Peter Ridd writes of this unbelievable example of arrogance and hubris from James Cook University on his GoFundMe page:
Dear All,
There has been a flurry of media activity on the case but the main news is that it looks as though the Vice Chancellor (VC) is digging in. She and the Provost Prof Chris Cocklin released an extraordinary statement saying the Judge was wrong on all 17 findings against JCU (see link below). In my opinion, she had not read Judge Vasta’s judgement and clearly does not comprehend what has just happened.
But this means that unless the JCU council (the governing body) deals with the VC, an appeal is likely. In my media statements I have repeatedly stated that the JCU council will be complicit in this mess if they do not deal with the VC and Provost. Due to the huge media response in Australia, the council will have heard this loud and clear.
JCU has near infinite resources from the taxpayer and the VC will not pay a cent when she ultimately loses. It matters not to JCU if they appeal on weak grounds, and the VC may well have retired from the university in the time it could take, perhaps 5 years, if it goes all the way to the high court.
An appeal will cost the best part of a million dollars – much more if it goes to the high court. But I reckon that if we are forced, we can raise the funds. I am very confident that we can win any appeal, although we would want to look closely at whatever mischief they come up with.
The fact is that we have the upper hand – we won the first round 17-nil. The university is bleeding reputation due to its own mistakes, and there is growing anger especially in North Queensland. If they think they can intimidate us with an appeal, they should think again.
Kind regards
Peter
https://www.jcu.edu.au/news/releases/2019/april/response-to-federal-circuit-court-judgement
With this case representing a repudiation of the Australian state religion, it seems fairly obvious to me that any and all norms will be dispensed with, and the necessary miscarriage of justice will be brought about in due course. May I be proved wrong.
There is definitely growing anger in North Queensland.
I wish you the very best of luck with these (I can’t think of a family-friendly word).
Regards,
Angry of North Queensland
It will be interesting to see how this pans out.
Any action against the Vice Chancellor will need to be driven by theUniverrsity Council and, in particular, the Chancellor, Bill Tweddell who, prior to the appointment at JCU, was a career bureaucrat with a number of overseas postings. It is noteworthy that both he and his wife are alumni of JCU and it will depend upon whether he values the reputation of the university as a world class research institution more than simply supporting the VC, Sandra Harding, and winning at all costs in a misguided attempt to protect her reputation and also funding sources.
It is also worth noting that in January 2019, Professor Harding was appointed an Officer in the General Division of the Order of Australia in the Australia Day 2019 honours list for her distinguished service to education at the national and international level, and to the community of Queensland.
She is an Honorary Fellow of the Australian College of Educators, Fellow of the Queensland Academy of Arts and Sciences, Fellow of the Australian Institute of Company Directors and a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Management. She is also deeply embedded in many aspects of the Australian educational and research establishment.
I may be wrong but I don’t think that she is the type of person who will just admit a mistake or even stand down, given the history of this case and episodes before it where JCU staff have been intimidated if they dare to question the orthodoxy and so threaten the funding trough.
Sadly, integrity now seems to be a very scarce commodity within the Australian University system and people like Peter Ridd are the only remaining bastions in a system that I once held dear to my heart.
I will certainly be contributing to support the next round of litigation.
i did read a very small bit in the online news that Peter had won…and the uni were considering further action..
from the above info that sheilas very firmly entrenched and removing her before death will be nigh on impossible unfortunately, and she sure didnt get where she is by being nice and playing fair in that environment.
the data that says most successes in Biz n politics etc are psychopaths or tendency hold true for the ladies also
As I have said before, in Australia there is no justice. There is a legal system, and the biggest pockets win. Sorrt Dr. Ridd. You know how it is here in Aus.
I’m all for people/corporations using their own money to buy the best legal team they can buy. The only problem here is that the biggest pockets here is that of the taxpayers, who have nothing to gain. How great would it be to make bad/illegal decisions in life and have someone else always pay for the inevitable failures?
In Australia, it doesn’t matter.
‘in Australia there is no justice’
Something Cardinal George Pell is contemplating every day as he is incarcerated in solitary confinement in a maximum security prison on the basis of a single witness evidence that was shown by multiple witnesses to be, practically speaking, impossible. It is Australian justice that stands in the dock in June at his repeal – not Pell.
*appeal
fwiw
I do feel that “I told you so” applies here.
