Indian defence experts say Pakistan and its ISI behind Pahalgam massacre - Indian Australian voters would find it hard voting for Tamgha-i-Quad-i-Azam Senator Mehreen Faruqi

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Tamgha-i-Quad-i-Azam Senator Mehreen Faruqi  is seeking re-election to the Australian Senate, as a Senator for NSW. She is regarded as a patriot, by Pakistan, for her services to Pakistan.  On a number of occasions she has even stood up in the Senate, Parliament Of Australia, to demand that Australian taxpayers pay reparations to Pakistan for climate change.

Meanwhile, in the past week India has suffered yet another terrorist incident, this time in Pahalgam, Kashmir. Indian terrorism experts like Lt Gen (R) Satish Dua are quite clear in saying that the Pakistan Government,  Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence are responsible for this latest act of terrorism. 

Australia's electorates are divided along communal lines, and Indian Australians comprise a significant percentage of voters in NSW. Voting is compulsory, and it is not unlikely that many if not all Indian Australian voters would find it hard if not impossible to cast a vote  for Faruqi and her Greens Party running mates.

END 

Ananda Krishnan rules Maxis , Astro and Bumi Armada from the grave, and his earthly executors and beneficiaries remain hidden like ghostly spirits

 by Ganesh Sahathevan

Succession remains a mystery 

On 16 April 2025 Maxis Bhd issued the following statement with regards its related party transactions: 

CIRCULAR TO SHAREHOLDERS IN RELATION TO THE PROPOSED RENEWAL OF EXISTING SHAREHOLDERS' MANDATE FOR RECURRENT RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS OF A REVENUE OR TRADING NATURE ("PROPOSED MANDATE")

The index to the Circular includes 

TAK

The late Ananda Krishnan Tatparanandam, a Major Shareholder of our Company (deceased on 28 November 2024)

Then at page 24-25: 

Each of PSIL, Excorp, PanOcean and the estate of TAK has a deemed interest over 124,688,000 ordinary shares in TCSB (“TCSB Shares”) representing 65.84% equity interest in TCSB through UTSB. UTSB holds an aggregate of 124,688,000 TCSB Shares representing 65.84% equity interest in TCSB, of which 71,000,000 TCSB Shares representing 37.49% equity interest in TCSB is held directly by UTSB, while 53,688,000 TCSB Shares representing 28.35% equity interest in TCSB is held indirectly, via its wholly-owned subsidiary, Usaha Tegas Resources Sdn. Bhd. The estate of TAK has a deemed interest in the TCSB Shares in which UTSB has an interest by virtue of the deemed interest of PanOcean in the TCSB Shares. PanOcean is the trustee of a discretionary trust, the beneficiaries of which are members of the family of TAK and foundations, including those for charitable purposes. PanOcean holds 100% equity interest in Excorp which in turn holds 100% equity interest in PSIL. PSIL holds 99.999% equity interest in UTSB. Although the estate of TAK and PanOcean are deemed to have an interest in the TCSB Shares as described in the foregoing, they do not have any economic or beneficial interest over such TCSB Shares, as such interest is held subject to the terms of such discretionary trust referred to the above. 

The estate must have executors, and it is really their identities that now matter. Given the failure to disclose their identities minority shareholders  cannot know who precisely is on the other side of the related party transactions, or any other transaction that Maxis might enter into. 

It should also be noted that the disclosure that "the beneficiaries (who) are members of the family of TAK " may no longer be accurate for Ananda is dead and what matters now are the beneficiaries of his estate.Who they might be remains a mystery. 

In addition the estate may be distributed among family members and the may be barred from being beneficiaries of their a trust they control. 

As it stands it is not in the interest of minority shareholders to vote in favour of the Maxis resolutions. The same can be expected to apply Astro and Bumi Armada as well.

