Please explain: liars with their pants on fire

It’s become part of the Australian vernacular, these words of the One Nation founder and xenophobe, Pauline Hanson. “Please explain”, the catch cry that irritated an entire parliament and Australian public may have seemed ill founded, but certainly made many a person think.

Now, in the words of that infamous personality, I am calling upon Ernst & Young to please explain this:

On 9 May 2002, the day after Pat was appointed ACT Commissioner for Revenue (a promotion from Manager Policy, Legislation and Projects), the Inquisitor wrote a letter to Howard Ronaldson, then Chief Executive of ACT Treasury stating that:

Inquisitor to Ronaldson, 9 May 2002

Ms. Louise Fitzgerald, Manager Corporate Services has given me a copy of [Pat’s] application for his substantive position of Manager Policy, Legislation and Projects, Revenue Management Branch. I have attached a copy of [Pat’s] applications for your information. [Pat’s] attached application clearly shows that he has limited Public Sector experience and holds unrelated qualifications, being a Bachelor of Arts Degree and a Diploma in Education.

Morphett Letter, 18 December 2003

On 18 December 2003, the Inquisitor contacted Ernst and Young via Gillian Morphett to obtain access to the ACT’s former Commissioner for Revenue’s (aka ‘Pat’) personnel file.In doing so, documents allegedly held by Ernst & Young pertaining to Pat’s academic qualifications were handed over to the Inquisitor, which then formed the basis for a public interest disclosure (PID) lodged against Pat with the ACT Department of Treasury. There were several problems with these documents, beginning with the fact that Pat had in fact been head-hunted in mid 2000 by Ernst & Young’s own recruitment consultant Tanya Taylor, who having failed to source a suitable applicant for the role after advertising locally, had requested Pat to apply for the position. Pat was not required to submit a curriculum vitae nor copies of his qualifications.

The PID lodged by the Inquisitor in the last week of December 2003 after he had used ACT letterhead to illegally access private information about his superior, contained copies of what were allegedly falsified academic transcripts in Pat’s name for degrees in finance, economics and law from the University of London. According to the Inquisitor, the University of London had no record of an Australian graduate with Pat’s name.

In April of 2004, Mr. Glen Gaskell, Executive Director ACT Department of Treasury advised Pat that he had forwarded to the then ACT Government Solicitor Phillip Mitchell, the letter written by the Inquisitor on 9 May 2002, in which Pat’s qualifications were first mentioned. Despite this, the ACT Government proceeded with a racially motivated prosecution against the ACT’s most senior Indigenous employee and Treasury’s only, with the assistance of Ernst & Young and the Australian Federal Police.

In December of 2005, Pat and a female companion, Ms King, who just happened to be Australia’s most senior female Indigenous banking executive (and remains so), were assaulted by the Inquisitor whilst lunching at the Waldorf Café in the heart of the ACT public service precinct in Akuna Street. The attack on Ms. King was indecent, but despite the obvious injuries to both Pat and Ms. King and the statements of several independent witnesses, the Australian Federal Police (AFP) refused not only to take the complaints of these Indigenous victims, but threatened to charge them if they did not leave the Police premises. The vitriol expounded by the Inquisitor during his assault included the following statement:

… “I told you I would get you, you useless boong cunt” […] assailant then made certain statements about changing documents at Ernst & Young with the assistance of Tanya Taylor […].

In court proceedings of 2006, Canberra Ernst & Young partner Andrew McCrossin stated under cross examination by Pat’s defence that he had sighted the University of London qualifications alluded to in the PID submitted by the Inquisitor in December 2003. Yet, the letter of intent cited above and signed by Andrew McCrossin in 2000, specifically states that Pat’s starting wage would be curtailed due to his lack of qualifications in law or accounting. Pat did indeed commence on the stated wage of $78,000. The point must be made that if Pat had held or had presented qualifications in law and or accounting at the time the letter of intent from Ernst & Young was written, his starting wage would have been considerably higher. Notably, Pat’s wage was not increased to $90,000 after the December 2000 review projected in the letter and he left Ernst & Young on the same income at which he commenced.

As Andrew McCrossin’s memory seems to have embellished somewhat on the facts whilst in the stand in court, differing significantly from what was apparently on file with Ernst & Young on 9 May of 2002, perhaps Jonathan Doy should be asked to assist in clarifying the facts of these matters.

What do you think, Rob McLeod? Was the Inquisitor acting alone in a racist attack on Pat? The letter cited above suggests otherwise. But then, if Ernst & Young can sack Mr. Cathal Lyons and Mr. James Mandel for exposing corruption in the Russian offices, perhaps this is simply just further evidence of a corporately corrupt accounting practice that holds at its heart the value of corporate expansion and greed at any cost, even that of a racist, misogynistic Inquisitor.

How about you, Katy Gallagher? Ah, but the ACT Government has covered up so much of the evidence and if you have failed to act upon the document that has apparently reappeared in ACT Treasury in the not so distant past that should have been grounds for reopening Pat’s case, then you are no better than Ernst & Young.

And you Tony Negus? As the head of the organization charged with protecting and upholding the law both within the Territory and the Commonwealth, how is it that a proper investigation has never been conducted? Have you seen the new evidence? If not, why not? Go ask Katy!

The timeline above must make you all think. The time period of the change in Pat’s resume is a very narrow 19 months between May 2002 and December 2003. How could this have been missed by all of the institutions involved? It is nothing less than corruption, cronyism and racism and I and the readers of Blak and Black are calling for it to be exposed. Give Pat and his family the justice they so deserve.