Attorney General Christian Porter in the Public Interest?

In the public interest.

We need to understand politicians, where they come from, their allegiances, friendships, beliefs, who they have worked, political affiliations, ideology to ensure those who represent us do so. I am passionate about the rule of law utilised to ensure good governance, democratic principles, the Australian Constitution and ultimately to ensure that justice prevails. I am concerned about legislation that benefits one group over another, legislation that changes democratic or human rights and legislation that is imported from other nations to fulfil global interests. I personally resonate with the words I’ve heard in court not as a statement of a legal contract but as a desire for truth: the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God (or whatever you believe in) as a mantra for all persons. I wish to live in a society where no-one is above the law because of shared ideology, allegiances, religion, guilds, clubs or as a means to maintain power.

All this is in the public interest as they represent us. Do we know them?

This is a Wikipedia overview of Christian Porter, the Australian Attorney General.

An excerpt from below:

Following the raids on the journalists of the ABC and Newscorp, Porter would not rule out prosecuting journalists for publishing public interest stories, although he said he would be “seriously disinclined” to go ahead with a prosecution.[32] In the case of Newscorp journalist Annika Smethurst, Porter asked the court not to destroy the evidence collected from the raid on her house, so that it could be used in a future court case. Porter and the Federal Police said the restrictive privacy when it comes to security matters, “may justify very large incursions on the freedom” of individuals.

I will add in my poetry in the public interest as a inner search for truth: Christian Porter – Wikipedia

Christian Porter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to navigationJump to searchFor the singer, see The Voice (U.S. season 4).

The Honourable
Christian Porter
Attorney-General for Australia
Assumed office
20 December 2017
Prime MinisterMalcolm Turnbull
Scott Morrison
Preceded byGeorge Brandis
Leader of the House
Assumed office
26 May 2019
Prime MinisterScott Morrison
DeputyDarren Chester
Preceded byChristopher Pyne
Minister for Industrial Relations
Assumed office
26 May 2019
Prime MinisterScott Morrison
Preceded byKelly O’Dwyer
Treasurer of Western Australia
In office
14 December 2010 – 12 June 2012
PremierColin Barnett
Preceded byColin Barnett
Succeeded byColin Barnett
Attorney-General of Western Australia
In office
23 September 2008 – 12 June 2012
PremierColin Barnett
Preceded byJim McGinty
Succeeded byMichael Mischin
Minister for Social Services
In office
21 September 2015 – 20 December 2017
Prime MinisterMalcolm Turnbull
Preceded byScott Morrison
Succeeded byDan Tehan
Member of the Australian Parliament
for Pearce
Assumed office
7 September 2013
Preceded byJudi Moylan
Personal details
BornCharles Christian Porter
(1970-07-11) 11 July 1970 (age 49)[1]
Perth, Western Australia,
Political partyLiberal Party
Spouse(s)Jennifer Porter[2] (separated)
FatherChilla Porter
RelativesCharles Robert Porter (grandfather)
Alma materHale School
University of Western Australia (B.Ec, B.A (Hons), LL.B)[3]
London School of Economics (M.Sc)[3]
ProfessionPolitician, lawyer

Charles Christian Porter (born 11 July 1970) is an Australian Liberal Party politician and lawyer serving as Attorney-General of Australia since 2017, and has served as Member of Parliament (MP) for Pearce since 2013. He was appointed Minister for Industrial Relations and Leader of the House in 2019.

From Perth, Porter attended Hale School, the University of Western Australia and later the London School of Economics, and practised law at Clayton Utz and taught law at the University of Western Australia before his election to parliament. He is the son of the 1956 Olympic silver medallist, Charles “Chilla” Porter, and the grandson of Queensland Liberal politician, Charles Porter, who was a member of the Queensland Legislative Assembly from 1966 to 1980.[4][5]

Before his election to the federal House of Representatives, Porter had served in the Parliament of Western Australia. He first entered the Legislative Assembly after winning the seat of Murdoch in a 2008 by-election following the death of the sitting member, Trevor Sprigg, and he was subsequently elected to the new seat of Bateman at the 2008 general election. After the Liberals formed government, Porter was appointed Attorney-General in the Barnett ministry. In December 2010, he was also appointed Treasurer, and held both portfolios until June 2012, when he resigned from the ministry to contest the 2013 federal election.

Prior to assuming his current position, Porter was Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister in the Abbott Government from December 2014 to September 2015,[6][7] and then Minister for Social Services in the Turnbull Government from September 2015 to December 2017.