TO BE READ WITH 

Sunday, January 12, 2025

Maxis, Astro, Bumi Armada refusal to inform market of changes in shareholdings raises serious questions about their related party transactions with the late Ananda Krishnan and his associates

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 
       Donations to the Prime Minister and Finance Minister Anwar's Ibrahim's Madani Fund does not change the fact that rules are being breached 

Two months have passed since Tatparanandam Ananda Krishnan passed away and yet the boards of Maxis, ASTRO, and Bumi Armada have yet to inform the Bursa Malaysia of the inevitable, even if unfortunate, change in substantial shareholder.



Bursa Malaysia continuing disclosure rules require that Maxis, ASTRO, Bumi Armada and any other company that he may have an interest of 5% or more make immediate disclosure of changes in shareholdings given the demise of controlling shareholder Tatparanandam Amanda Krishnan.As it stands the directors of these companies are in breach of Bursa rules , for there has yet to be any announcement to the Bursa Malaysia.


Additionally ,all three companies are required to gain shareholder approval for related party transactions, which they have, and all the resolutions concerning the related party transactions feature with a high degree of frequency the name Tatparanandam  

Anandaa Krishnan ( or TAK for Tatparanandam Anandaa Krishnan). His demise and the existence of the resolutions approving the transactions in his favour remain in place, and hence there is now a question as to who gains from those related party transactions.

END 

To Be Read With 

Ananda Krishnan's death casts a frightful shadow over the ownership of his quasi-GLC assets in Malaysia, and the conduct of his lieutenants

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

    Ananda Krishnan circa 1968.Photo courtesy of former business partner and blood brother,Ken                   McMahon of Minsec. Photo taken at the McMahon's home in Seaforth, Sydney

CJ NSW and Chairman NSW LPAB Andrew Bell has rubbished College Of Law Australia's PLT which TEQSA and its former Chief Commissioner Nicholas Saunders defended- left to new Chief Commissioner Professor Kerri-Lee Krause to clean-up the mess

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Chief Justice  NSW and Chairman NSW LPAB Andrew Bell's public  rubbishing of the College Of Law Australia's PLT brings to mind how  TEQSA and its former  Chief Commissioner Nicholas Saunders defended The College , its CEO Neville Carter ,and other members of the College's enior management against complaints similar to those raised by Andrew Bell.

TEQSA has a now a  new Chief Commissioner  in  Professor Kerri-Lee Krause  whose recent appointment to the post coincides with Bell's ongoing war against the College and its PLT.  Despite the extensive reporting , TEQSA has this far remained silent about the PLT which it also supervises.  

TO BE READ WITH

Friday, August 3, 2018

Australia's education sector putting money ahead of standards :The trend continues, aided and abetted by TEQSA

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Edited 17 April 2025

                      Professor Nick Saunders AO (Chief Commissioner)

                                                             



The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) is an Australian  government body that is meant to ensure that  the hundred of thousands each overseas student hands over to Australian colleges and universities actually purchases a worthwhile degree.

It is headed by one Nicholas Saunders (photo above).

Over the past three months Saunders and TEQSA have been queried about the finances, infrastructure, academic qualifications and teaching standards at The College Of Law Australia which has an on-line offering actively promoted in South East Asia.

His response, to sum up,has been to ignore, deny, and obfuscate. 

He has done so despite being provided evidence which has included written responses  from the dean of a law school in Malaysia which confirmed that Neville Carter, CEO and  principal of The Collee Of Law had at the very least exaggerated his seniority and nature of work in Malaysia.

In a sense Saunders is typical of the modern Australian academic who has discovered that students from Asia are an easy, cheap way to make money while enjoying "marketing trips" to especially now China.

The article below from Singapore's Strait Times is but one example of what Asians have seen for a long time as a naked cash grab.

Adding  to the problem is the fact that there is no real avenue to complain about low standards, or universities providing educational goods and services way below what students have paid for.

While TESQA is supposed to provide an avenue for such complaints, Saunders himself has been caught referring complaints back to the university or college concerned. His excuse: Students are required to address their concerns to the internal complaint process.

