Remember Brigalow ? more info.

This is a letter to the editor, which has been modified to comply with the wishes of several editors, yet still can't get printed, some have quoted legal reasons , so I'm told, anyway I'll leave it up to you, make of it what you will and I hear there is more to this story.


Back in the 1970`s and 80`s, the then Bjelke Petersen Government took what i am sure they considered [to be]the visionary step at the time of resuming private property in the Wolfdene/Albert River catchment area, for the future construction of the proposed Wolfdene Dam, but allowed the resumed properties owners to continue residing as normal effectively as tenants, retaining only statutory title of their property, while the state government in all reality owned the same properties according to crown title common law, and were effectively the property landlords.

As we all know now, democracy prevailed, the Wolfdene dam was scrapped, and the newly elected Goss government legally inherited a lot of land in the Albert Valley area,property it continued to technically own until it recinded the purchase of the affected properties and re-instated crown 'fee simple' title on all land resumed by the National Party Government before 1989 that held statutory title only.

Coupled with other precedents set,[it seems] a giant pandoras box too irresistable for the newly elected Labor government to resist, was about to be opened. Twenty years on, there is only one common denominator pertaining to the Wolfdene legacy that displays the same analogy of Sir Joh`s distinction between the state and the crown - it is called THE CORPORATION.

THE CORPORATION, without wanting to sound ambiguous, has got a name, I know the name, but I cant tell you what it is, because then this letter probaly will not be printed.

Thats because [it seems] many a journalist has been intimidated by various means to shut their trap by persons in government and judiciary circles to not ask any questions to enquire, or provide any media coverage to the `alledged` existance of THE CORPORATION.

What the television and print media has reported on, is the reference given to the state government agencies such as the Enviromental Protection Agency and the Dept. of Natural Resources and Water as the `state corporations`.

But the million dollar question that no journalist nigh on 16 years openly it would seem has had the ticker to ask is this - Does a corporation legally enshrined within the Queensland constitution WHICH was created by LEGISLATIVE constitutional amendment exist, and is the state government itself, the state supreme court, and the citizens of the State of Queensland subordinate to its legal authority, allowing statutory law to take precedence over crown common law in instances where it would appear to have previously conflicted with the `recognised` Australian constitution.

In 1992, the Goss Government implemented in legislation the Land Titles Amendment Act, which in retrospect would appear to be policy based on the concept of the Bjelke Petersen governments endeavors to make a clear distinction between statutory and crown law in relation to freehold property ownership, as displayed by the pre-emptive purchase of land by the state government in the Albert Valley all them years ago. And oh how muddy have the waters become since then. Perhaps former premiers Goss, Borbidge, Beattie and current premier Bligh can enlighten us all further.



TIM BADRICK,
TAMBORINE. (PH. 0437043786)
NOTE; THIS IS AN AMENDED LETTER TO ONE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED.