Territory Stories

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

Details:

Title

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

Collection

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

Date

1998-12-01

Description

Tabledby Shane Stone

Notes

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.

Language

English

Subject

Tabled papers

File type

application/pdf

Use

Copyright

Copyright owner

See publication

License

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Series/C1968A00063

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/297025

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/391962

Page content

What was said in that regard?---Mick said to me that the council's probation guidelines required that supervisors put in a report at the end of the third month and at the end of the six month of the probation period. He said, 'Your's will be coming up next month' and he said that, 'I'm telling you that I '11 have to make some adverse comments about you in relation to your dealings with Haritos and Mitchell.' And did he elaborate about.those dealings or not?---Well, he thought - he said that he thought I was being too aggressive with them. And was this the first occasion or not on which Mr Dodson had said anything to you about being too aggressive in relation to either Mr Mitchell or Mr Haritos?---Yes, it was. In relation to other matters concerning your report, did he say anything else or not?---Nothing else at all. Did you say anything to him as a result-of him making those remarks to you?---Yes, I went into some length about why there was difficulty and I relayed the circumstances of Haritos' work performance and the problem I had with Mitchell because of the inadequacy of Mitchell's briefing following the contrete~mps in the minister's office. Do you mean those on 28 January 1993?---That's right. And is that all you said?---Yeah, it only concerned those two people. They were the only two that he mentioned. Right?---And I knew I was having no problems with other staff. And what was his response, if any, to your remarks?---Well, he listened but he didn't say, ' A H right, I accept what you're saying and there wont be any adverse comment in your probation report.' It was just left. I offered my explanation and that was the finish of it. By this stage, it was pretty late in the day, as I recall, and it was knock-off time. And are you able to say - y o u may not be able to - about how long this conversation with Mr Dodson would've lasted?---I d probably be guessing, maybe 15 - 20 minutes. If I could next then ask you to have a look at document 64, which is a letter from Mr Dodson to Mr Tichner concerning the question on notice from Senator Tambling?---Yes. Is that a letter you were involved in drafting, or not?---No. If I could then move to 5 February 1993. On that date, did you meet Mr Dodson at his house?---Yes, I did. 56-57/ld Hansen 112 P.J. HANSEN XN 18/11/98