 26th February 2013 wherein the Australian Federal Police states that it will ‘suspend its evaluation of the matter’ until after the outcome of the appeal by Mr James Ashby’s lawyer Mr Michael Harmer ‘has been finalised’.

2. Commander Raiser advises that this evaluation of allegations that the Honourable Mal Brough {“Mr Brough”), the Honourable Christopher Pyne MP (“Mr Pyne”), the Honourable Julie Bishop MP (“Ms Bishop”), Queensland Minister the Honourable Mark McArdle (“Mr McArdle”) or Ms Karen Doane (“Ms Doane”) were engaged in a criminal conspiracy to destroy Peter Slipper and bring down the Federal Government, will at the very least be delayed until after the Leave to Appeal is heard by the Federal Court on the scheduled date of 30th May 2013.

3. In my submission, it is neither appropriate nor desirable for evaluation of the criminal allegations against Mr Brough and others to be unnecessarily delayed while this appeal is resolved. Not only because the full resolution of this matter could potentially be very lengthy, but primarily because the task to be undertaken by the Full Bench of the Federal Court is completely different from the work of the Australian Federal Police in investigating any criminal conduct arising from Mr Ashby’s now discredited allegations against Mr Slipper. Consequently it is therefore essential for the Australian Federal Police investigation to continue independently of the progression, or not, of the appeal proceedings.

4. At the time of writing I note that on 11th January 2013 Mr James Ashby’s lawyer Mr Scott Freidman of Harris Freidman lawyers applied for leave to appeal the judgement of Justice Rares. Furthermore, I note that on 14th January 2013, Mr Ashby’s former lawyer also filed an application for leave to appeal Justice Rares’ judgment but did so in his own right and without any instructions from Mr Ashby.

5. It is my understanding that the 30th May 2013 is actually the scheduled date for the costs hearing in the original Slipper matter (Federal Court reference: NSD580/2012) and that the Harmer and Ashby leave matters (Federal Court references: NSD22/2013 and NSD31/2013) are scheduled to be heard by the full federal court by their honours Mansfield, Siopis and Gilmore on the 2nd May 2013 and 3rd May 2013.

6. At the time of writing, the Federal Court Registry has not received any application from Mr Brough, Mr Pyne, Ms Bishop, Mr McArdle or Ms Doane seeking leave to appeal the judgement of Justice Rares.

7. As I detailed in my letter dated 20th December 2012, I sought an immediate investigation into whether Mr Brough, Mr Pyne, Ms Bishop, Mr McArdle, Mr Ashby and Ms Doane had committed criminal offences in relation to their participation in a political conspiracy designed to harm the Honourable Peter Slipper MP and the Federal Government, as laid out in the Federal Court decision dated 12th December 2012 by Justice Rares.

8. The Full Bench of the Federal Court will be asked to review the trial judgment and determine whether His Honour Justice Rares erred in finding that Mr Ashby’s allegations against Mr Slipper were brought for a collateral political purpose and not to ventilate any legitimate legal complaint. The Court will base its review on evidence and argument that was relied upon by the parties to the original claim, together with any new material that the parties may place before the Court. The appeal will be resolved as between the parties to the proceeding, Mr Slipper and Mr Ashby, and will determine their rights and liabilities according to principles of civil law.

9. As Mr Ashby is the only one of the aforementioned parties who has sought leave to appeal Justice Rares’ decision, I ask you to reconsider the decision by the Australian Federal Police to suspend evaluation of this very serious matter for at least several months. Moreover, in light of the seriousness of the findings of fact in Justice Rares’ December 2012 decision, there is an argument that the time for “evaluating” has long since passed and that in the interests of justice, investigations should now be advanced expeditiously.

10. I repeat the fact that in Justice Rares’ decision he reached a “firm conclusion” that the “predominant purpose” of Mr Ashby’s sexual harassment claim against Mr Slipper was to “pursue a political attack against Mr Slipper” designed to “tip the Government to Mal’s (Brough] and the LNP’s advantage”.

11. It is my submission to you that the role of the Australian Federal Police in investigating the criminal allegations which I raised with Commissioner Negus in December 2012 is completely different, and it is appropriate that this continue independently of the civil appeal.