Background and early career[edit]

Porter’s father was Charles “Chilla” Porter, who during the 1970s and 1980s was director of Western Australia’s Liberal Party.[5] His grandfather, Sir Charles Robert Porter, was a Queensland Liberal state MP between 1966 and 1980 and served in the ministry of Joh Bjelke-Petersen.[5]

Porter was educated at Hale School, then at the University of Western Australia where he graduated Bachelor of Economics and Bachelor of Arts with first-class honours in politics, before completing a Bachelor of Laws degree. Porter later studied at the London School of Economics for a Master of Science in political theory, from which he graduated at the top of his class with distinction.[8]

Prior to entering Parliament, Porter worked predominantly as a lawyer, starting as a commercial litigator at Clayton Utz before moving to public practice. He spent a year as an advisor to the Federal Minister for Justice and then began working for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions as a senior state prosecutor. Before his election in 2008, Porter was working as a lecturer at Curtin University and the University of Western Australia as well as retaining, part-time, his position as senior prosecutor at the DPP.[9]

Porter has described himself as “not particularly religious”.[10]

State politics[edit]

At the 2008 election, Porter contested and won the newly created seat of Bateman following the abolition of the seat of Murdoch in the 2007 redistribution. He was appointed Attorney-General and Minister for Corrective Services after the election,[11] having held the equivalent shadow portfolios prior to the election.[12]

On 14 December 2010, Porter was sworn in as Treasurer of Western Australia. He retained the portfolio of Attorney General, while the Corrective Services portfolio was transferred to Terry Redman.

On 12 June 2012, he announced he was stepping down from his ministerial portfolios to contest the seat of Pearce at the 2013 Australian federal election.[13]

Federal politics[edit]

See also: Abbott Government and Turnbull Government

At the 2013 election, Porter was elected to federal parliament with an 8% margin. He had a rapid rise through the ranks, becoming the parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister in 2014-15, and was a part of the speaker’s panel from 2013-15.[14]

Minister for Social Services (2015–2017)[edit]

On 20 September 2015, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announced that Porter would replace Scott Morrison as Social Services Minister as part of a Cabinet overhaul.[15]

In 2016, Centrelink, operating under Porter’s senior oversight as Social Services Minister, became involved in a debt recovery controversy. Despite heightened media interest and complaints, after meeting with the Department of Human Services,[16] Porter stated that the program was working “incredibly well”.[17] The program was later subject to a Senate committee inquiry.[18]

One of Porter’s roles was to manage the cashless welfare card, and increased its use in various communities. He spoke of his pride in the outcomes of the policy.[19] The card was linked to increased hardship for many of its users,[20] and there is no evidence that it produces a positive outcome.[21][22][23]

During his time in this ministry, Porter was instrumental in the formation of the coalition policy of performing drug tests on welfare recipients, which was considered bad policy by experts, since there was no evidence anywhere in the world of a similar project working,[24] and the ABC fact checkers called the policy “wishful thinking” that it would help people get off welfare.[25] This section of the legislation was eventually dropped to allow the passage of the remaining elements of the bill, which contained large budget cuts to the welfare system.[26][27]

Porter was criticised for skipping the final sittings of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in order to attend the cricket with John Howard.[28]

Attorney-General (2017–present)[edit]

In a December 2017 reshuffle of the Turnbull ministry, Porter became Attorney-General in place of George Brandis. He relinquished the social services portfolio to Dan Tehan.

At the reshuffle, some of the national security powers and responsibilities previously held by the Attorney-General were transferred to the new position of Minister for Home Affairs, which was given to Peter Dutton.[29] This was seen as a positive by some, who said that the role of attorney general had become too focused on security and that the role should be realigned to its old role of defending the rule of law. It was also suggested that many areas of the law were in crisis because of the security focus, such as family law and incarceration levels of indigenous Australians.[30]

At the commencement of his role as attorney general, Porter called on religious institutions to implement the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.[31]

Following the raids on the journalists of the ABC and Newscorp, Porter would not rule out prosecuting journalists for publishing public interest stories, although he said he would be “seriously disinclined” to go ahead with a prosecution.[32] In the case of Newscorp journalist Annika Smethurst, Porter asked the court not to destroy the evidence collected from the raid on her house, so that it could be used in a future court case. Porter and the Federal Police said the restrictive privacy when it comes to security matters, “may justify very large incursions on the freedom” of individuals.[33]

In November 2019, Porter as Attorney-General extended the religious freedom bill from faith-based schools and organisations to religious hospitals and aged-care providers. The bill states that the aforementioned institutions would be able to employ staff according to their beliefs with legal protection.[34]