The pot of other people’s money will be endlessly peculated unless a firm punch on the nose is applied here.
Previous antics of Aussie politicised climate inquisitors in institutional sinecures leads one to believe that they feel invulnerable. Wasn’t there a NSW government hydrographic surveyor (iirc) that got sacked for pointing out that the data didn’t support the politician’s claims?
It is abundantly clear these people are seeking to damage Dr. Ridd’s career and wellbeing in an organised fashion – who is correct about GBR is a sideshow – this is about vindictive doing down of a challenge by any means to hand and I’d argue that that is criminal.
Did anyone really expect anything less?
Just wondering, but my comments don’t seem to be coming up. They used to appear immediately.
Maybe an issue my end . Don’t think I said anything controversial.
Thanks. Eamon
Hah! Thanks. 😉
I think the lag is due to processing time of automated WordPress moderation filters. There is almost always a lag time with mine. Now when a comment of mine goes into manual moderation (requiring human intervention, I presume) it appears immediately and the word “unapproved’ appears in the URL.
Are all Australian Universities line JCU?
I note that in the last few years in the UK, universities have spent 85 million on gagging orders (money for silence) to cover up bullying etc.
To downgrade the facts about the GBR is a error. In my opinion for what it is worth the GBR is the main factor.
Yes its true that the top brass of JCU is out to get Peter Reed, but why ? this whole matter could have been settled by a generous “Golden Handshake”, but that would not have stopped the then retired Dr.. Reed for bringing up the GBR issue.
Its far more than the Federal Governments taxpayers funds to the Uni. Its all about Climate Change, which right now in the midst of a Federal Election is a red button issue between the Liberal (Conservative e) and the Labour (Democrats) parties.
Bill shorten wants to bring in a sort of Carbon Credit tax, more for the likesof Al Gore,. The Liberals say that going on the original Kyoto agreement , Australia is doing all that was required of it.
So while both parties are talking about the same thing, climate change, the Labour seem intent on crippling the Australians economy. So again saying that there is nothing wrong with their favourite warming icon, the GBR , could be considered a problem, especially for the Labour Party.
So if JCU does not appeal, or make some loud face saving effort to say that Peter Reed got his statements about the GBR is doing fine all wrong, then the whole nonsense of Climate Change could also be considered to be wrong.
And the ABC did mention it.
MJE VK5ELL
Who is Peter Reed, why is JCU out to get him, and what relevance does it have to the Peter Ridd case? 😉
I’m a Yank who knows nothing essentially nothing about Aus law.
IIRC, there is a FOIA-like law, is it or something else powerful enough to obtain information from JCU about how many dollars have been spent on this case. It would be nice to know how many people spent more than some number of hours on the case. I assume asking for names is more than can be expected, and I’d oppose that anyway. There are too many jerks out there who will quickly pounce on them with everything from faux outrage to credible death threats against family members.
Can someone in Aus create a website that collects all the papers, briefs, press releases, FOIA dialog, etc on the case to get everything in one place?
A WordPress site would probably suffice.
Wow.
JCU Quadrupling down.
The in-print dramatic soliloquy by the Provost dated 16 April confirms all of the worst intentions that could mostly only be inferred but the university’s administration up to this point.
They despise free speech and freedom of expression. It is most telling from he judgement given that the JCU councilopened their argument in court by pointing out that there is no constitutional free speech amendment to which Dr Ridd could appeal–as if he should need one. Frankly, JCU “should” guarantee it to him anyway. Instead they insist on their authority to issue gag order to hush things up. Unfortunately for their authoritarian plans, contract law and precedent gave Dr Ridd a free speech guarantee in the employment agreement that the university made with him when they employed him.
The fact that is is extremely Orwellian to attempt to turn a confidentiality clause in the Code of conduct designed to protect employees like Dr Ridd (or others under investigation) and that Dr Ridd was at liberty anytime to waive that confidentiality into a means to shut him up about this whole process has completely evaded their understanding.
I probably should have let this at just…..
Wow.
I am not a lawyer but I would have thought that, if Australian law follows English law, Dr. Ridd should have all, or at least a large part, of his costs to date reimbursed by JCU. That should form a good base for the costs attaching to defending any appeal. The rest will come easily from those of us who will readily fork out to see justice done.
