DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY SERVICES AND ABORIGINAL AND ISLANDER AFFAIRS
- Throughout the life of the Heiner Affair, certain DFSAIA public officials, by weight of evidence, appear to have assiduously corrupted due process and abused their public office for their own purposes and that of the Executive Government of Queensland to obstruct known rights of citizens and abused children, and then to engage in a concerted cover up. That such prima facie corrupt conduct should have gone unchecked for so long means that it could not have existed or survived without systemic corruption being present, with its ultimate patronage residing in the Executive branch of the Queensland Government while being assisted in that enterprise by the Office of Crown Law and other Crown agencies;
- That other core elements showing suspected abuse of office by certain DFSAIA public officials have been set out in my earlier Petition, tabled in the Queensland Parliament by the Independent Member for Gladstone Mrs Liz Cunningham MLA on 17 November 1995 (Notice of Business No 565), in which I sought leave to appear before the Bar of Parliament. While not seeking to limit the comprehensiveness of this Petition, Honourable Members may wish to read both in conjunction to better appreciate the unfolding landscape of this matter since November 1995;
- That on 2 January 1990 DFSAIA Acting Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett was made aware by Deputy Director-General Mr Ian Peers that a departmental file existed containing the Heiner Inquiry Terms of Reference and the original (Heiner Inquiry) complaints against Mr Coyne's management (including a complaint on matters of suspected child abuse) and yet she wilfully misled to him (Mr Coyne) about their alleged non-existence on 17 January, 16 February, and 22 May 1990 thereby obstructing his legal rights;
- That on 16 February and 19 March 1990 DFSAIA Director-General Ms Matchett misled Mr Coyne and his solicitor into falsely believing that the Government's position regarding access to (a) parts of the Heiner Inquiry transcripts relating to Mr Coyne; and (b) the original complaints, was "interim" and that once final Crown Law advice was received, they would be informed. Through the agency of that official assurance based on deceit and abuse of office, the service of the Writ was forestalled until all the evidence had been secretly destroyed;
- That on 14 February 1990, Mr Coyne's solicitor, acting on his client's instruction, phoned Mr Trevor Walsh, DFSAIA Executive Officer to Ms Ruth Matchett, and told him not to destroy anything pertaining to Mr Coyne legal claim on relevant documents [ie (i) parts of the Heiner Inquiry transcripts relating to Mr Coyne; and (ii) the original complaints]. Mr Walsh recorded this unequivocal notice of impending court proceedings conveyed in their phone conversation in his memorandum written on the same day: In part it said:
"Mr Berry made it quite clear that there is still an intention to proceed to attempt to gain access to the Heiner documents and any departmental documents relating to the allegations against Mr Coyne and that they have every intention to pursue the matter through the courts."
- That on 15 February 1990 Mr Coyne's solicitor put in writing to DFSAIA Acting Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett confirmation of having served due notice on the Crown of impending court proceedings in which the Heiner Inquiry documents (and original complaints) were the central item of evidence said over the phone on the previous day;
- That on 23 February 1990 a meeting was held between DFSAIA Acting Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett and myself (witnessed by DFSAIA Senior Industrial Relations Officer Ms Sue Crook) at which Mr Coyne's impending court proceedings were discussed. It concerned access to (i) parts of the Heiner Inquiry transcripts relating to Mr Coyne; and (ii) the original complaints. Ms Matchett did not (a) express any ignorance of the court proceedings under discussion; (b) say that she already had "final" advice (ie 23 January 1990) that the Heiner Inquiry documents could be shredded "…providing no legal action had commenced requiring the production of the material"; and (c) say that the documents under active discuss for court action were, on that same day, with the State Archivist from the Cabinet Secretariat seeking her urgent approval to be destroyed on the (known false) pretext that they "…weren't required or pertinent to the public record." She assured me that the documents were safe with the Office of Crown Law, and that she was still waiting for advice;
- That knowledge of Cabinet's decision to shred the Heiner Inquiry documents was withheld from Mr Coyne, his solicitors and unions by DFSAIA Acting Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett up to and until it was too late for those interested parties to seek injunctive relief to preserve the evidence so that justice could be served;
- That on 18 April 1990 DFSAIA Acting Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett was advised by Crown Law that Mr Coyne did enjoy a legal right to access the original complaints pursuant to Public Service Management and Employment Regulation 65 but with intent obstructed his rights by failing to tell him or his solicitors immediately (or ever) that the Crown had acknowledged his claim was correct according to law;