Other actions he has taken in his role have been calling on social media platforms to be seen as publishers,[35] attempts to block environmental groups from calling on boycotts of companies connected to the coal industry,[36] repealing the medevac laws, to restrict union activity[37] and attempted to have GetUp! registered as an arm of the Labor party.[38]

Personal life[edit]

Porter was listed as a contender for Cleo magazine’s eligible bachelor of the year.[31]

In 2008 Porter married Jennifer Negus, granddaughter of former independent senator Syd Negus.[39] He took paternity leave after his wife gave birth to his first child the day after being sworn in as the social services minister.[40] The couple separated in January 2020. [41]


  1. ^ WA Parliament bio
  2. ^ “Christian Porter Biography”. Christian Porter: Federal Member for Pearce. Archived from the original on 12 August 2016. Retrieved 7 November 2015.
  3. ^ Jump up to: a b “Hon Christian Porter MP – Parliament of Australia”. Retrieved 26 April 2019.
  4. ^ “First Speech: Hon Christian Porter MP”. Parliament of Australia. Retrieved 7 November 2015.
  5. ^ Jump up to: a b c Poprzeczny, Joseph (7 July 2012). “Promising WA MP’s Canberra bid”. News Weekly. Retrieved 13 February 2016.
  6. ^ Taylor, Lenore (21 December 2014). “Tony Abbott cabinet reshuffle moves Scott Morrison out of immigration”. Guardian Australia. Retrieved 21 December 2014.
  7. ^ “Tony Abbott’s revamped Ministry sworn in at Government House”. News Corp Australia. 23 December 2014. Retrieved 23 December 2014.
  8. ^ “From Cleo to Canberra: Christian Porter is an MP to watch”.
  9. ^
  10. ^
  11. ^ Anglie Raphael, Christian Porter is given the role of Shadow Attorney General, Melville times community, 18 March 2008, p.3
  12. ^ Tullberg, Julie (23 February 2008). “SMH Online News – Porter claims win in Murdoch by-election”. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 12 June 2008.
  13. ^ “WA Treasurer quits state politics for federal stage”. ABC News. 12 June 2012. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  14. ^ corporateName=Commonwealth Parliament; address=Parliament House, Canberra. “Hon Christian Porter MP”. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  15. ^ Clarke, political reporter Melissa; Conifer, Dan (20 September 2015). “Turnbull dumps ministers to make way for Cabinet ‘renewal'”. ABC News. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  16. ^ “Community Affairs References Committee”. Parliament of Australia. 18 May 2017. p. 46. Retrieved 14 August 2017.
  17. ^ McIlroy, Tom (3 January 2017). “Centrelink’s automated debt recovery system working ‘incredibly well’: Minister Christian Porter”. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 14 August 2017.
  18. ^ Doran, Matthew (8 March 2017). “Centrelink debt recovery program to be investigated at Senate committee today”. ABC News. Retrieved 14 August 2017.
  19. ^ “Miranda Live: Cashless welfare improves lives says Christian Porter”. Daily Telegraph. 19 December 2017. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  20. ^ Koslowski, Max (13 September 2019). “‘The card declined and I broke down’: Life on the cashless welfare card”. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  21. ^ “Briefing: What’s wrong with the cashless debitcard?” (PDF). Vinnies. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  22. ^ Koslowski, Max (12 September 2019). “What are cashless welfare cards and how do they work?”. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  23. ^ Allam, Lorena (15 October 2019). “Cashless welfare card: loophole allows purchase of alcohol and pornography”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  24. ^ Henriques-Gomes, Luke (9 September 2019). “The Coalition want to drug test welfare recipients. Here’s why experts think it’s a bad idea”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  25. ^ “Fact check: Drug testing welfare recipients”. ABC News. 18 September 2017. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  26. ^ Knaus, Christopher (22 November 2017). “Drug testing of welfare recipients may be delayed, Christian Porter says”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  27. ^ “Welfare drug testing pilot halted”. The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  28. ^ “Christian Porter cops it for choosing cricket over commission”. NewsComAu. 14 December 2017. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  29. ^ “Porter’s the new AG, but can he keep his own seat?”. ABC News. 19 December 2017. Retrieved 20 December 2017.
  30. ^ “Attorney-General Christian Porter to prioritise family law, rule of law”. Australian Financial Review. 19 December 2017. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  31. ^ Jump up to: a b Peatling, Stephanie (19 December 2017). “Christian Porter, the country’s new top legal officer”. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  32. ^ Remeikis, Amy (20 October 2019). “Christian Porter says he can’t guarantee he wouldn’t prosecute journalists”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  33. ^ Karp, Paul (25 October 2019). “Christian Porter asks high court not to destroy material from Annika Smethurst raid”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  34. ^ “Subscribe to The Australian | Newspaper home delivery, website, iPad, iPhone & Android apps”. Retrieved 20 November 2019.
  35. ^ Karp, Paul (20 November 2019). “Christian Porter calls for Facebook and Twitter to be treated as publishers”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  36. ^ editor, Adam Morton Environment (10 November 2019). “Inside Market Forces, the small climate group Scott Morrison wants to put out of business”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 25 November 2019.CS1 maint: extra text: authors list (link)
  37. ^ editor, Adam Morton Environment (10 November 2019). “Inside Market Forces, the small climate group Scott Morrison wants to put out of business”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 25 November 2019.CS1 maint: extra text: authors list (link)
  38. ^ Karp, Paul (21 October 2019). “Liberal MPs complain about GetUp at inquiry into 2019 election”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  39. ^
  40. ^ “Who is Christian Porter? | PBA”. Pro Bono Australia. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
  41. ^

