Wednesday, April 4, 2012

leter from Ruth Harley

3rd April 2012

Dear Mr Ricketson

It has come to my attention that quite apart from the substantial volume of correspondence you have sent to this organization containing serious accusations against members of our staff, you have seen fit to publish similarly damaging material to various other people, including the Prime Minister and the world at large through the internet.

We are an organization with limited resources serving the Australian film community in good faith. I appreciate that you have had some concerns about our decision making process and we have repeatedly, over many months, endeavoured to answer those concerns. We will not engage in any further correspondence about those issues.

Your decision to publish your most recent correspondence on the internet  was, seemingly, calculated to create the maximum potential for personal distress and reputational damage. You may wish to seek legal advice as to the consequences of such conduct, and in particular, the consequences of making public and damaging allegations which I believe to be totally untrue. In the interests of all concerned, I ask that you cease that conduct forthwith.

Yours faithfully
Ruth Harley
Chief Executive Officer

1 comment:

  1. James

    I happened upon your blog the other day and ended up reading the lot, good on you for your relentlessness.

    The issue of lack of answerability of the bureaucrats involved whilst spending tax-payers money and flapping around the country yapping about a film industry that doesn’t really exist (specifically as an industry) is not acceptable and does need addressing (it is very much the emperors new clothes). It seems that the ATO is under review for abuse of their powers so if that can happen you have every chance getting somewhere with the issues large and small that you are raising. Of course as practically all funding has to come through SA you may be a bit of a lone voice as no-one would want to shoot his/her next project in the foot.

    I also appreciated your evaluation of SA’s criteria (apparently for everything) which requires virtually impossible sets of ticked boxes, and of course the constant invalidating of the importance of storytelling.