12. The Australian Federal Police possesses investigative powers to inquire into the allegations I have raised and determine whether the individuals referred to in my correspondence, or anybody else, has committed any criminal offences. My referral relates to a much broader group of people than those involved in the civil proceedings currently before the Federal Court, and is supported by a much broader
range of evidence to that which will be considered by the Court as it conducts its appeal hearing. However, the Australian Federal Police will form a view about the lawfulness of the conduct of Mr Brough and others based on the principles of criminal law.

13. Nothing arising in the civil appeal can fetter the powers of the Australian Federal Police in identifying whether any criminal offences have been committed, and whether any such offences should be referred to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions for prosecution. As well, nothing arising in the Australian Federal Police investigation can possibly prejudice the conduct of the appeal before the Full Federal Court. In all these circumstances, it is neither appropriate nor desirable to postpone evaluation of the very serious criminal allegations contained within my referral, and the better course of conduct is to proceed immediately with evaluation of those criminal allegations.

14. Whilst I recognise the caution behind the Australian Federal Police’s decision to wait three months before you recommence your evaluations, I also wish to stress the pressing seriousness of this whole matter; the risks associated with any delay; and the benefits of your officers investigating in a timely manner.

SIGNIFICANCE OF INVESTIGATION

15. The conspiracy and accompanying behaviour towards Mr Slipper could constitute causing him harm in his capacity as a Commonwealth public official, contrary to s147.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (“the Criminal Code”) and all the aforementioned involved parties other than Mr Ashby may still be liable as either principals or accessories pursuant to Part 2.4 of the Criminal Code (Extension of criminal responsibility).

16. Mr Brough’s unauthorised access to Mr Slipper’s official diary might be classified as conduct classified as unauthorised access to restricted data contrary to s478.1 of the Criminal Code, and unauthorised disclosure of information by Commonwealth officers contrary to s70 ofthe Crimes Act 1914.

17. There are serious penalties attached to the abovementioned crimes. As Mr Pyne and Ms Bishop are serving members of parliament; Mr McArdle a Minister of the Crown in Queensland; and Mr Brough is currently a federa l candidate, any possible or potential criminality on their part is of especial significance and would have ramifications for the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth parliament and the makeup of the government of Queensland.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

18. I also refer to the additional information sent to my office by a member of the public and subsequently provided to the Australian Federal Police by my office via email regarding Mr Pyne’s suggested involvement in the conspiracy. The email referred to a Liberal-National Party fundraising event on the Sunshine Coast where the principal guest was the Leader of the Coalition in the Senate, Senator the Honourable Eric Abetz.

19. I note from Justice Rares decision that Mr Ashby engaged in an exchange of SMS messages with Ms Peta Simpson on 3rd February 2012, which indicates that Mr Ashby had agreed to the “deal” discussed with Mr McArdle. Ms Simpson is a senior Sunshine Coast member of the Liberal-National Party and a close associate of the Leader of the Coalition in the Senate, Senator the Honourable Eric Abetz.

20. Shortly after Mr Pyne’s meetings with Mr Ashby in late March 2012, on or around 4th April 2012, Senator the Hon. Eric Abetz, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, visited the Sunshine Coast and met with Ms Peta Simpson. Ms Simpson appears to have been in regular contact with Mr Ashby about the “deal” he had been offered by Liberal-National Party figures in exchange for bringing the sexual harassment claim against Mr Slipper.

21. Therefore, Mr Abetz’s role in the conspiracy, along with the aforementioned parties also should be investigated in a timely manner to determine whether any criminal offences have occurred, and to subsequently refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions, where appropriate.

RISKS OF DELAY

22. There are significant risks associated with any delay because of the possibility of the destruction of diaries, computer hard drives and any other incriminating documentation associated with the preparation and planning of the conspiracy.

23. In my submission, time is of the essence. Not only might delay lead to the destruction or disappearance of vital evidence it is important that the Australian Federal Police investigation is resolved prior to the September 14 Federal election. If Mr Brough, Mr Pyne or Ms Bishop are to be charged, this should announced well in advance of the election, to allow the Liberal National Party to consider their preselection and to allow the electors of their seats to cast a fully informed ballot. If Mr Brough, Mr Pyne or Ms Bishop are charged, and later convicted, of any offence punishable by more than 12 months imprisonment, they would be disqualified from sitting as a Member of the House of Representatives by operation of s 44(ii) of the Australian Constitution. It is essential that these possibilities are resolved prior to the election, in the interests of the electors of Fisher, Sturt and Curtin.

