Monday, November 25, 2019

Why a special audit of Peter Hall's ICAC must include a review of his handling of the China donation inquiry , and the NSW LPAB 's dealings with Zhu Minshen

by Ganesh Sahathevan

ICAC Chief Commissioner Peter Hall will head an inquiry that involves NSW Labor.

In his current inquiry into Chinese donations to the Labor Party ,ICAC Commissioner Peter
Hall QC(picture above) seems reluctant to go anywhere near the matter of Zhu Minshen and his Top Group,whose
donations to the NSW Liberal Party may have consequences for Hall's former colleagues at the NSW Bar and Bench who manage the Legal Profession Admission Board, the body that has provided Zhu the status of a law school vice chancellor.


The SMH has reported that NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian has tasked the state's auditor with conducting an unprecedented review of the funding arrangements and management of four key independent agencies, including the Independent Commission Against Corruption and the NSW Electoral Commission.



As reported by the AFR Peter Hall's handling of the ICAC Inquiry into Chinese donations to the NSW Labor Party has been distinguished by what it refuses to see:

"The questions ICAC isn’t asking": Peter Hall QC turns away from evidence on Huang Xiama (and Zhu Minshen)



It has been shown here that the evidence with regards Zhu Minshen is in the public domain (see for example story below) but ICAC and Peter Hall seem determined to ignore it.It has been suggested that Hall appears to be conflicted:

ICAC's Peter Hall concerned with Chinese donations to the ALP,but not Liberals: Hall seems conflicted by the fact that an investigation into Minshen Zhu & Top Group's donations to NSW Liberals will involve the LPAB & AG Speakman



At this point one needs to determine if Peter Hall's conflicts of interest and incompetence are affecting ICAC's operational efficiency. Put in another way, simple, straightforward investigations are being drawn out by the Chief Commissioner's lack of expertise and conflicts of interest.

Hall seems to have taken to accusing the Government of depriving him of resources, and using that as a justification for not pursuing pursuing investigations, to the point where he has , as explained above, ignored information in the public domain and worse, attempted to prevent information from coming to his and ICAC's attention.

There is evidence that Hall stopped the flow of information from this writer to ICAC giving the usual three reasons, in order: lack of resources, too many emails, we have already given you an answer.

The first , lack of resources, seems to be a phrase appended to ICAC communications to help it make the case to government that it needs more money.
The second seems to be a way of justifying the first, .but also ensures that ICAC is not troubled by that which is wishes not to know. 
The third, taken with the second, seems to be part of a disturbing trend especially among NSW Department of Justice employees to seek refuge from investigation by claiming harassment, threats and intimidation. 

 Unfortunately for Hall and ICAC, public domain information is growing in volume, and so are the tools available to those of us who have spent many years and hours harvesting that data. It is a sign of Hall's incompetence that he does not comprehend this and continues to act as if he were a lawyer in the 70s, or 80s, where on can be confident that everything that can affect a matter is contained in his brief, and not likely to be found elsewhere.
END 



END


Sunday, September 15, 2019


Top Group IPO a classic case of license trading: Post IPO spike & collapse in market cap raises obvious questions about any political party beneficiaries ,but Peter Hall & ICAC not interested

by Ganesh Sahathevan










The graph above shows the movements in Zhu Minshen's Top Group's share price since its IPO and listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.

It is easy to see that there was an initial spike after which share price and market capitalisation collapsed.

Anyone familiar with Asian markets will see that the Top Group listing and movement in share price follows the well trodden path of companies that list as soon as hard to get approvals are obtained and then sold via an IPO. In the case of Top Group the relevant approval was the "first and only" license to grant Australian law degrees granted a private company, granted by the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board,after consultation with the Law Council Australia.




It has already been shown on this blog that the granting of that license coincided with donations from Top and Zhu to the NSW Liberal Party. Consequently a inquiry into who the beneficiaries of the IPO were seems a logical step for an inquiry into political donations in NSW, but not it seems for Peter Hall QC and ICAC.