Federal Executive Council Advises Governor General

In the public interest. I didn’t know about this group. I am looking into the role of the Governor General, as the Queens representative and if we are a legitimate representative democracy or a colony of British interests. It is noteworthy to remember the Whitlam dismissal and how a foreign representative could dismiss a government that has been popularly elected. As I research I realise that Australians know nothing about democracy or their government.

Key questions are:

What is sovereignty?
What is democracy?
And ‘We the People’ is this true?

This is a Federal Executive handbook:

Federal Executive Council (Australia)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigationJump to search

In Australia‘s political system, the Federal Executive Council is a body established by Section 62 of the Australian Constitution to advise the Governor-General,[1] and comprises, at least notionally, all current and former Commonwealth Ministers and Assistant Ministers. As the Governor-General is bound by convention to follow the advice of the Executive Council on almost all occasions, the Executive Council has de jure executive power.[2] This power is used to legally enact the decisions of the Cabinet (the de facto body of executive power), which under conventions of the Westminster system has no de jure authority.[2][3] In practice, the Federal Executive Council meets solely to endorse and give legal force to decisions already made by the Cabinet.

The Federal Executive Council is the Australian equivalent of Executive Councils in other Commonwealth realms, and is similar to the privy councils of Canada and the United Kingdom (although unlike the UK privy council, the Leader of the Opposition is not typically a member).[3]



The Australian Federal Executive Council consists of all current and former Commonwealth Ministers and Assistant Ministers (previously called parliamentary secretaries).[1] Members of the Executive Council are referred to as Councillors and are entitled to the style ‘The Honourable‘.[1] Section 64 of the Constitution stipulates that when a Minister is appointed, that Minister shall also become a member of the Executive Council.[1][4] There is no provision for such membership to come to an end, but only those Ministers in the current ministry who are invited to take part in meetings are in practice actually involved in Council activities.[1]

The Governor-General presides over meetings of the Executive Council, but is not a member.[1] A Member of the Cabinet is appointed to hold the position of Vice-President of the Executive Council to act as presiding officer of the Executive Council in the absence of the Governor-General,[5] at no additional salary or allowance. The appointment of Sir James Killen to this post in 1982 was controversial because the office was seen as a sinecure given that he held no Ministerial portfolio. He was nevertheless considered a member of the Ministry by virtue of this office, and he even administered a small, short-lived department (the Department of the Vice-President of the Executive Council; such a department also existed for two months in 1971 under Sir Alan Hulme, who was simultaneously Postmaster-General).

The Governor-General has the power to dismiss any member of the Executive Council, but that power is rarely exercised in practice. It might be exercised if, hypothetically, a minister or former minister were convicted of a serious criminal offence. One notable case was that of the Queensland Senator Glen Sheil. Malcolm Fraser‘s government was re-elected at the 1977 election on 10 December, and on 19 December he publicly announced the ministry he would be recommending to the Governor-General, which included Senator Sheil as the new Minister for Veterans’ Affairs. Sheil was sworn in as an Executive Councillor but, prior to the scheduled swearing-in of the Ministry, he made public statements about apartheid that were at odds with the government’s attitude to the issue. Fraser then advised Governor-General Sir Zelman Cowen not to include Sheil in the ministry—advice that Cowen was required by convention to follow. Sheil’s appointment as an Executive Councillor without portfolio was terminated on 22 December.[6]


Meetings of the Executive Council do not require the Governor-General’s attendance, but the Governor-General must be notified of the meeting in order for it to be valid. A quorum for meetings is the Governor-General and two serving ministers or assistant ministers. If the Governor-General is not in attendance, quorum is the Vice-President and two serving ministers or assistant ministers. In the absence of the Vice-President, quorum is three ministers, one of whom, a senior minister, will preside. In practice, meetings will only be attended by a small number of Councillors rather than the full Cabinet.[1]

