Money to The Crown Corporation and/or The English Monarchy
Dear Department of the Treasury,
Could you please advise of any and all moneys which flow from the Australian Government or The State Governments to The Crown Corporation, The English Monarchy or other institutions in England for their continued involvement in our affairs?
Do these colonial institutions receive any money from stamp duty on property sales or from sale of Crown Land, or for faces on currency, for instance?
Yours faithfully,
Gary Anderson
Dear Mr Anderson
We would like to acknowledge receipt of your FOI request to this
department, received 17 February 2017, requesting the following:
Could you please advise of any and all moneys which flow from the
Australian Government or The State Governments to The Crown Corporation,
The English Monarchy or other institutions in England for their continued
involvement in our affairs?
Do these colonial institutions receive any money from stamp duty on
property sales or from sale of Crown Land, or for faces on currency, for
instance?
Your request will be processed as soon as possible. If you have any
questions in relation to your application, please contact the FOI Team on
02 6263 2800.
Regards,
FOI Team
Parliamentary and Legal Services Unit
Financial and Parliamentary Division
The Treasury, Langton Crescent, Parkes ACT 2600
Phone: (02) 6263 2800
Email: [1][email address]
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
Dear Mr Anderson
Please see attached correspondence regarding your recent freedom of
information request for:
‘Could you please advise of any and all moneys which flow from the
Australian Government or The State Governments to The Crown Corporation,
The English Monarchy or other institutions in England for their continued
involvement in our affairs? Do these colonial institutions receive any
money from stamp duty on property sales or from sale of Crown Land, or for
faces on currency, for instance?’
Regards,
FOI Team
Parliamentary and Legal Services Division
The Treasury, Langton Crescent, Parkes ACT 2600
Phone: (02) 6263 2800
Email: [1][email address]
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
Dear FOI,
The question was about whether there was any money going to The Crown or The English Government. The question is not about whether there are any documents on the subject.
Are you saying there is no money going to either?
Are you saying there is money going to either?
Are you saying you don't know whether there is or there isn't?
or
Are you saying if there is money going to either, it is hidden from The People?
Do not The People have a Right to Know whether there is or there isn't money transferring to them?
If there is not money going to them, why can't you state that?
From my perspective and any reasonable person, this is a cover-up.
Please answer. This is very important and The People have a right to know.
Yours sincerely,
Gary Anderson
Dear Mr Baldwin FOI,
Quite the contrary, the English were ALL ABOUT THE MONEY, and ALL ABOUT LIES, e.g. divine-right-to-rule and terra nullius, so since there is no documents to me that means that there IS MONEY GOING TO THEM, and it IS hidden.
It is incongruous to think of The Crown Corporation setting up militarily controlled colonies all over the world and they don't get any money from them, e.g. us, now.'
Seriously, do you think they want to keep us, their "greatest acquisition” as I have seen Australia described by English dignitaries, in their federated colony status, because of love?
There should be some sort of Royal Commission that is run by The People not “Royals” or those that believe everything they say blindly, so we want a People’s “Get To The Root Cause” Commission.
Come on, surely they are still making a fortune out of us one way or other. Maybe they trade the deeds to our property they have on some elite insiders exchange, such deeds they got through contravening their own laws on claiming inhabited lands, and describing the indigenous peoples as “flora and fauna”, and committing genocide. “Long live the integrity of The Crown!”
Wake up! Think for yourself. We are totally owned by the Crown Corporation. We have no sovereignty on what matters. We have to accept their slavery system. We are inmates in a sort of huge open air prison of lies and laws by madmen and madwomen who claim they are The Sovereign (title for God) and yeah, we have a democracy, and separation of church and state, when the queen is the head of the church and the state. hahahaha.
The People deserve the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Yours sincerely,
Gary Anderson
Mr Anderson,
We acknowledge receipt of your request for internal review received on 4 April 2017, in relation to the Department’s decision of 21 March 2017. Your request will be processed in due course.
Please contact the FOI Team if you have any questions in relation to your application.
Regards,
FOI Team
Parliamentary and Legal Services Division
The Treasury, Langton Crescent, Parkes ACT 2600
Phone: (02) 6263 2800
Email: [email address]
Locutus Sum left an annotation ()
The applicant seems to have misunderstood how Right to Know works. He writes "Dear Mr Baldwin FOI ... but the hapless Mr James Baldwin is only another Right to Know user, exactly the same as me!