But, assuming that JCU pay Dr. Ridd’s costs to date, this case in total must already have cost the university more than ½ million dollars (AUD 500,000). Whatever the external auditors, if any, examine and report on, this matter it will also test the flaunted independence of the Internal Audit who are responsible for:
“…Compliance auditing which has traditionally been a focus area for Internal Audit activities and enables the Manager, Internal Audit to express an opinion on whether the University or an organisational area has complied in all material aspects, with requirements as measured by the suitable criteria which include:….
University policies, procedures and the Code of Conduct;
Contracts to which the University is a party; …”
The Internal Audit report should make interesting reading.
My apologies a spelling mistake, but its still all about the GBR.
Her in Australia the GBR is a icon, so to have a employee of a University
say that there is nothing wrong with it, that its doing just fine , is a very
big No, No.
MJE VK5ELL
Even if that conclusion is the truth? Bleaching is a natural part of the reef ecosystem. Aerial photographs and more comprehensive diving expeditions did not back up the catastrophic findings of the center’s report. That is not to say there isn’t a need to be careful about runoff and fishing practices, only that there was not a crisis on the reef. When scientists go beyond the data in a quest for outlandish funding, they are no longer scientist, but politicians.
BTW, during the past week across North QLD there’s been a barrage of Southern Uni advertising, apparently to try to poach JCU students, that is being countered by a blizzard of annoying repetitive JCU TV-ads to try and stop other Uni’s cutting its grass.
@WXcycles
and they just keep getting handed piles of mostly tax payer sourced funds – what’s not to like?
A succinct summary of the entire Ridd versus JCU case. (Monty Python stoning scene from Life of Brian).
In the UK, more people know about it this time around & most are angry (we’ve just heard UK, universities have spent £85 million on gagging orders) so the cash will flow in to Peter to help carry the fight on.
Reading VC Sandra Harding’s bio and scanning through JCU’s website I’m not surprised she’s digging in since JCU appears to be on the front lines of social justice and saving the planet, and given VC Harding’s credentials. For example, Harding’s experience and credentials are all in educational public policy in government and academia; no indication of rigorous science. The website displays the slogan “Stay Social,” and they tout an award of “5 Stars for Social Equity.” I also noted that one rarely sees a photo that includes a Western white male.
Hang in the Peter. We’ll continue to support you.
At some point this now public issue ought to impact enrollment.
Why spend money and time getting a degree from a place tainted
by such unsavory things?
Choosing to go elsewhere is an easy decision.
Such has occurred in the USA when nasty happens.
Unbelievable arrogance is prerequisite for this personality type.
Remember, the decision by the University to go forward or not will be an emotional one, not a logical one. If they believe strongly enough that social justice demands they appeal, there will be an appeal – not matter what the odds, facts, or damage done.
Now supporters of the University (those donating large amounts of money) might have a thing or two to say about it…I doubt they want all their money wasted. The potential of crowd-sourcing to defend Prof. Peter Ridd means deep pockets, and donators who actually EARNED the money they donated might be smart enough to let this go. Money talks.
No – there will be no concern from the University supporters. They have access to untold billions in taxpayer allocations and activist group funding. They won’t want to lose this…
This is going to be a bit like Brexit, or Trump’s election.
It starts with the Establishment supremely confident that they can have their way regardless, and that everyone will do what they say.
Then there is the growing realisation that they have no valid argument to make, and that people no longer believe them. They go into overdrive on ‘Project Fear’ and start making wild accusations, building up insignificant issues into show-stoppers.
Then they lose.
AFTER THAT, they double down on the wild accusations, run an interminable delay or semi-impeachment process, and shout that the decision must be reversed – though they have no valid reason why.
Eventually they will get some kind of retrial. At this point they will pull all the dirty tricks in the book, including bribery and criminal activity in an attempt to get their way once again…
I am not one for donating, but if it goes that route, you can count on my tiny contribution this go around. Keep up the good fight.
I too, as a rule, do not donate, but an appeal could change that posture of mine too.
Peter Ridd denigrated no one — he pointed out how colleagues were denigrating themselves, as they themselves failed to uphold the very principles upon which JCU supposedly stands.
The admin emperors have no academic robes.
When JCU’s faculty assembles for graduation ceremonies instead of wearing robes with various color schemes to indicate levels of academic achievement, I recommend the JCU faculty attend in the buff. After all, doesn’t nudity (1) represent the absence of all social inequality/injustice, and (2) characterize a state of total lack of honor?