That approach works well when a student complains about marking and grades, but clearly the wrong avenue when the complaint is about the product.

END 

Alarm over Aussie unis' low 

entry standards

The University of New South Wales is among those found to have been accepting students whose high school rankings were well below the advertised minimum. Critics have accused the universities of boosting enrolment to increase revenue, saying the decision to let in substandard students has drained resources and led to bloated class sizes.ST FILE PHOTO

PUBLISHED

 FEB 3, 2016, 5:00 AM SGT

Many students don't make the grade, but varsities have other admission criteria

Jonathan Pearlman For The Straits Times In Sydney

Universities in Australia have been accepting large numbers of students who fall below the admission requirements, prompting concerns about a decline in the nation's education standards.

The falling entry standards came to light after figures were published last week by Fairfax Media showing that leading universities in the state of New South Wales have been accepting students whose high school rankings were well below the universities' advertised minimum.

These included Macquarie University, where 64 per cent of students who were offered places for this year had a ranking below the cut- off. The figure was 46 per cent at the University of New South Wales (UNSW), 27 per cent at the University of Sydney, and 59 per cent at Western Sydney University. Universities in other Australian states reportedly had similar numbers.

The figures sparked a debate on whether universities were allowing standards to slip or whether the problem was with catch-all ranking systems that do not consider a candidate's other qualities.

New South Wales State Education Minister Adrian Piccoli said he believed the admission practices of the universities risked damaging their international reputation.

NO EXCUSE

I'm annoyed that universities are taking students with such low marks... For universities that are concerned about their rankings internationally to be taking in students with such low (admission scores) is not a good look. I know they have funding pressures, but that is no excuse.

MR ADRIAN PICCOLI, State Education Minister of New South Wales, saying he believes the admission practices of the universities risk damaging their international reputation.

Australia has about 300,000 international university students, with six universities in last year's top 100 world rankings by Times Higher Education.

Mr Piccoli told Fairfax Media last week: "I'm annoyed that universities are taking students with such low marks... For universities that are concerned about their rankings internationally to be taking in students with such low (admission scores) is not a good look. I know they have funding pressures, but that is no excuse."

Most local undergraduates in Australia are admitted into university on the basis of the Australian Tertiary Admission Rank - a percentile score that shows how students performed against other students.

The move to admit an increasing number of students with lower admission rankings followed the federal government's decision in 2012 to allow universities to offer as many undergraduate places as they like. The total student population went from 1.26 million that year to 1.37 million in 2014, an increase of almost 10 per cent.

Critics have accused the universities of boosting enrolment to increase their revenue, saying the decision to let in substandard students has drained resources and led to bloated class sizes.

But universities said admissions are not based merely on a catch-all ranking and take into account other factors such as a candidate's leadership skills, community contribution and where he went to school.

Professor Iain Martin, a deputy vice-chancellor at the UNSW, said universities have various schemes to add points to a student's ranking. This could be based on a student's performance in subjects relevant to a particular degree, or whether he is socially disadvantaged.

A government study in 2014 showed that students with lower rankings are less likely to complete their courses.

Mr Andrew Norton, an expert on higher education at think-tank Grattan Institute, said it was important to ensure disadvantaged students have an opportunity to attend university. But, he added, it was also important to provide support to students with lower rankings to help them complete their degrees.

"Reform needs to be geared towards not just increasing enrolment, but to what is in the best interests of students and prospective students," he wrote on The Conversation website on Jan 21.

"We want to give them a chance to complete a degree, not just to start one."

A version of this article appeared in the print edition of The Straits Times on February 03, 2016, with the headline 'Alarm over Aussie unis' low entry standards'. Print Edition | Subscribe

Andy Ng, publisher of PNG's The National has questions to answer in Malaysia concerning a story he published as editor of The Sun which was in contempt of court, but for which he escaped prosecution

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                                                         Andy Ng (2019)

Andy Ng, General Manager of PNG's Pacific Start which publishes  PNG's The National has questions to answer in Malaysia concerning a story he published as editor of  Malaysia's   The Sun. What Ng published was found to be in contempt of court, but it was not Ng who was even charged for contempt. Instead , the reporter who authored the story but who had not authority to publish  was , it appears, forced to plead guilty for Ng's offence. 