Note 1 to the applicant: An annotation on Right to Know is a comment about your request by an ordinary user of Right to Know, or maybe by an administrator of Right to Know. It has no connexion with the agency (in this case, the Treasury).
Note 2 to the applicant: Unfortunately your internal review must fail. You might want to discover the answers to your questions but the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) will not help you beyond what you have already done. As Mr Baldwin correctly told you, the Act gives you an enforceable right to obtain documents (except exempt documents) but only if the documents exist. An agency cannot conjure the documents when it does not have them, and the Act does not ask the agency to do research or to answer your general questions. The Treasury might have rejected your original email as an example of an invalid request. It was invalid because it was not a request for documents but for general answers to questions. However, the agency was generous. It did not reject the request; instead, it looked for documents that might have been relevant to the request. None exist., or none can be found.
Note 3 to the applicant: The only way that an internal review could succeed is if the reviewer discovers a document that was missed by the original decision maker. It is possible, but in my opinion it is unlikely. More likely it is that Mr Baldwin is correct: the inference you should draw from the decision is that the answer to your question is "no money is being paid to Mrs Windsor".
Note 4 to the applicant: You might find it useful to read my annotation to a request that is made in 2013. My annotation is here https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/w... . If you read the request and the annotatin you might see that there are many similarities: a desire to discover a truth, the belief that the truth is being deliberately obscured, and the fact that the FOI Act cannot help you.
Dear Mr Anderson,
I refer to your recent correspondence requesting a review of the
department’s decision dated 21 March 2017. You have asked ‘Could you
please advise of any and all moneys which flow from the Australian
Government or The State Governments to The Crown Corporation, The English
Monarchy or other institutions in England for their continued involvement
in our affairs? Do these colonial institutions receive any money from
stamp duty on property sales or from sale of Crown Land, or for faces on
currency, for instance?’
The department is unable to provide the information you have requested as
it is not in possession of any documents relating to your request.
Please note, the Freedom of Information Act (FOI Act) provides a right to
request access to documents, rather than information or answers to
questions.
However, in order to assist with your query concerning faces on currency,
the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) advised that they do not pay money to
‘UK institutions’ for the use of the Queen’s image, but noted there was a
one-off commission for the photograph, which they own and use with
permission of the Palace. Any further enquiries about this should be
directed to the RBA. Information on lodging a Freedom of Information
request with the RBA can be found via the following link
[1]www.rba.gov.au/information/foi/making-an-foi-request.html.
Withdrawal of request
As the department does not hold documents relating to your request, we are
seeking your agreement to withdraw your request. If you are agreeable to
this, could you please confirm by responding to this email with ‘confirm’.
Regards,
FOI Team
Parliamentary and Legal Services Division
The Treasury, Langton Crescent, Parkes ACT 2600
Phone: (02) 6263 2800
Email: [2][email address]
References
Visible links
1. http://www.rba.gov.au/information/foi/ma...
2. mailto:[email address]
Locutus Sum left an annotation ()
I had intended, but forgot, to comment on a sentence in the applicant's email (https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/m... ) to the agency (mistakenly addressed to Mr Baldwin) after the agency said that they had no documents about the subject that the applicant in interesting. The sentece is "Quite the contrary, the English were ALL ABOUT THE MONEY, and ALL ABOUT LIES, e.g. divine-right-to-rule and terra nullius, so since there is no documents to me that means that there IS MONEY GOING TO THEM, and it IS hidden. "
What logic grounds the statement? What evidence could be provided to show that there is no money that is paid by Australia to a secret thing called "The Crown Corporation"? I think that the answers must be "none", and "none". The applicant's statement's are driven by a premise that is, apparently, beyond challenge and beyond evidence. If there exist documents to show that Australia is paying money to the secret Crown Corporation, then obviously money is being paid to the Crown Corportation. But by the applicant's logic, the absence of a document of this kind is also proof that "MONEY IS GOING TO THEM" ?!?!?!! So the presence, or the absence of evidence (documents) are both proof of the premise. The internal review must, of need, confirm the original decision.
James Baldwin left an annotation ()
Gary,
The FOI Act only gives you a right to access documents. It doesn't give you the right to have random questions answered.
The department has told you there are no documents that answer your questions. You could interpret that as meaning no money has gone out.