Member of the Australian Directors
Guild board
PO Box 211
Rozelle
NSW 2039
Australia
21st Nov 2016
Dear Samantha Lang, Ray Argall, Nadia
Tass, Michela Ledwidge, Jennifer Peedom, Stephen Wallace, Jonathan Brough and
Jeffrey Walker
Four and a half years ago, in May 2012,
when Ruth Harley imposed her ban on me, the ADG could have asked her and the Screen
Australia board, whose members (including Rachel Perkins and Claudia Karvan) ratified the ban, a simple question:
"Could you please
provide the ADG with evidence that James intimidated, harassed and placed at
risk members of SA staff?"
Such a request, in either an email or
letter, would have taken a few minutes to compose.
Ruth Harley could have either
provided such evidence (if it existed) or found whatever face-saving way she
needed to lift the ban immediately if no such evidence existed. If the evidence
existed and was made publically available (as it should be) the ban on me would
have been perfectly justified. Intimidating staff at Screen Australia, placing
them at risk, is deserving of a ban.
Alternatively, if the ADG felt that it
could not ask such a question of Ruth Harley because I was not a member, why
did the ADG not, at the very least, mention the ban in the ADG newsletter? Surely
Screen Australia’s ban on one of the founding members of the ADG must have been
news!
As long as three years after the ban
was implemented I kept meeting filmmaker members of the ADG who had no idea of
the ban placed on me.
Why did the ADG decide to keep its
members in the dark in 2012? And 2014, 2014, 2015, 2016?
When the ADG magazine “Screen Director”
twice refused to publish articles by me that were critical of Screen Australia
and the ADG’s own policy relating to quotas for women directors it was suggested
to me that my opinion pieces could not be published because I was not a member
of the ADG!
I responded with (I am paraphrasing):
“If I join the ADG will you
publish my opinion pieces?”
I received no response. The ADG made
clear with its silence that it did not want me to be a member of the
organization. Or, to out it another way, that you did not want me to be a
member if I was going to be critical of either Screen Australia or ADG policy.
Try and see this from my perspective:
What point would there be in my joining
an organization that refuses to even mention, in its newsletter, that a fellow
director has been banned by Screen Australia from either making development
applications or even speaking on the telephone with members of SA staff?
Why would I want to join an
organization that refuses to publish, in Screen Director, an article critical
of Screen Australia? Or an article critical of the ADG's decision the support
quotas for women directors? Why would I wish to join an organization that sees
maintaining a good relationship with one of its major funders (Screen
Australia) as being more important than supporting a filmmaker in his or her
battle with this same funder? The ADG was formed, in part, to fight battles of
the kind that I have had to fight alone this past four and a half years.
As matters stand Screen Australia’s
ban (54 months to date) must, of
necessity, be a lifetime ban since one of the conditions of the ban being
lifted is that I cease in my continued requests (characterized as harassment)
for evidence that I ever once, prior to May 2012, harassed, intimidated or
placed at risk members of Screen Australia’s staff with my correspondence.
Through the ADG’s silence you have,
as board members, given Screen Australia your tacit approval of not just the
ban placed on me but the very concept of banning filmmakers who criticize the
organization. You have legitimized both the ban and the notion that such bans
are necessary. And because the ADG never asked for any evidence of my guilt,
Screen Australia could ban another filmmaker without evidence and feel secure
that the ADG would not utter a peep in protest. Is it any wonder that other
filmmakers I know, who are as critical as I am about Screen Australia, prefer
to keep their mouths shut; their opinions to themselves!?
You are all filmmakers and so know
full well that a ban such as Screen Australia's is the kiss of death
to a fellow filmmaker. You have maintained your silence for four and a half
years. Will the ADG maintain its silence into 2017 or might the ADG, at this
very late stage, have the courage to ask Graeme Mason and the SA board to
provide it with evidence of the offended that have led to the destruction of my
career as an Australian filmmaker.
I have set in motion the wheels
necessary to force Screen Australia, in the Supreme Court, to produce the
evidence upon which it justified the ban on me and continues to justify it to
this day. This has already proved to be a very time-consuming and expensive
exercise.
Again, I ask the question:
“If I were to become a
member, would the ADG, at the very least, ask Screen Australia for evidence in
support of the ongoing 2 year bans placed on me?”
If Screen Australia were to produce
such evidence a great deal of time, effort and money could be saved by a lot of
people. And if such evidence exists and is made public the damage to my
reputation would be well deserved and my continued insistence that I am not
guilty as charged would be seen as gross hypocrisy.
best wishes
James Ricketon
No comments:
Post a Comment