Ever the company man , it would have surprised many that Ng resigned from his pervious position  at Malaysia's The Sun, in protest of the treatment his reporters suffered at the hands of Malaysia's former Mahathir administration.   This writer can attest that Ng routinely demanded the names of sources  and  carried through with threatened disciplinary action when  sources were protected. 

To Be Read With 

Much is rotten in the 1998 Sessions Crt conviction by Judge Sauufee Affandi  of SUN reporter S. Arulldas:   Malaysia's judiciary cannot possibly stand by decision to convict  reporter for contempt when the offending story was  published by SUN Media and its editors , who were not even charged 

 by Ganesh Sahathevan

As reported yesterday, in 1998 then Sessions Court judge Saufee Affandi was specifically assigned to a contempt matter involving Vincent Tan's Sun Media, but managed to place blame solely  on the Sun reporter S.Arulldas while excusing Sun Media, the publisher, and its editors, Rejal Arbee and Andy Ng.

How that esteemed jurist managed  a finding of guilt  given the facts is a matter that requires investigation for the reporter concerned, S.Arulldas could not possibly have published the article on his own. In fact, he could never have published, ever.

As anyone with even a cursory knowledge of how newspapers are published would comprehend, reporters can at best write their stories, but it is the editors who decide if the stories are actually published, their form, and content. A lesser known fact is that even after the editors make their decision, the sub-editors often make their own changes , ostensibly under the supervision of the editors. At The SUN, it was the sub-editors, not the reporters, who decided the headline. 

One need not be an esteemed jurist to understand that one can only be held accountable for what one does. Additionally an esteemed jurist  such as Saufee would have understood that the doing must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and that there must be a clear unbroken chain of facts proven beyond a reasonable doubt between the intention to do wrong and the criminal act. 

How then Suafee might have convicted  Arulldass must concern anyone in charge of the Malaysian justice system. As it stands this judgement sits on the books, and cannot be said to foster confidence in Malaysian common law.

That Arulldass first claimed trial and then pleaded guilty before Saufee only adds to the stench surrounding this decision. To quote  Mr Justice NH Tan  in the Ayer Molek decision:

Something is rotten in the State Of Denmark.

It is for the Chief Justice Of Malaysia to have the matter investigated, and all concerned charged as required. 

TO BE READ WITH 

In 1998  Sessions Crt judge  Saufee Affandi was specifically assigned to a contempt matter involving Vincent Tan's Sun Media, and managed to place blame on the Sun reporter while excusing Sun Media and its editor Rejal Arbee; Saufee's conduct in '98 adds context to his legal innovation in favour of Sun Media, Singapore billionaire Peter Lim, Vincent Tan ,their business partners , and others in the matter of Ganesh Sahathevan v Sun Media 

 by Ganesh Sahathevan

            YBhg Datuk Ahmad Rejal Arbee

As reported earlier on this blog, former Industrial Court Chairman Saufee Affandi managed to turn an Industrial Court claim by this writer against Vincent Tan's Sun Media into a defamation matter where he undertook to prosecute the case for Singapore billionaire Peter Lim and his business partners, despite not having any authority to do so, and despite Lim himself never commencing a claim against Sun Media or this writer. 

It has also been reported here how Saufee mismanaged  and in essence attempted to discredit evidence against Bursa companies Gamuda Bhd, Litrak Bhd and the EPF which had financed their privatised LITRAK toll road project, which had been discovered by this writer.

It can now be revealed that Saufee had a prior, and perhaps more questionable involvement with Sun Media in 1998 when he served as a Sessions Court judge. The matter was reported by The SUN (which is published by Sun Media): 

A Sun reporter was fined RM 2,500 today when he admitted defying a court order which prohibited the publication of certain information in the case of a sessions judge who allegedly performed oral sex on a man. Sessions judge Saufee Affendi, who had come from Kuala Lumpur to specially hear the case. 