See
Peter Hall QC and ICAC have been provided information about Top Group by Dr Amen Lee, but ICAC will still not call Zhu Minshen




AND



TOP Education Institute's Bachelor of Laws : Political donations,HK Stock Exchange IPO seem to have left regulators confounded, speechless

END 

Sunday, November 24, 2019

"You wake up one day and find decisions made in our country that are not in the interests of our country": Was Duncan Lewis speaking about his boss, George Brandis? Brandis conduct in the matter of Ausgrid, the Top Group LLB decision, Zhu Minshen's meeting with Brandis,all require Brandis to explain himself

by Ganesh Sahathevan






Former ASIO chief Duncan Lewis declared last week:

"You wake up one day and find decisions made in our country that are not in the interests of our country."


In an interview published by Quarterly Essay Lewis warned that  covert foreign intrusion into the heart of Australian politics is "something we need to be very, very careful about".

ASIO was for much of Lewis's tenure under the purview of the Attorney General, George Barndis. As reported last week, Brandis does have questions to answer about his dealings with Zhu Minshen and especially Zhu's license to issue LLB degrees granted by the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board.


Fergus Hunter reported in the SMH , 


Top Education Institute, the company Dr Zhu established in 2001 and PricewaterhouseCoopers invested in earlier this year(2016) , specialises in law, business and accounting qualifications costing between $8500 and $80,000.
In November(2015) , he met Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull for a dinner related to the institute's newly established law school.
In April (2016), he discussed the merits of law degrees with Senator Brandis.
This is interesting given that Top's law school is accredited by the New South Wales Legal Profession Admission Board,which is under the purview of AG NSW Mark Speakman SC.  The common thread however is in the fact that Turnbull ,Brandis and Speakman are all "moderates" which in English means they are of their Liberal Party's Left faction.
The decision to grant Zhu Minshen the authority to award LLBs is exceptional (see story below).
Was Lewis referring to his former boss, George Branids?

END


SEE ALSO

Sunday, August 18, 2019

Why did the LPAB make an exception for China's Minshen Zhu & Top Group -AG NSW Speakman maintains political silence despite weakening share price, China protests

by Ganesh Sahathevan




Top Education Group Ltd

Follow

HKG: 1752
0.32 HKD −0.0050 
19 Aug, 4:00 pm GMT+8 · Disclaimer



Open0.33
High0.33
Low0.32
Mkt cap826.11M
P/E ratio81.66
 
Div yield-
Prev close0.33
52-wk high0.46
52-wk low0.24






Anyone can see that Top Group stands out in this list from the NSW LPAB website:


Accredited law courses

In accordance with Section 29 of the Uniform Law and by virtue of the transitional and savings provisions in the Legal Profession Uniform Admission Rules 32(3)(a) the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board has accredited the following Academic courses
Name of InstitutionCourse
Legal Profession Admission BoardDiploma in Law
University of SydneyLLB or JD
University of New South WalesLLB or JD
Macquarie UniversityLLB or JD
University of Technology SydneyLLB or JD
University of WollongongLLB
University of New EnglandLLB or JD
Southern Cross UniversityLLB
University of NewcastleLLB or JD
Western Sydney UniversityLLB
University of Notre DameLLB
TOP Education InstituteLLB
Australian Catholic UniversityLLB
Charles Sturt UniversityLLB​ or LLB/BCrimJustice



Top Group has been happy to advertise the fact that the LPAB granted it the "first and only" license to grant law degrees granted a private company.


See also 
NSW Libs received donations of $44,275 from TOP Education Group just before after TOP was granted the "first & only" license issued a private company to award law degrees: AG Speakman and his LPAB refuse to disclose all details in the LPAB Annual Reports


China-HK protest on Australian campuses but not at Minshen Zhu controlled campuses-Are legal profession admission rules being used (again ) to suppress complaints and protests







Wednesday, November 20, 2019

Australian billionaires propose to do a Bakun where Olivia Lum failed: Twiggy & Canon-Brookes looking decidedly old school, taking after Ting Pek Khiing,and is PwC going to be answerable to investors in this remake of the mid-90s Bakun Undersea Cable disaster

by Ganesh Sahathevan


Atlassian co-founder Mike Cannon-Brookes' family investment firm, Grok Ventures, will help fund development of a solar-power link between the Northern Territory and Singapore.





First the Sydney Morning Herald  headline, which seems not to have  made any impact in Singapore:

Billionaires invest in 'massive' solar farm to supply power to Singapore






Australian billionaires Mike Cannon-Brookes and Andrew "Twiggy" Forrest have joined a capital raising of "tens of millions of dollars" to build a huge solar farm in Australia to supply electricity to Singapore.