Most of the powers vested in the Governor-General, such as appointments and the authorisation of budgets, are exercisable only by “the Governor-General in Council” – that is, under advice from the Federal Executive Council. The Council acts as a formal ratification body for decisions of the Cabinet. In a parallel manner to the Royal Assent given to legislative Acts by the Governor-General after they have passed both Houses of Parliament, proposed executive actions will receive the approval of the Governor-General in Council after they have been agreed to by the Prime Minister and Cabinet.[1]

See also[edit]


  1. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h “Federal Executive Council Handbook”. Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Archived from the original on 27 April 2015. Retrieved 7 January 2015.
  2. ^ Jump up to: a b “Democracy in Australia – Australia’s political system” (PDF). Australian Collaboration. Retrieved 25 January 2014.
  3. ^ Jump up to: a b Hamer, David. “The executive government”. Department of the Senate (Australia). Retrieved 25 January 2014.
  4. ^ “Chapter II – The Executive Government”. Constitution of Australia. Office of Parliamentary Counsel (Australia). Retrieved 25 January 2014.
  5. ^ “Federal Executive Council Handbook” (PDF). Government of Australia. June 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 July 2007. Retrieved 7 July 2007.
  6. ^ Gavin Souter, Acts of Parliament, p. 624

City of London’s Influence in UK Parliament

Kick bankers out of Parliament

This first article is by Avaaz seeking to abolish special privilege of the Remembrancer (City of London) in Parliament. The second is additional comment plus a story on the bedroom tax which links to financiers/bankers influence and dogma as the welfare sector is cut as it is economically unviable. This reflects financial/banking perspectives not the public interest. Inequality is caused by unequal distribution of wealth as those in positions of power and influence have disproportionate influence to change the game in their favour. If a Remembrancer can block legislation which redistributes wealth or requires more visibility or nationalises the banks, then they are perverting the democratic process. Despite the fact they are 500 corporations and not the public, should be cause for concern as this clearly corrupts a so-called democracy.

What is required is a level playing field for all. Why is this important? Because in the general population it creates greater gaps, hardship where some are eeking out a living and others are high on the hog, as they say! The structural barriers of class, status, education, family, occupation etc inhibit the real wealth of a nation from rising. The real wealth is in the people.

AVARZ raises the issues of the special category of the Remembrancer in the UK Parliament. The Remembrancer is the City of London’s representative.

Do you mean “@”? Add your number if you’d like to hear from us by phone or text. Here are some points you might want to raise in your message:

  • I am outraged that the banker-controlled City of London has special privileges in Parliament.
  • The City of London’s representative, the Remembrancer, should not have the right to sit in the House of Commons chamber.
  • I call on you to use your power as Speaker to bar the Remembrancer from the chamber.



United Kingdom ___ Note: [sender_name] sent you this message as part of an Avaaz campaign to kick bankers out of parliament at To respond, please e-mail


By continuing you agree to receive Avaaz emails. Our Privacy Policy will protect your data and explains how it can be used. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Everyone has the right to lobby our government, but one group’s formidable financial firepower and long standing privileges seem to give their views extra weight — bankers from the City of London have a special seat in Parliament to use for their special pleading. Their level of access is unbelievable, but together we can make one simple change to start to take back our democracy.

The Remembrancer is an ancient post answerable to the City that sits in the House of Commons. He has 6 lawyers, a budget of £5.3 million a year and the right to see every draft law before it’s passed. It’s no wonder that the government struggles to stand up to the City! But a single decision by one MP can ban the Remembrancer from the chamber for good — let’s convince Speaker of the House John Bercow MP to take bankers off Parliament’s guest list.

Last month the City held another sham election where companies cast more votes than citizens. Before the new rulers decide how to direct their lobbying muscle, let’s tell speaker Bercow to kick the bankers out of Parliament. Send a message now.

Second article:

Kick privileged bankers’ man The Remembrancer out of Parliament

When Parliament is sitting The Remembrancer has a special seat to the right of the Speaker in the House of Commons


Ros Wynne JonesReal Britain columnist

  • 00:00, 8 MAY 2013
  • Updated01:04, 8 MAY 2013


Privileged: City Remembrancer with Gordon Brown in 2008
(Image: PA)

Top of Form

Sign up to FREE daily email alerts from Mirror – politics


We will use your email address only for sending you newsletters. Please see ourPrivacy Noticefor details of your data protection rights

Bottom of Form

As Elizabeth II takes to the throne in the House of Lords for the Queen’s Speech today, a ­little-known figure will be taking his special seat close by – all the better to scrutinise every new piece of legislation for how it benefits or damages the banks.