A conviction under this sub-section carries a maximum fine of RM 5,000 or jail up to three years or both. Arulldas, who paid the fine, was accompanied by Sun Media Group editor-in-chief Ahmad Rejal Arbee and editor Andy Ng.

Why Vincent Tan's Sun Media and its editors Ahmad Rejal Arbee and Andy Ng who actually published the story were not also charged is mystifying. 

Even more mystifying is the fact that Saufee  accepted that the crime of contempt had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt  against a  reporter who had absolutely no power to publish. The contempt, described above involved the publication of facts which were subject to a court order against publication. 

TO BE READ WITH  

Court fines Sun reporter RM2,500.

By Cynthia Blemin

335 words

17 June 1998

The Sun

English

(c) The Christchurch Press, INL 1998

Butterworth, Tues: A Sun reporter was fined RM 2,500 today when he admitted defying a court order which prohibited the publication of certain information in the case of a sessions judge who allegedly performed oral sex on a man . Sessions judge Saufee Affendi, who had come from Kuala Lumpur to specially hear the case, delivered his ruling after a 90-minute mitigation plea by defence counsel R. Rajasingam.

He said the court had taken into account the facts of the case, the counsel's mitigation and the prosecution argument. Saufee said accused S. Arulldas' admission of guilt was the main mitigating factor which carries weight when passing sentence . He stressed the need for the media to maintain close rapport with the court. He warned Arulldas against repeating such a mistake and fined him.

Arulldas had earlier claimed trial and the hearing was fixed for three days from today. He admitted commiting the offence through an article published in the paper on March 25, after the facts of the case were read out to him. Arulldas, 42, was charged with contravening Section 101(2) of the Subordinate Courts Act, 1948 (Act 92), which had been invoked by the prosecution in the case involving Butterworth sessions court judge Rungit Singh.

Rungit had been charged with gross indecency and using criminal force to outrage the modesty of a man whose identity has been withheld by the court. The sub-section reads that "a court may, at any time, order that no person shall publish the name, address or photograph of any witness ... or any evidence or any other thing likely to lead to the identification of the witness."

A conviction under this sub-section carries a maximum fine of RM 5,000 or jail up to three years or both. Arulldas, who paid the fine, was accompanied by Sun Media Group editor-in-chief Ahmad Rejal Arbee and editor Andy Ng.

(c) 1998 Sun Media Group Sdn Bhd.

Document thesum0020010928du6h003qw

 

 

SUN REPORTER FINED RM2,500 FOR DEFYING COURT ORDER.

372 words

16 June 1998

BERNAMA Malaysian National News Agency

English

(c) 1998 Chamber World Network

BUTTERWORTH, June 16 (Bernama) - A journalist with the 'Sun' newspaper was today fined RM2,500 for defying a court order when reporting on a case involving a judge.

S.Arulldas, 42, who had pleaded not guilty when charged in the Sessions Court here on April 30, changed his plea today and apologised to the court.

He was charged with defying an order issued by the court on March 24 prohibiting the reporting of any evidence or details that might reveal the identity of the alleged victim in the case against judge Rungit Singh.

Rungit is facing three charges of using criminal force to outrage the modesty of a man, and two alternative charges of committing acts of gross indecency by performing oral sex on the man.

In sentencing Arulldas, judge Sauffee Affendi said counsel R. Rajasingam's hour-long mitigation was the longest he had heard in his legal career and the points put forward had been noted.

According to Rajasingam, the court order was stale as the authorities had not issued a similar gag-order before Rungit was charged and earlier reports in 'The Star' and 'New Straits Times' newspapers had already identified the alleged victim.

He also questioned why the prosecution did not apply to the court to amend the alleged victim's name in the charge sheet to "Mr X" or "Mr Y" in view of the fact that the sheet would become a public document after that and anyone could obtain it.

