Peter Lindsay (Herbert, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Earlier today I received a statutory declaration containing serious allegations. I make no comment on the accuracy of the allegations contained therein because it is for proper authorities to comment on those. But I am of the view that open and transparent government requires public disclosure of this statutory declaration. The declaration reads:

I, Dr Christine Jane Eastwood, do solemnly and sincerely declare that

1.

On Friday, 14 August 2009 at around 7 pm, I and my husband met with Mr Needham (Chair, Crime Misconduct Commission) in a hotel meeting room in Coolangatta. (I have a receipt for the booking of that meeting room).

2.

In order to organise the meeting with Mr Needham, a number of phone calls were made to both his home and mobile number. A number of calls were made by him to us. (I have phone records to prove those calls took place). Mr Needham was told that I wanted to meet with him in relation to alleged serious criminal offences, potentially involving senior Queensland Police. Mr Needham was also asked not to bring or involve Helen Couper (Acting Assistant Commissioner, Misconduct, CMC).

3.

When we arrived at the hotel meeting roam, I saw Mr Needham and his wife arrive. He told her to stay in the foyer, and we then went upstairs to the meeting room.

4.

As soon as we sat down, Mr Needham produced a small silver tape recorder and asked us if we would agree to the meeting being recorded. We agreed. He told us that the recording was for transcript purposes. The tape was running in the small recorder for the entire duration of the meeting. (Mr Needham had a statutory duty to properly file and keep that recording).

5.

I began by explaining to Mr Needham why I had asked to meet with him without Ms Couper. I told him I could not ask the QPS to investigate because potentially up to three very senior police ‘families’ could be involved in those alleged serious crimes. I also told him that all the senior police have had, or currently have fathers, brothers, nephews and/or sons serving in the QPS, up to and including Assistant Commissioner level. Therefore, I could not go to the QPS as it would almost certainly be investigated by one of the police families or their colleagues.

I told him I could not report it through the usual channels of the CMC because I knew Helen Couper (Acting Assistant Commissioner, Misconduct) had a prior work relationship and a family relationship to two of the police families (cousins). Having nowhere else to go, I believed the only place I could have the matter fairly investigated was by the Chair of the CMC himself.

Early in the meeting, when I explained to him the family relationship between the QPS families and Couper, Mr Needham indicated he was not aware of those relationships between the Qld Police and Couper. From that point his demeanour and attitude changed. His reaction was one of panic and aggression. Once I had explained the Couper connection, I could hardly get a sentence out without him interrupting me. He tried to bully and intimidate me. He was rude, aggressive and insensitive to the circumstances I was trying to explain to him. He made ridiculous statements of law and fact.

Needham intentionally, dishonestly and repeatedly misrepresented the law to me. For example, he told me that if police committed serious crimes outside of work hours there is nothing he can do about it.

When I asked if crimes of fraud, forgery and uttering (involving two or three police families and a solicitor) and manslaughter/murder could fall under the category of major crimes under the CMC Act, he appeared surprised I knew of the section and brushed me off by telling me that it usually only applied to organised crime. (However, Schedule 2 CMC Act clearly states major crime means criminal activity that involves an indictable offence punishable by a term of imprisonment not less than 14 years).

Needham discouraged me from taking the complaint to the police. I was told that if we took the evidence we had gathered to the police, they wouldn’t bother with it because they would find it ‘too hard’.

Towards the end of the meeting, when I expressed concern that he had left me with nowhere to go—he again discouraged me from going to police and reiterated that the CMC would not accept the complaint. He left the meeting room and refused to take with him any of the documentation I had prepared in relation to the complaint.

Given as Chair of the CMC, Mr Needham has the highest statutory duty to fulfil the purposes of the CMC Act, I would like answers to the following:

A.

Did Mr Needham correctly file and keep the recording of the meeting, as required?

B.

Did Mr Needham inform the Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee (PCMC) that Couper may have an undisclosed conflict of interest going back 18 years, as required?

C.

Why did Mr Needham refuse to accept my complaint as he was required to do, as required under the CMC Act?

Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table the statutory declaration.

Leave granted.