He’s the only non-MP or civil servant with a seat in the House of Lords and House of Commons.

His job dates back to Henry VIII.

He has a budget of £5.3million, a staff bill of £500,000 – including a team of six lawyers – and he represents bankers’ interests at the heart of our democracy.

He’s called The Remembrancer.

And – as the banks get away scot free and disabled people pay for the banking crisis, as millionaires get tax cuts while poor people get taxed on how many bedrooms they have – a new campaign by pressure group Avaaz called “Kick Bankers Out of Parliament” is beginning to ask exactly why he’s still allowed the special ­privileges he has.

The shortest explanation is this: over 1,000 years, kings, queens and governments have been saved by loans from the City of London – the 1.2 square miles at the heart of Britain’s financial centre.

In exchange the City of London has extracted great privileges that still distort our ­democracy.

The current Remembrancer is a man called Paul Double, a former barrister.

He has held the post since 2003 but has never done any ­interviews about his role. A few weeks ago I contacted the City of London to ask for one.

They took several days to reply, during which Margaret Thatcher died – and then said he was busy with ­arrangements around her funeral, which took place inside City of London ­jurisdiction.

One of the Remembrancer’s roles is to appear at a ceremony involving a red cord on the City’s boundary ­whenever the Queen makes a “state entry” as she did for the funeral.

This, as it turns out, is one of the ­Remembrancer’s less troubling duties.

Nicholas Shaxson, who wrote the brilliant investigation into the City of London, Treasure Islands, calls him the “world’s oldest ­institutional lobbyist”.

As if having 18 millionaires in the Cabinet isn’t enough to advance big money’s interests, when Parliament is sitting he has a special seat to the right of the Speaker in the House of Commons.

He also has a mirror image seat in the Lords.

Shaxson says a previous ­Remembrancer boasted his role was to “oppose every bill which would interfere with the rights and privileges enjoyed by the Corporation”.

The post dates back to some trouble the City had with Henry VIII’s adviser Cardinal Wolsey commandeering the armour and plate of its livery ­companies.

In 1571, it created the post of ­Remembrancer to “remind the king of his debt” and make sure the City’s interests were never again affected by ­Parliament.

Paul Double’s modern-day role is ­officially described as “looking after the City of London Corporation’s interests in Parliament”.

The ­Corporation is the governing body of the City of London. It’s an elected body, but unlike your usual local council, it’s not just residents that vote, it’s businesses – including over 500 banks.

Its boss is the Lord Mayor – not to be confused with London Mayor Boris Johnson who presides over the Greater London Authority.

Mind you, the City’s Remembrancer, also “tracks the work of” the GLA.

In February, he went to Buckingham Palace to be made a Lieutenant of the Royal Victorian Order by Prince Charles – as part of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Honours.

Last year, The Bureau for ­Investigative Journalism showed the ­Remembrancer’s Office had submitted evidence to 16 separate select committees in the past 18 months, including the Treasury’s Tax Principles report.

The City of London press office said they hoped I wasn’t going to write a piece about how “mysterious” the Remembrancer is.

I replied that an interview would definitely stop him being mysterious, but my follow-up requests have been ignored.

As the ConDems’ savage cuts deepen and it becomes ever clearer who is paying the price of austerity – not the bankers who caused it but the ordinary people of Britain – Avaaz’s campaign to abolish the Remembrancer’s special privileges couldn’t be more timely.

This is no longer the era of Cardinal Wolsey, or of Wat Tyler, the peasant leader killed by the Lord Mayor and his men after challenging the City’s might.

We are no longer serfs who have to suffer an unelected vested interest at the heart of our democracy.

We have the right to tell the City to start lobbying like any other special interest group and give up its privileged status.

Like punishing those responsible for the bank crisis, abolishing The Remembrancer’s privileges would send a message to the City and banks that the most vulnerable will not pay any more for their mess.

“Over and over again we have seen that there is in this country another power than that which has its seat at Westminster,”

Clement Attlee complained bitterly of “those who control money” in 1937. More than 75 years on his words have never rung more true.

Saddest victim of the Bedroom Tax

Elizabeth Barry and her disabled son Ryan Hewitt

Elizabeth Barry and her disabled son Ryan (Image: MEN)

It is just over a month since the cruel Bedroom Tax began and I have been deluged by heartbreaking letters and emails.

The story of Elizabeth Barry and her 20-year-old son Ryan, who has severe autism, is among the most unjust.

Elizabeth, who lives in Clayton, Manchester, cares for Ryan 24 hours a day, but she still worries that people think she is a scrounger.

