Janes Supit
Head of Legal
Screen Australia
Level 7, 45 Jones St
Ultimo 2007
11th Jan 2017
Dear Ms Supit
I am writing in relation
to two matters:
(1) Screen Australia’s
refusal to allow members of SA staff to meet with me
and
(2) Screen Australia’s
refusal to accept Freedom of Information requests from myself
(1) On 16
November 2012, six months after Screen Australia’s first ban was placed on me,
Ruth Harley wrote the following to me regarding the Producer Offset:
[in relation to] the Producer
Offset, which is administered by Screen Australia as the film authority under
the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997[…] subject to the usual requirements of the
producer offset legislation and associated rules, Screen Australia will accept
producer offset applications lodged by companies owned, managed or otherwise
associated with you and will determine any such application in accordance with
law.
Could you please
explain to me how, in practical terms, I and my creative collaborators can
apply for the Producer’s Offset without meeting members of Screen Australia’s
staff? Such a meeting is, as you know, not possible as a result of the ban on
me. Indeed, Screen Australia staff are not allowed to even speak with me on the
telephone or communicate with me via mail or email.
On 2nd
Dec Kent Purvis, of the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office, indicated to me in a
letter (copy enclosed) the reasons presented to him by Screen Australia as to
why meetings between myself and SA staff cannot occur. In a nutshell it is that
meeting with me would place SA staff at some kind of risk. The nature of the
risk is unspecified.
In my letter to
Chief Executive, Graeme Mason of 16th Dec 2016 (copy enclosed) I
asked if Kent Purvis’ letter accurately reflected Screen Australia’s position
vis a vis my meeting with members of Screen Australia staff. Graeme has not
responded to my letter. I will ask you the same question, Jane:
“Does Kent Purvis’ letter accurately
reflected Screen Australia’s position vis a vis my meeting with members of
Screen Australia staff?”
If so, what is
the nature of the risk I pose? And what evidence does Screen Australia have
that I pose such a risk? Can you direct me to any one instance when I have
posed a risk to SA staff either in a meeting or any other context?
I have been
asking this question for close to five years now. I have been likewise asking
what the expression ‘place at risk’ even means in legal terms. Screen Australia
refuses to provide an answer. I recently asked a Barrister what the expression
‘place at risk’ means in legal terms. He shook his head and said, “I have no
idea.” He further indicated that the only way to find out, given Screen
Australia’s refusal to tell me, was by taking legal action.
(2) Chief Executive Graeme
Mason’s declaration that FOI requests from myself will not be processed. Screen
Australia’s FOI Officer, acting on Graeme’s instructions, refuses to accept FOI
applications. My most recent such request was made on 6th Jan 2017.
There has been no acknowledgment of receipt of this request.
As Screen Australia’s senior Legal Officer could
you please direct me to the section of the Freedom of Information Act which
provides Screen Australia with a legal reason to refuse FOI requests from
myself?
Just as I insisted back in 2012 that I have
never once intimidated or placed at risk a member of Screen Australia’s staff I
now insist that I did not, at any time between May 2014 and May 2016, include
anything in my correspondence with Screen Australia that was sufficiently
unreasonable to incur a third two year ban; a ban that prevents me from
accessing the Producer Offset and hence makes it virtually impossible for me to
make films of any kind in Australia.
That Ruth Harley and Fiona Cameron decided, back
in 2012, to wreak such havoc in my professional life, based on a lie, was bad
enough. That Screen Australia, in Jan 2017, continues to refuse to present me
with any evidence in support of the need for a ban (supported by the SA board) and
would deny me access to the Producer Offset is unconscionable.
I trust, Ms Supit, that you will not ignore
this letter; that you will do me the professional courtesy of answering my
questions and (a) instructing Screen Australia’s FOI Officer to accede to my
most recent FOI request and (b) providing me with instances of such
‘unreasonableness’ on my part as to warrant the termination of my career as an
Australian filmmaker.
best wishes
James Ricketson
Jane Supit
Head of Legal
Screen Australia
30th Jan 2017
Dear Ms Supit
I have received
no response to my letter of 11th Jan. I refer to the following
question:
“Could
you please explain to me how, in practical terms, I and my creative
collaborators can apply for the Producer’s Offset without meeting members of
Screen Australia’s staff?”
Your lack of an
answer to this question is hardly surprising as you know full well there is no
way that I (and my filmmaking colleagues) can access the Producer Offset
without meeting with members of Screen Australia staff. Given that I am banned
from meeting staff members it follows that I cannot access the Producer
Offset. This renders it impossible for
me to work as an Australian filmmaker. You know this. So does Graeme Mason. So
do members of the Screen Australia board. It has been thus since May 2012.
Indeed, the intention of the 2012 ban, and the two subsequent bans, was to
severely damage, if not destroy, my career. The ostensible reason why Screen
Australia has chosen this course of action is that I intimidated, harassed and
placed at risk members of Screen Australia’s staff prior to May 2012. No
evidence has ever been presented to me in support of this proposition.
The latest ban
on me (May 2016) is justified, according to Kent Purvis of the office of the
Commonwealth Ombudsman, on the grounds that I am ‘unreasonable’. Mr Purvis
declines to present me with any evidence of my ‘unreasonableness’. Given that
Chief Executive Graeme Mason likewise refuses to provide me with such evidence
I have made an FOI request to be provided with evidence of ‘unreasonableness’
on my part so extreme as to warrant the effective termination of my career as
an Australian filmmaker.
On 16th
Dec 2016 I received the following email from Screen Australia’s FOI Officer
Dear Mr Ricketson
Screen Australia
has identified two requests for information made by you under the Freedom of
Information Act 1982.
Screen Australia
will respond to these requests by 28 January 2017.
FOI
Screen Australia
The 28th
Jan has come and gone! I have received no response. Could you please request of
Screen Australia’s current FOI Officer that s/he provide me with a response to
my FOI request this week?
best wishes
James Ricketson
No comments:
Post a Comment