Territory Stories

The Supreme Court of Australia Transcript of Proceedings Between Peter Julian Hansen (Plaintiff) and Northern Land Council (Defendant) pages 52-117



The Supreme Court of Australia Transcript of Proceedings Between Peter Julian Hansen (Plaintiff) and Northern Land Council (Defendant) pages 52-117

Other title

Tabled paper 807


Tabled Papers for 8th Assembly 1997 - 2001; Tabled Papers; ParliamentNT




Tabledby Shane Stone


Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory under Standing Order 240. Where copyright subsists with a third party it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.




Tabled papers

File type




Copyright owner

See publication



Parent handle


Citation address


Page content

Yes, is that document 54?---Yes, it is. Yes?---ATSIC seems to me to have set it out reasonably clearly. I'd looked at the annual report and it seems utterly clear that the surplus reported was $1,166,448 but the distribution was $1,667,726. Now, as & result of those considerations, did you then determine to speak to Mr Dodson on 29 January 1993?---Not immediately. I, you know, sat down with Mitchell and went through with him, both documents; both his proposed response and the ATSIC briefing paper and I see this absurd stuff that Mitchell has written on it, stuff like 'balls', 'Council said no', 'hurry up' - you know, this guys the - - HIS HONOUR: I'm sorry, what are you referring to now?---This is document 54. MR SOUTHWOOD: These are the handwritten notations, are they, firstly, on the last page, the word 'balls' appears?---That's correct. - On the second-last page, down the bottom on the extreme right, there' s hurry-up' - - - ?---Yeah. And at the top right, there's 'Council said no'?---Yep. You say those comments were written by Mr Mitchell?---I think s o . Right, and as a result of observing that, what did you do?---I .asked him questions about what these comments meant. Then - and I just wasn't getting any satisfactory meaningful serious responses from him. He seemed to be taking this matter as if it - it's just a day-to-day routine. I'm exceedingly alarmed about the treatment of the director in the ministers office.. I know that the minister has the responsibility to table this report. I know that Senator Tambling and others are hugely interested in the funding of the NLC. I know it's going to be a source of deep embarrassment and severe questioning of the minister at a later stage in parliament, particularly in Estimates Committee hearings, and that the minister's in deep trouble but, not only that, my boss says to me that he doesn't know about the auditor's qualifications. So, I said to - 'How can it be that the director doesn't know?' I said, 'Why didn't you tell him?' and he just - no, just sort of dismissed it as irrelevant. So, all right. Then we went - I went to his proposed response. The briefing paper starts talking, I think, of the first two auditor's qualifications. Mitchell's proposed response is, paragraphs 1 and 2, 'No comment'. So, I was in a profound state of disbelief that this man, the administration manager, doesn't seem terribly concerned about 50/ld Hansen 106 P.J. HANSEN XN 18/11/98