- That on 8 May 1990 DFSAIA Acting Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett and her Principal Liaison Officer Mr Donald A C Smith sought assistance from the Office of Crown Law to avoid complying with Mr Coyne's legal rights as set out in earlier advice of 18 April 1990; and that on 18 May 1990, Crown Law provided advice "…in line with your instructions…" in accordance with Ms Matchett's "…expressed intention" (and attached draft letters) assisting in the unlawful disposal of the original complaints. Crown Law advised that before the records were disposed of, approval from the State Archivist was required;
- That in providing its advice of 18 May 1990, the Office of Crown Law knew, by having seen the complaints, that they contained unresolved evidence of suspected child abuse from an "unsigned" JOYC Youth Worker (See Point 19), and knew that (a) Mr Coyne had a legal right of access; (b) Mr Coyne was seeking to exercise his right of access from as early as 8 February 1990; (c) the records were required for court; and (d) the law required such misconductevident "on the papers" of maltreatment of children to be reported to the CJC or police for examination;
- That on 22 May 1990, DFSAIA Acting Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett altered the wording of the draft letters supplied by the Office of Crown Law (to be sent to the parties concerned) to eliminate Crown Law's acknowledgement contained in them that Public Service Management and Employment Regulation 65 had applicability, and sent letters to Mr Coyne, his solicitors and other parties falsifying that no records being sought by them remained in the Government's possession and control, when in fact she knew that she still possessed photocopies of the original complaints which had been returned to her by the Office of Crown Law attached to the advice of 18 April 1990;
- That on 22 May 1990, in specific contravention of what the law demanded as stated in Crown Law advice to her, DFSAIA Acting Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett unlawfully disposed of the original complaints (defined as "public records" under section 5(2) of the Libraries and Archives Act 1988) without prior approval from the State Archivist [required under section 55(1) of the Libraries and Archives Act 1988]. She unlawfully returned them to Ms Janine Walker, Industrial Services Director of the Queensland State Services Union. In so doing, she acted contrary to her legal obligations and obstructed justice for Mr Coyne and the abused children concerned, and may have engaged in suspected official misconduct;
- That on 23 May 1990 DFSAIA Principal Liaison Officer Mr Donald A C Smith unlawfully shredded the photocopies (defined as "public records" under section 5(2) of the Libraries and Archives Act 1988) without prior approval from the State Archivist [required under section 55(1) of the Libraries and Archives Act 1988]. Afterwards he recorded his unlawful act by personal notation on the DFSAIA/Crown Solicitor's advice of 18 April 1990, by which act he obstructed justice for Mr Coyne and the abused children concerned;
- That on 1 November 1990 at a confidential meeting between Ms Ruth Matchett and Mr Coyne (witnessed and recorded by senior DFSAIA public official Mr Leigh Carpenter), Mr Coyne discussed his concerns about staff putting their complaints to Mr Heiner about the handcuffing children at the Centre. In the memorandum it recorded that "…Ms Matchett stated that no one had suggested that he had done anything wrong"; (Note Point 26)
- That on 10 January 1991 a meeting occurred between certain senior DFSAIA public officials and certain QPOA officials who threatened to take the department to the CJC over the "entire saga of the John Oxley Youth Centre" unless money was paid to Mr Coyne (to which there was no legal entitlement and/or basis for claim). After the threat was made, DFSAIA Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett and senior DFSAIA officials (together with certain QPOA officials) concocted an ex gratia/special payment in the sum of $27,190.00 to be paid over and above Mr Coyne's normal retrenchment entitlements. It was known that the CJC's jurisdiction under the Criminal Justice Act 1989 pertained solely to matters of suspected official misconduct and corruption, not industrial dispute matters, and therefore, [under then section 2.28 of the Criminal Justice Act 1989] whatever "suspected official misconduct" the QPOA officials had in mind, it should have been reported immediately to the CJC by Ms Ruth Matchett as the Principal Officer of "a unit of public administration" instead of concealing it through a prima facie extortion exercise against taxpayers' money;
- That on 7 February 1991 then DFSAIA Minister the Hon Anne Warner MLA authorised the payment of $27,190.00 in breach of the Financial Administration and Audit Act 1977 being outside her known spending-limit entitlement;