David Griffin, chief executive of Sun Cable, did not disclose the total investment other than to say it was less than $50 million. Mr Cannon-Brookes and his wife, Annie, were "lead investors" with their family firm Grok Ventures, while Mr Forrest tipped in funds from his Squadron Energy company.


The over-subscribed raising marks the start of what could become a $22 billion plan to build the world's largest solar farm with a 10-gigawatt capacity covering 15,000 hectares near Tennant Creek in the NT, and a 22GW-hour storage plant.

The project would aim to supply competitively priced electricity to the Darwin region and to Singapore via a 4500-kilometre high-voltage cable.



All this brings to mind a slightly less ambitious plan from the mid 90s, which was even easier to fund, and finally died ten years ago despite valiant attempts by less than clean politicians to keep it alive


RM10b bonds to fund cable project



See Also 

Damned Corruption Began With Bakun



AND, Singapore's energy market is a tough one, even for local heroes like Olivia Lum, who has got  badly burnt by an attempt to diversify into energy generation:

In 2017, Hyflux embarked on a divestment exercise of Tuaspring Integrated Water and Power Project - the company's largest asset - "in line with its asset light strategy", but was unable to finalise any binding bids.
It said that "despite strong initial interest in this project", losses from electricity generation, lack of understanding of Singapore power market by potential buyers and delayed regulatory approval led to "a protracted sale process"
PwC  have led the fund raising for the Australian project, and one does wonder about their liability for promoting the project:

The Australia Singapore Power Link (ASPL) aims to supply renewable electricity from a 10GW solar farm to both Darwin and Singapore via a high voltage direct current transmission line – a plan first outlined by Beyond Zero Emissions in August, and which quickly attracted the attention of the likes of Cannon-Brookes.
According to a release from pWc, who guided the fund-raising process, the project will also include a massive 22GWh of battery storage located near Tennant Creek in the Northern Territory,  with electricity supply transported by a high voltage direct current transmission network, extending 4,500 km from the project site.
END 




Monday, November 18, 2019

George Brandis and Zhu Minshen's license to award LLB degrees: Brandis conduct in the matter of China's attempt to buy Ausgrid raises further questions about his dealings with Zhu Minshen, and the NSW LPAB's decision to grant Zhu and his Top Group that license.

by Ganesh Sahathevan


Hon George Brandis





In May 2018 Peter Hartcher and the SMH reported with regards the  the federal government's decision to veto the $10 billion sale of Ausgrid to a Chinese-dominated partnership in 2016:

 In the inner sanctum of the cabinet's national security committee, there were some terse exchanges. The then secretary of the Defence Department, Dennis Richardson, emphatically rejected any suggestion that it was his department’s responsibility to police the critical infrastructure list.
The Treasury hosts the body that has to consider foreign buy-ins of any scale or sensitivity, the Foreign Investment Review Board, but the Treasury doesn’t manage the list of critical infrastructure. “Well,” Scott Morrison asked at one point, “Who is responsible for managing the critical infrastructure list?” He looked around the table, according to multiple people present at the time. It was not a secret. In fact, the public website of the Attorney-General’s Department stated that it was responsible for managing the list.

After a silence, when the attorney-general George Brandis said nothing, the secretary of his department, Chris Moraitis, spoke up: “We are.”   



The above account of the conduct of George Brandis' ,who was then also in charge of ASIO is added to the issues raised by this writer in the article: 

Top Group's LLB: Did ASIO warn its minister George Brandis, did Brandis, the NSW LPAB and Law Council Australia ignore ASIO


It does look as if Brandis, who is currently High Commissioner to the UK, has treated matters of national security as if he were in court, where one can always rely on silence to justify the argument that a decision of the court is valid regardless of the facts because the particular issue had not been plead. 
Unfortunately, the real world and in particular national security cannot work that way. 
Brandis must provide answers, as do the NSW LPAB , its chairman Tom Bathurst, and all others involved in granting Zhu Minshen his history making license.
END 

Top Group's LLB: Did ASIO warn its minister George Brandis, did Brandis, the NSW LPAB and Law Council Australia ignore ASIO- Information from Chinese Government websites raises questions for which Dan Tehan must obtain answers.

by Ganesh Sahathevan



Hon George Brandis


As reported on this blog yesterday:
Zhu Minshen's Law School Dean was a member of Law Council Australia's Legal Education Committee while "specially engaged by China 's "1000 Experts Project"


The Communist Party China's Central Organisation Department (COD) oversees the Thousand Talent ,or Thousand Expert Project which recruited Zhu Minshen's Law School Dean, Eugene Clark.