Rajasingam said the court should only issue such orders to avoid interference in the administration of justice and not to avoid anyone from embarrassment.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Ahmad Fairuz Zainol Abidin submitted to the court that the March 24 order was not applicable to media reports before the Rungit case came to court.

Arulldas was charged under Section 101 (2) of the Subordinate Courts Act 1948 which provides for a maximum fine of RM5,000 or three years in jail, or both, upon conviction.

Arulldas, who was accompanied by Sun Media Group editor-in-chief Ahmad Rejal Arbee, paid his fine.

Copyright(C) 1998 BERNAMA The Malaysian National News Agency

 

National

Reporter pleads not guilty to defying court order

299 words

27 March 1998

The New Straits Times

Main/Lifestyle; 2*

12

English

Copyright (c) 1998 Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved.

PENANG, Thurs. - A reporter with the Sun daily pleaded not guilty in the Sessions Court in Butterworth today to a charge of defying a court order stopping the media from publishing the alleged victim's identity in a case involving a Sessions Court Judge.

S. Arulldass, 42, claimed trial to the charge of contravening the Subordinate Courts Act, 1948 (Act 1992) before Judge Tarmizi Abdul Rahman.

On Tuesday, Sungai Petani Sessions Court Judge Ghazali Cha had made the order when another Sessions Court Judge Rungit Singh a/l Jaswant Singh was charged with using criminal force to outrage the modesty of a person.

In the case, Ghazali had invoked section 101 (2) of the Act, to stop the media, both print and electronic, from publishing the alleged victim's name, address, photograph or any information leading to the identification of the alleged victim.

Arulldass was represented by Jagdeep Singh Deo while DPP Yaacob Md Sam prosecuted.

Jagdeep is also one of six lawyers defending Rungit, who is facing three counts of using criminal force to outrage the modesty of the person and two alternative charges of committing an act of gross indecency with a person by performing oral sex.

The five other lawyers are Karpal Singh, Gurbachan Singh, Christopher Fernando, Ranjit Singh Dhillon and Teja Singh Panesar.

Arulldass, who was accompanied by his wife, Theresa, Sun editor Andy Ng, its regional (northern) editor Ng Kee Seng and several colleagues, was alleged to have used words which could identify the victim in the case.

Arulldass, if found guilty, could face a maximum fine of RM5,000 or three years' imprisonment or both.

Tarmizi fixed the case to be mentioned on April 30 and allowed bail at RM5,000.

Caption: Arulldass ... charged.

SEE ALSO 

Industrial Crt chairman Saufee Affandi decided that Singapore billionaire Peter Lim had been defamed-Industrial Court has no jurisdiction to hear defamation matters, and Saufee did not rely on any decision of any competent court that Lim had been defamed

Australia's PM Anthony Albanese gives up (quietly) his fantasy of cheap, reliable wind and solar, instead promises ongoing household energy bill rebates to subsidise wind and solar-Meanwhile Singapore 's Tan See Leng continues to look forward to cheap Australian solar power , shipped over to Singapore via a 3000 KM undersea cable

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese promises ongoing household energy rebates, and no longer promises reliable wind and solar as he did when campaigning three years ago.

Meanwhile Singapore  Minister Tan See Leng continues to look forward to cheap solar, shipped over to Singapore via a 3000 KM undersea cable to keep energy cheap and clean. 

TO BE READ WITH 

Tuesday, December 17, 2024

Australia could not keep the lights on in Broken Hill, population 17,624, despite the town having solar, wind and a huge battery-How then does Singapore (pop 5.5 Million) expect SunCable and its 3000KM undersea cable to power Singapore and be "a meaningful complement to the Asean Power Grid"

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                             

See first the above  about blackouts in the well known small town of Broken Hill, which is small even by Singapore standards.