- That payment was entered into when DFSAIA Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett's state of knowledge consisted of (a) DFSAIA had obstructed Mr Coyne's rights through the shredding, thereby preventing access to (i) the Heiner Inquiry documents; (ii) the original complaints; (iii) photocopies of the original complaints; and (b) believing that Mr Coyne had unlawfully and/or inappropriately maltreated (handcuffed and isolated) children in the care of the State for excessive periods (notwithstanding whatever defences Mr Coyne may have for such suspected illegal conduct) [See Point 26] and removing him from the Centre; and (c) her decision not to reappoint him to the position of Centre manager;
- That, together with the Office of Crown Law and DFSAIA Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett (both possessing awareness of (a) and (b) above), the Crown Deed of Settlement terms were settled on 12 February 1991. It stated that as a condition of being paid public money it would be agreed (amongst other things) between the parties (the State of Queensland and Mr Coyne) that:
"…2. The Claimant (Mr Coyne) will not canvass the issues surrounding his relocation from John Oxley Youth Centre, Wacol to Brisbane or the events leading up to and surrounding his relocation with any officer of the Department of Family Services and Aboriginal and Islander Affairs or in the press or otherwise in public and will forbear to take any action in any forum whatsoever which may have jurisdiction in respect of any of such issues and events;
3. The terms of this Agreement will not be disclosed by either party without written consent of the other first being obtained;
…5. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing provisions the Claimant shall not permit or allow the events leading up to and surrounding his relocation to Brisbane to be the subject of any autobiography, biography or any published article. (Underlining added)
- That the aforesaid Deed of Settlement was signed on 12 February 1991 on behalf of the State of Queensland by DFSAIA Director-General Ms Ruth L Matchett; the Claimant Mr Peter Coyne; and witnessed by DFSAIA Director of Finance and Organisational Services Mr Gary Clarke;
- That on 8 May 1991 DFSAIA Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett, with concurrence of DFSAIA Minister the Hon Anne Warner MLA wrote to the Crown Solicitor indicating that the circumstances surrounding my dismissal (which included my handling of the "Coyne case" [ie the Heiner Inquiry, the shredding and related matters]) were to come under investigation by the Cooke Commission of Inquiry into the Activities of Certain Queensland Unions. Both she and her Minister, were seeking representation "…at an early stage in any proceedings" and it (their legal representation) "…be briefed out to a private solicitor and the private bar" to an experienced Queen's Counsel. In so seeking representation away from Crown Law, Ms Ruth Matchett knew (but Crown Law didn't) that she had wilfully acted contrary to Crown Law instructions on 22 and 23 May 1990 by disposing of the original complaints (and photocopies) without first obtaining approval from the State Archivist pursuant to section 55(1) of the Libraries and Archives Act 1988 whose breach was still within the statute of limitations until 22 and 23 May 1991 respectively;
- That on 9 May 1991 the Crown Solicitor advised DFSAIA Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett (and Minister the Hon Anne Warner MLA) that while he had "…no objection" to representation for them by a private solicitor and counsel at the private bar, DFSAIA Minister the Hon Anne Warner MLA may need (a) to make a submission to Cabinet on the subject; (b) first talk with her colleague Queensland Attorney-General the Hon Dean Wells MLA; but (c) that if any party was found to have engaged in illegal conduct, Crown funding would be withdrawn by precedent. Within days, the Goss Government refused further funding to the Cooke Inquiry preventing it from fully examining the circumstances surrounding my dismissal and before either Ms Ruth Matchett or Minister the Hon Anne Warner MLA could be called to the witness box by either counsel for the Inquiry, or my counsel to be cross-examined over the shredding and related matters;
- That on 30 November 1992 DFSAIA Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett withheld important evidence of Mr Coyne's legal action in her response to the CJC concerning the legality payment of $27,190.00 in spite of and after her Principal Liaison Officer Mr Donald A C Smith had assured Crown Law Legal Officer Mr John Tate on 25 November 1992 that it would be mentioned in her
- That on 18 May 1993, in a statement responding to a Question on Notice from then Deputy Opposition Leader the Hon Kevin R Lingard MLA on the circumstances surrounding the shredding, then DFSAIA Minister the Hon Anne Warner MLA misled Parliament by withholding relevant facts;
- That on 12 October 1994, after the Queensland Police Service had interviewed me on three separate occasions on the alleged criminality surrounding the Heiner Inquiry documents shredding, then DFSAIA Minister the Hon Anne Warner MLA, DFSAIA Director-General Ms Matchett and her Executive team met at departmental facility "Yungaba" [Kangaroo Point, Brisbane] and discussed containing strategies on "Issues Politically Damaging" which inter alia included "Heiner/Coyne/Lindenberg [sic];"