Ryan needs constant supervision. His mum describes his mind as being like that of a toddler.

Her only respite comes from a carer who regularly uses the third bedroom of her modest home.

Yet the Bedroom Tax now means that this family – already struggling to make ends meet – will lose 25% of their housing benefit.

Elizabeth feared Ryan would have to go into care for the sake of £20 a week.

With the help of her Labour MP Lucy Powell, Elizabeth appealed and has now been told she can receive a Discretionary Housing Payment – for one year only – to help cover the bills.

But there are 4,000 people affected by Bedroom Tax in central Manchester alone, many of them with stories as sad and unfair.

There are 660,000 people affected ­nationally. Will DHP help them all?

Cut twice over

Not only is an austerity war on the disabled being waged from Westminster, but families with disabled kids face attack locally too – as councils are forced to pass on huge cuts to their budgets.

Warwickshire council has to save £100 million over the next four years.

This week they announced children with disabilities will face £1.7 million worth of cuts to local services.

Number crunch 1

A report from Sheffield Hallam University shows welfare cuts will take more than £1.6bn a year out of the Scottish economy – and hit the poorest parts hardest…

the rest of the article is here:

Government or Corporation or Both or Neither?

With the increase in privatisation of public assets without public debate or real input we need to become clearer about who is authority and who is business, as this line has blurred. Why does the public have a right to know? Their money is used and actions are taken in their name.

This article provides insights for public comment in the public interest.

Real News AustraliaReading Between the Lies

You are here: Home » OPPT, Banks, Governments, Corporations and You

April 13, 2013 | General Maddox | 19 Comments

OPPT, Banks, Governments, Corporations and You

      6 Votes


By General Maddox.

As much as it’s tracking and tracing what you do online, you’ve gotta love social media. Why? Well the main reason it was set up to begin with was to bring people closer together and communicate more freely. This is how i came to stumble upon a particular documentary. One of the people i’m “Friends” with online posted a YouTube link. I had some free time one night so thought i would watch it and see where it takes me. Little did i realise that this would start me on a path to an incredible realisation and present me with some information i have dubbed an “Absolute Game Changer”.

The documentary i’m referring to is called What The FUQ? – Frequently Unanswered Questions of the “Australian Government” and i highly recommend you watch it. Then watch it again. Then share it with everyone you know. Then watch it again!

It was made by a gentleman by the name of Scott Bartle of Scott is an Aussie bloke who hails from Perth in Western Australia and I recently had the pleasure of talking to Scott on a podcast show that i frequent as a regular guest myself (ConspiracyOz Podcast). The information divulged by Scott is mind blowing to say the least.

What Scott discovered when trying to bring a fully restored Classic 1959 Corvette which he purchased whilst working abroad, was layers of bureaucracy wrapped in red tape such as:
– Import Approval due to his Corvette being manufactured Pre-1989 Scheme
– Environmental Issue due to his Corvette having a pre-charged piece of equipment installed on it (the air conditioner!)
– Customs demanding Luxury Car Tax & GST.
Now most people, as annoying and expensive as it is, would simply pay the fees and fines and abide by the rules and regulations laid down by the government departments concerned. Not Scott.

Scott began to see discrepancies and irregularities with the documentation and correspondence he was having with these so called government departments. For example, © Copyright symbols next to where it would say Commonwealth Government on letters he received. That triggered Scott to dig a little deeper and what he has uncovered affects every single Australian. Yes. Every single one of us.

Quite frankly one of the most shocking things is the image above. According to our Constitution, which one do you think is valid? Most would say the one on the right. I did too. Until now. The one on the left is the Great Seal of the United Kingdom to which our original Constitution was written under in Letters Patent by Queen Victoria. An Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia 1900 (UK). The one on the right is actually a registered trademark of a corporation known as the COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA. A company registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission in Washington DC, USA. (CIK#:0000805157). See the link for yourself and read that twice if you need to.

What does this mean you ask? Well the ramifications of this are staggering. What this means is that everything you’ve come to understand as the “Australian Government” is not actually government but a corporate entity masquerading as government. Essentially our government was hijacked and corporatised.

How can this be you might ask? Well in 1984 another Letters Patent supposedly revoked the original and made changes to it. However there’s a few things wrong with it. See here and here (the circled areas). The main things to point out are as you’ll see is that it is written under the Great Seal of Australia which is in fact in direct contradiction to the conditions of the original letters patent of 1900. Do you follow me? Well allow me to put it in laymen terms…

Let’s say you get an official looking letter in the mail from what looks like the bank with whom you have a mortgage with. The letter is advising you that terms and conditions of your mortgage have just been changed and that you owe more money. It’s a very convincing letter to most people. It has an official looking logo and its signed too. So do you think you should challenge it or do what it says?