24. As there are less than six months until the scheduled date for the next federal election and both Mr Slipper and Mr Brough are candidates for the same federal seat, it is only fair that both the Australian public and the voters of Fisher know if there is likely to be any criminal charges brought against their candidates.

25. Furthermore, I am advised that Mr Brough has opened his campaign office only two doors away from Mr Slipper’s electorate office. This can only be interpreted by the voters of Fisher as a deliberate and provocative act by Mr Brough.

26. Furthermore, I am advised that local schools and community groups have not invited Mr Slipper to events in his electorate because he is under investigation. However, on the other hand, they have invited Mr Brough to local events because he is a candidate. Any delay in resolving the investigation into the conspiracy only further hampers Mr Sl ipper’s ability to represent his electorate and fairly present his bona fides to the electorate of Fisher on the 14th September 2013.

27. Justice would dictate that the names of both candidates for the next election must be investigated and cleared, in a timely manner.

28. I also wish to take this opportunity to bring to your attention further compelling evidence which links the highest echelons of the Federal Coa lition to the conspiracy to destroy Mr Sl ipper and bring down the Federal Government. In my original correspondence to Commissioner Negus, I noted that it was possible the “Murray” referred to repeatedly in text messages between Mr Ashby and Ms Doane was in fact Mr Murray Hansen, long-time Chief of Staff to Julie Bishop, Deputy Leader of the Opposition. In that correspondence, I noted that Mr Hansen had well established links with the Sunshine Coast, and was rumored to be friends with Peta Simpson, the Sunshine Coast Liberal and National Party Branch Member and former Liberal and National Party pre-selection candidate for the Federal Seat of Fisher.

29. Is there any evidence in the mainstream or social media which supports or establishes any links or friendship between Mr Hansen and Ms Simpson? You will recall that Ms Simpson was apparently central in negotiating the “deal” that Mr Ashby and Ms Doane would be offered by the Liberal and National Party to participate in the conspiracy against Mr Slipper. Mr Hansen has had a long-time role as an adviser to the Federal Coalition and has well established links with the Sunshine Coast and South East Queensland. In my opinion, the Australian Federal Police should concentrate investigations to determine whether the “Murray” referred to by Mr Ashby and Ms Doane as an avenue to employment with the Federal Coalition as part of the “deal” offered to them to participate in the conspiracy to bring down the Government, was in fact Mr Murray Hansen. 

CONCLUSION

30. In the interests of efficiency, timeliness and thoroughness it would be strategic to commence investigations into Mr Pyne, Ms Bishop, Mr McArdle, Mr Abetz, Ms Simpson and Mr Brough, while at the same time leaving aside Mr Ashby’s role in the matter until after the Federal Court has made a decision as to whether his leave to appeal will be granted.

31. Consequently, I again ask the Australian Federal Police to urgently conduct a formal investigation to determine whether Mr Brough, Ms Bishop, Mr Pyne, Mr McArdle, Ms Doane, Eric Abetz, and/or any others, have committed any criminal offences. I ask the Australian Federal Police to prepare a Brief of Evidence for referral to the Director of Public Prosecutions {DPP), if appropriate.

32. I would urge the Australian Federal Police to proceed with its investigation immediately, especially given the risk of disappearance of vital evidence and relevance to the choice faced by electors in Fisher, Sturt and Curtin at the imminent Federal Election.

33. Undoubtedly, because of the political nature of this case, there has been significant media and public interest in the Australian Federal Police’s handling of this case.

Whilst I only seek justice in this matter, I am also very well aware that I write to you as member of the Federal Parliamentary Labor Party Caucus at a time of highly charged political circumstances whilst there is a minority government. Nevertheless, I will continue to make our correspondence available to the public and the media, unless you request otherwise with good reason. However, I also give an undertaking
to not reveal the names of any individual Australian Federal Police officers who progress this matter. I assume that they too would not wish to be harangued and harassed by members of the public and media who are interested in the progress of this important investigation.

Thank you once again for taking the time to investigate this very serious matter.

Yours sincerely,

Graham Perrett MP

Federal Member for Moreton

CC Commander Errol Raiser

Manager Special References

GPO Box 401

CANBERRA CITY ACT 2601

Graham Perrett Pushes Indolent AFP Over Ashbygate