- That, in absence of any contrary evidence, DFSAIA Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett, DFSAIA Freedom of Information (FOI) Manager Ms Sue Horton and other public officials attached to the DFSAIA/FOI Division, did not object to Mr Donald A C Smith conducting the internal review process under the Freedom of Information Act 1992 (Qld) on my June 1994 FOI application in December 1994, while knowing that he had a conflict of interest in the matter when deciding to withhold relevant public records from me;
- That in late-1994/early-1995 DFSAIA Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett approved of at least one visit to her Department by Mr Michael Barnes, CJC Chief Complaints Officer, and gave him access to the "Heiner Documents" files held under the control of Ms Carmel Finn DFSAIA Director of Information Management; and that his visit/s remained undisclosed until 12 March 1999 when Mr Barnes was obliged, by unexpected and unavoidable circumstances over more than four years later, to admit to FOI Commissioner Fred Albietz that a visit/s occurred before he gave evidence to the Senate Select Committee on Unresolved Whistleblower Cases. During his visit/s, Mr Barnes read "…memoranda between Ms Matchett and Minister Warner…" which, according to him, inculpated all members of State Cabinet in criminal conduct (applying legal argument used by Messrs Morris QC and Howard). While being lawfully bound to act impartially [pursuant to section 22 of the Criminal Justice Act 1989], Mr Barnes purportedly saw nothing "on the papers" to cause him any concern about the existence of suspected official misconduct associated with the shredding; but during his undisclosed visit/s he did become aware of the unresolved child abuse on the files. Mr Barnes refused to act on the maltreatment of children held in the care of the Crown claiming that the incidents were more than two years old. (See The Courier-Mail 24 August 1999 Letters to the Editor). The CJC withheld its knowledge of child abuse from the Australian Senate in 1995 and 1996, and the Connolly/Ryan Judicial Review into the Effectiveness of the CJC in 1997, and only acknowledged its true state of knowledge following an article written by journalist Mr Bruce Grundy in The Courier-Mail on 18 August 1999;
- That in mid-May 1996, some 18 months after Mr Barnes had inspected the same material, barristers Messrs Morris QC and Howard had this to say concerning the impact the evidence "on the papers" had on them when conducting their examination of the files. At page 19 of their Report its says:
"…At a particular stage in the course of our investigations, it became apparent to us that there appeared to be considerable substance in Mr Lindeberg's allegations, particularly as regards the destruction of the Heiner documents. When we examined this aspect of the matter more closely, we formed the view that - for reasons now set out in Part II of this Report - substantial grounds exist for suspecting that serious criminal offences were committed in connection with the destruction of the Heiner documentations.."
- That during hearings by the Senate Select Committee on Unresolved Whistleblower Cases in 1995 on the Heiner shredding matter, DFSAIA Director-General Ms Ruth Matchett (on behalf of or under the instructions of the Goss Government): (a) withheld certain [incriminating] Crown Solicitor'sadvices of 18 April and 18 May 1990 relevant to the Senate Committee's commission; and (b) tampered with Document 13 [sent to the Senate on 31 July 1995] by not providing the document intact along with attachments pertaining to the handcuffing incident of 26 September 1989 (which had the effect and/or intent of scapegoating and publicly discrediting Mr Coyne) when the entire document showed that he was informing his immediate DFSAIA superior officer Mr Ian Peers and still enjoying his confidence;
- That on 29 October 1996 DFSAIA public officials Messrs Donald A C Smith, Trevor Walsh and Gary Clarke (all facing possible criminal charges flowing out of the findings of the Morris/Howard Report) wrote to then Department of Families, Youth and Community Care (DFYCC) Director-General The Revd Allan C Male seeking an interview with "…an independent person" in the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions so that "…some of the areas raised may well be able to be resolved very simply which may result in saving certain costs associated with an inquiry"; and that on 22 November 1996, a copy of that letter and a departmental memorandum prepared by Ms Carmel Finn, DFSAIA Director of the Information Services Division, commenting on the Morris/Howard Report findings, were sent to Mr Royce Miller QC, DPP, by Revd Male;
- That on 28 December 1998, a 16 year-old aboriginal boy Mr Bobbie Yarrie committed suicide around midnight on a hanging point in his Lawson House cell at the Centre. The hanging points had been identified as an area of improvement in the building design to the Heiner Inquiry by JOYC staff but were ignored after the Inquiry's closure and the shredding by those in authority for nearly a decade until the boy's death. The same boy, who was known to be troubled with a suicide ideation, had attempted suicide by hanging before at the Centre. He had been previously orally raped by older inmates while a detainee at the Centre as reported by a former Youth Worker on Nine Network's Sunday programme screened nationwide on 28 March 1999 "Neglect and Cover Ups" as a follow up to "Queensland's Secret Shame."