In light of the above read on this earlier post:

Friday, October 25, 2024

ASEAN Power Grid agreements do not include Australia- Singapore's declaration that Sun Cable will be "a meaningful complement to the Asean Power Grid" meaningless

 by Ganesh Sahathevan

                Singapore aspires to become Asia's renewable energy hub:Nikkei Asia

The Edge reported , quoting Singapore's Minister for Manpower and Second Minister for Trade and Industry Tan See Leng: 

Singapore’s Energy Market Authority (EMA) has granted conditional approval to Sun Cable to import 1.75 gigawatts (GW) of low-carbon electricity from Australia’s Northern Territory to Singapore, says Minister for Manpower and Second Minister for Trade and Industry Tan See Leng.

Sun Cable’s US$24 billion ($31.6 billion) Australia-Asia Power Link (AAPowerLink) project involves laying a 4,300km subsea power cable connecting a solar farm in Australia’s Northern Territory to Singapore via Indonesian waters.


Considering the scale and distance of the project, Tan expects the Sun Cable project to only come online after 2035. “When completed, the project will be a meaningful complement to the Asean Power Grid and it will serve as an additional source of low-carbon electricity for Singapore.”

Minister Tan's ambition for Sun Cable to be a "a meaningful complement to the Asean Power Grid" is admirable and it is in keeping with his Prime Minister Lawrence Wong's ambition  for Singapore to be a renewable energy hub.

However the ASEAN Power Grid agreement does not provide  Australia to be part of the Grid.   Typical of ASEAN it has taken 15 years between the signing of the ASEAN Power Grid agreement in 2009 and the   ASEAN Power Grid Advancement Programme (APG-AP), which is likely to be a series of further talks which will see little if anything being actually done. In any case, none of this involves Australia. 

Singapore's declaration that Sun Cable will  be "a meaningful complement to the Asean Power Grid" is in fact meaningless, and it is hard to see why Minister Tan See Leng has chosen to make his unillateral declaration including Australia in the ASEAN Power Grid.

END 

Recovery of tax payer funded FEE HELP from the College Of Law Australia can begin with the Commonwealth clawing back all funding provided the College Of Law for its now worthless PLT,and then cancelling PLT course debt

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

The College Of Law Australia's reliance on tax payer funded FEE HELP to finance its PLT course  has been shown to be a wasteful use of limited Commonwealth resources and now that Andrew Bell, the Chief Justice NSW has condemn the College Of Law PLT  (see story below)  it would be unfair  that those who have undertaken the PLT bear any FEE HELP debt associated with that PLT.

Given the Chief Justice's comments the Commonwealth ought to claw back all FEE HELP funding provided the College for its PLT and having done so, cancel the  FEE HELP debt of students who have incurred that debt as a result of having to fund the PLT.  The Chief Justice himself has declared the College Of Law PLT overpriced so students did not really have a choice but to suffer the  debt.

Saturday, February 15, 2025

The Chief Justice NSW Andrew Bell's public condemnation of the College Of Law PLT provides an avenue for PLT students to seek a refund -PLT course and certificate are worthless without the Chief Justice's imprimatur

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                         Andrew Bell has been described as ‘one of the most brilliant in a generation’

The College of Law Australia's  Practical Legal Training (PLT) course  has been condemned  by the  Chief Justice NSW Andrew Bell, for offering a PLT course that is not worth the money. Bell has now embarked on a campaign to reform the PLT. 

Bell is not only Chief Justice but also chairman of he MSW Legal Profession Admission Board that accredits  the College as a PLT provider so it is not surprising that Bell's outburst has caused others to offer their own frank assessment of the College's PLT.

According to Maxim Shanahan of the Australian Financial Review:

Senior practitioners and recent graduates from the 15-week practical legal training course, which requires only five days of in-person attendance and is taught mostly online, criticised its lack of rigour and utility.

They acknowledged a normalisation of cheating by sharing past answers to recycled exam questions and deploying ChatGPT to generate responses.