You’re damn right you should challenge it!

And that’s exactly what Scott Bartle did. To this day the illegitimate government department of “Australian Customs” still holds his Corvette hostage. And Scott continues to invoice them as a result. Viewing his documentary and logging on to his website is a must.

But what is OPPT? And what does it have to do with all this?

As it turns out this type of large scale deception goes on all around the world. That sort of statement no longer shocks people as we’re so desensitised to it now. But what’s worse is that people are willing to go along with it and do nothing.

Enter One People’s Public Trust (OPPT). Here’s an easy to understand synopsis by Andy Whiteley of

Understanding that corporations, governments and banks are one and the same, an “Order of Finding and Action” was filed against the “the debtor”, a legal entity created via the UCC process which encompasses all corporate entities. The filings claim that the Debtor “knowingly, willingly and intentionally committed treason” by “owning, operating, aiding and abetting private money systems” and “operating Slavery Systems used against… citizens without their knowing, willing and intentional consent”.

UCC filings are public records, and follow standard administrative processes. When facing a claim, an entity (in this case “the Debtor”) is given the right of rebuttal. If a rebuttal is not received within the required timeframe, a default action then applies, followed by termination of that entity; in this case, on the grounds that it failed to rebut charges of treason by “the One People”.

The important thing to understand here is that a UCC filing stands as law if it remains unrebutted. And in this case, the OPPT Trustees ensured they created a legal situation in which the individuals and entities that form “the debtor” had no ability to rebut. How could they? The claims of slavery and fraud are true.

Of course, no rebuttal was received.

The ‘Debtor’ is therefore guilty of treason.

As remedy, corporations are foreclosed and their assets re-claimed.

The wealth of our planet is returned to “the One People”.

All corporate debt is erased.

“The system” is terminated.

The public record shows it.

The UCC filing stands as international law.

By the system’s own terms, it no longer exists.

We are free!!

Make sense? Of course the system is doing its best to ignore it and hoping it will just go away. No main stream media has even touched this extraordinary issue. The system simply continues the status quo.

In my discussions with Scott Bartle he mentioned that UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) isn’t common knowledge amongst lawyers here in Australia, nor is UCC taught in law schools. A fact confirmed to me by a lawyer contact of mine. When I mentioned the term UCC he said that “it was an American code” and “failed to see how it would apply to us in Australia”. While still a valid concern, determining the validity of OPPT and how it applies to us, Scott has provided documents that link our major 4 banks with using UCC law. View the documents linked below.
Westpac vs Fed Reserve NY Compiled
NAB vs Fed Reserve NY NAB Compiled
Cwlth vs Fed Reserve NY UCC 2008077211
ANZ vs Fed Reserve NY UCC 2010016115
“I’d say there need to be only one example of it binding an Australia company for it to be relevant”, said Scott. Well as you’ll see above there’s four! This diagram UCC Collateral WESTPAC illustrates how we’re all tied into the slavery system.

There is an abundance of information available at the website and some handy stuff here where you can download the key documents needed such as the Foreclosure Flyer, UCC Financing Statement and the most important one, The Courtesy Notice. Plus guidelines on how best to implement them. It couldn’t be easier to start your path to freedom.

So what’s stopping you? What’s the catch you say? Well there are of course people out there attempting to debunk all this. And the basic rule many of us follow “If it looks too good to be true, it probably is” causes us to hesitate. After all that’s how we’ve been brought up. There’s nothing wrong with that. Personally i think it’s great to question what we’re presented with. And i’ve done just that in talking personally with Scott. In addition i asked if all this was sending shockwaves throughout the big financial institutions around the world. “At first it was simply ignored and dismissed as baseless. Now however, inside sources have revealed that these very institutions are in damage control mode”, said Scott.

One of the trustees of OPPT and former lawyer from within the inner circles of the banking elite, Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf had this to say:

“In every code, statute, law on the books around the globe…a declaration unrebutted stands as absolute truth… the boys on the hill (Washington D.C.) to the other side of the pond (London) to the mountains (Switzerland) to the east (China) have been trying to find a loop hole… a way to rebut… but since July 25th, 2012 when the BE’ing and BE’ings value were duly secured… if they haven’t found it by now… they won’t… but i wait for the attempt by duly verified sworn rebuttal, made with specificity and particularity… meanwhile, isn’t it time we all moved on to BE’ing and DO’ing with systems that assist our BE’ing and DO’ing?”

I couldn’t agree more.