This
morning I have written to the international broadcaster informing it
of my position vis a vis Screen Australia.
Dear
XXX and YYY
Thank
you very much for your interest in providing a pre-sale for ‘Chanti’s
World’ and for all the time and effort you have put into viewing my
‘promos’ and discussing with me ways in which the resultant
documentary might best suit your broadcast platform. Unfortunately,
it is not possible for me to continue negotiations with you. A
pre-sale from ZZZ, when we finally agreed upon a contract that served
both ZZZ’s and my own creative ends, would only be of value if I
were able to use it, in accordance with Screen Australia guidelines,
to seek investment funds from that organization. However, in May this
year Ruth Harley, Chief Executive Officer at Screen Australia
informed me that the Screen Australia board had resolved that I would
henceforth be unable to make applications of any kind to Screen
Australia for development or investment funds. The reason given was
that I had intimidated and placed at risk members of Screen Australia
staff. Ms Harley has provided me with no evidence at all in support
of this contention – hardly surprising given that I have never
intimidated or placed at risk any member of Screen Australia’s
staff. My being effectively banned was (and remains) an act of
spiteful retribution for my having been a public critic of the
organization since its inception.
My
apologies for not having informed you of this hitch back in May when
it occurred but I had hoped that common sense would prevail and, when
it became apparent to the Screen Australia Board and/or the office of
the Ombudsman that the correspondence I have supposedly written does
not exist, that I would receive an appropriate apology from the board
and that the ban on me would be lifted. Alas, this has not occurred.
The Screen Australia board, along with the office of the Ombudsman,
have no interest at all in whether or not the correspondence exists,
perhaps because both would have a considerable amount of egg on their
faces if they were to ask that the correspondence be produced at this
late date, only to discover that it does not exist. They could, of
course, have asked to see the correspondence in May. They did not.
Again,
thank you for your interest. There is a small chance that the
situation vis a vis ‘Chanti’s World’ and Screen Australia might
change before 19th
Oct but I think that a snowflake in hell has a better chance!
best
wishes
The
snowflake in hell possibility is that the Ombudswoman (Alison
Larkins) might finally ask a few pertinent questions of Liz Crosby,
Ross Mathews, Claire Jager and Julia Overton. My letter to her of
27th
March speaks for itself:
Ms
Alison Larkins
Acting
Commonwealth Ombudsman
GPO
Box 442, Canberra 27th
March 2012
Dear
Ms Larkins
re
2010-118398
Following
on from my letter of 15th
March and various emails copied to your office.
I do
appreciate that I am very possibly engaged in an exercise in
futility; that Fiona Cameron will never be asked to produce the
correspondence she refers to; that no-one, up to and including the
office of the Ombudsman, thinks that there is any problem in the fact
that Fiona Cameron adjudicates complaints made about Fiona Cameron.
If so, so be it. As mentioned before, the ramifications are much more
significant than the matter in question – in which only the fate of
one filmmaker is affected. My last email to the Documentary section
of Screen Australia and Fiona Cameron speaks for itself.
Dear Documentary Section and
Fiona Cameron.
My latest letter to the Prime
Minister speaks for itself. I know that I will be repeating myself
here but experience tells me that persistence often pays off and
maybe, even at this late date, that the possibility exists that the
Documentary section of Screen Australia and Fiona Cameron might
apologize for the cockup that has occurred in relation to CHANTI’S
WORLD. This is all that I have asked for this past 16 months.
If you did, Claire and Ross,
actually view the promo that was the centrepiece of my application
close to two years ago, why have you never said so? Have I been lying
this past 16 months? If you, Liz Crosby, did not overhear Ross
Mathews admitting that he had not viewed the promo, why have you
never said so? If any of you have read the correspondence from
me that Fiona refers to and which I claim not to exist why have not
one of you admitted to it? Or, alternatively, admitted that you
haven't seen such correspondence?
Why has no one at Screen
Australia answered any one of these questions (along with many
others) when it would have been easy, at any point this past 16
months, for you all to say, “James, of course we saw your promo; no
James, you are mistaken in your recollection that both Claire and
Ross admitted not having seen your promo and here, James, is the
correspondence in which you make it clear that you had come away from
the meeting with Ross and Julia Overton with the expectation that
CHANTI’S WORLD had been funded.”
I don’t understand why,
given the conspiracy of silence that you have all been engaged in,
that you didn’t simply go one step further and totally discredit me
by saying that all I have written in my many letters is lies. It
would have been my word against the entire Documentary section of
Screen Australia and Fiona Cameron. End of story. I suspect that the
Documentary section of SA did not go down this path because you all
know full well that it would have involved a good deal of lying.
Whether it was integrity or the fear of being caught out lying that
prevented you from taking the conspiracy to the next level I have no
way of knowing. Certainly your collective silence has resulted in
this matter dragging on for 16 months when it could easily have been
resolved, and very quickly, at the time it began if the will had been
there to do so.
Given that the Documentary
section of Screen Australia has committed itself to such a long
period of silence and, in the process, made itself an accessory to
Fiona Cameron’s lies, it is hard to imagine that any of you are now
likely to answer any questions from me or to apologize for what has
happened. And this is the real problem here. One filmmaker being
screwed by vindictive bureaucrats (Julia Overton played a significant
role in all this) is neither here nor there in the grand scheme of
things. The entire Documentary section of Screen Australia being
involved in a conspiracy such as has occurred here is, in the grand
scheme of things, very significant – just as the significance of
the Watergate break-in lay not in the break in itself but if what the
subsequent cover up revealed about the corruption inherent in Richard
Nixon’s White House.
It certainly seems that Screen
Australia is going to stick to its guns; refuse to answer any
questions; refuse to deal appropriately with my original (and easily
resolved) complaints. All I ever wanted was an apology and for the
record to be corrected to reflect truth and not Fiona Cameron spin.
best wishes
Ms
Larkins did not respond to or acknowledge receipt of this letter, sent over six months ago.
No comments:
Post a Comment