Among the other China Government agencies involved in the 1000 Expert project are: -Ministry of Human Resources & Social Security -Central United Front Work Department -Ministry of Public Security -The Overseas Chinese Affairs Office - Central Committee of the Communist Youth League


The entry in any form by any one of the agencies named above,let alone collectively via a single vehicle into any Australian institution, and especially legal institutions, ought to have alerted ASIO, who ought to have then advised the Minister in charge, who in 2015 was the Attorney General George Brandis, of the threat.

If ASIO had been alert to the threat it is likely that it would have similarly advised the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board and the Law Council Of Australia. Alternatively it would have been Brandis' duty to do so, assuming that he had been properly advised.

Had they been advised, did they ignore the threat, and if so why? It now falls to Education Minister Dan Tehan to use his new powers to obtain answers; he may have to work with Peter Dutton and Home Affairs to do so, and the public have aright to be informed of his findings.


Eugene Clark receiving his 1000 Experts letter
of appointment

END

SEE ALSO

Thursday, November 14, 2019


New foreign interference laws may require Minister Tehan to apply his "blunt instruments" to Zhu Minshen's Top Group; investigation of regulators including the NSW LPAB must follow

by Ganesh Sahathevan




The AFR has reported  that universities will be forced to take action over China ties:

The education minister (Dan Tehan)  told universities he has ways of compelling them to take action on foreign interference, reinforcing comments he made earlier this week that he had "blunt instruments" to use if they didn't .
These include acting against a university through the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, which is the industry regulator, or writing new rules into individual 
contracts each university has with government for funding.


Zhu Minshen's Top Group has a history of interference in local politics which is a matter of public record. As reported previously on this blog Zhu Minshen undermined an Australian Federal Police directive.


In his 2018 book "Silent Invasion" Professor Clive Hamilton reports that Top Education Group's Zhu Minshen organised students , including students from his Top Education Institute to protest against Tibetans at the 2008 rally , which counted towards the Top students’ assessment. Zhu’s Top Institution is “perhaps the only accredited degree program in Australia that counts agitating for a foreign power towards its qualifications.

He also  describes how  Zhu Minshen and his Top Education Institute(and other Chinese entities) interfere  in Australian politics.The section on Zhu and Top begins :
"Few people noticed, but the  fishy smell around Zhu Minshen's Top Education Institute was noticeable a few years before it began wafting from the front pages of the newspaper (such as the AFR in 2013)"


The donation scandal that Zhu was involved in has been complicated by the fact that Zhu made a series of donations to the NSW Liberals which coincided with the grant of his license to issue LLBs.

While these rules have only just been introduced, and while it is unlikely that the laws will apply retrospectively, the  issue of Zhu Minshen's license to issue LLB's is an ongoing one that has been enabled by the  NSW Legal Profession Board and its chairman the NSW Chief Justice Thomas Bathurst. The LPAB and the Chief Justice have refused to provide answers. Compounding the issue is a recent incident where the NSW LAPB and its chairman refused to investigate complaints from this writer against another institution under their purview, The College of Law,and instead attempted to discredit this writer's work on the 1MDB scandal. They relied on special powers granted law school principals which give them, and Zhu, the ability to determine arbitrarily who may practise law in NSW, and in Australia.


The history of secrecy and failure of regulation by the LPAB will require Tehan to apply his "blunt instruments" to both Top Group and its regulator, the LPAB. 

Minister Tehan may not have contemplated an investigation into the NSW LPAB ,its chairman Tom Bathurst and the AG NSW Mark Speakman when his officers and he formulated the foreign interference laws. However, the conduct of these regulatory bodies makes the investigation necessary. 

END

See Also

"The fishy smell around Zhu Minshen's Top Education Institute": Clive Hamilton's "Silent Invasion" raises questions for NSW AG Mark Speakman & the LPAB