One junior lawyer, who completed the course last year and now works in the public sector, said prior fees of up to $12,000 were “transparently extortionate, and everyone knows that’s going in. It’s a necessary prerequisite for admission, and students know they won’t gain anything from it”.


“I didn’t feel like I was getting value for money once. Coming from university where academic rigour was held in high regard, to be paying for mundane and reductive online tasks felt like a slap in the face. In order to justify that price, the standard should be a lot higher,” said the lawyer, who asked for anonymity to speak more freely. 

Another junior lawyer, who paid for the course themselves and now works at a community legal centre, said staff did little to combat students’ dim view of the course.

“There’s kind of this unspoken vibe between teachers and students that it’s all pretty bullshit,” they said.

“Written assessments follow the same formula for every subject … but no one puts any effort into them. People either copy someone else’s [answers] or use ChatGPT.

“You can upload the course documents to ChatGPT and ask it to write a letter of advice. I did that and passed everything.”

In light of the above PLT graduates have now a certificate that cannot be said to add anything to their professional standing and if anything embarrasses them. It follows that PLT graduates and students are entitled to recovery of their fees.The College should in fact be providing past and current students with proposals for refund of fees paid for services that were obviously not of the standard promised. Failure to do so, very soon, can be remedied by a class action. 

Complaints about the College's PLT are not new, but the College and its senior managers have always enjoyed the protection of their Chief Justice, which has allowed them to act with impunity.

TO BE READ WITH 

Government funding for the College Of Law PLT where students are assessed on the quality of their reflection on their work experience , not the quality of their work experience

February 02, 2022

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

The above has been extracted from the latest College Of Law Ltd's annual report. The substantial government funding is provided via the Commonwealth's FEE HELP facility. 

The Practical Legal Training (PLT)  which the College runs, and which is a prerequisite for admission to practise  in NSW, has the imprimatur  of the Chief Justice NSW, Tom Bathurst, in his capacity as Chairman of the the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board. 

College Academic Director Lewis Patrick has said that in assessing the work experience component of the PLT  " the College is not assessing the quality of (the student's) work experience, but rather the quality of (the student's) reflections on that experience.

The College's PLT course is now mostly on-line, and there are problems with delivery and infrastructure. Its FEE HELP cashflow is being utilised to finance its expansion overseas.

TO BE READ WITH 

Failed in KL try London: The College Of Law's latest overseas venture raises further questions about the abuse of FEE HELP to fund vanity projects 

by Ganesh Sahathevan





Very many questions remain unanswered with regards the College Of Law's joint venture with Malaysia's Bar Council.





UK's The Lawyer reported recently that the College Of Law Sydney has decided to break into the UK market, to"battle BPP and ULaw for super-exam supremacy".


Quoting College CEO Neville Carter The Lawyer reported:
“The hallmark of the Australian model is delivery of learning directly into the workplace within a very flexible framework of work placement. The model drives access to the legal services market and fuels the growth of employment opportunities. We believe that the reforms in England and Wales provide an opportunity for us to share what we have learnt in Australia and across Asia and assist in shaping new models and pathways in England and Wales.”


Carter has yet to explain his exaggerated claims of having reformed Malaysian legal practise in the mid 80s; in fact the College's latest venture into Malaysia seems to have ended in failure, again leaving many unanswered questions.
The College has refused to explain why its website dedicated to its "LLM" in Malaysia no loner works, nor has it been replaced with anything similar.

As previously reported, the College seems to have a tendency to invest its mainly government funded revenue in vanity projects in  exotic locations at the expense of its core business of providing the Professional Legal Training course that must be completed by anyone seeking admission to practise in NSW. 

Complaints against the College are ignored by its regulator, the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board, which is chaired by the Chief Justice of NSW,who considers it the height of bad behaviour to question the relevance and  quality of the College's teaching standards, despite students here having to normally take on a debt of about AUD 10,000 to pay for about 3 months worth of on-line learning, most of which is self taught with minimal input from instructors.
END 

Posted 13th December 2019 by Ganesh Sahathevan