WHO IS SHE WORKING FOR? | Shoebridge Grills Australia's Antisemitism Envoy In Senate

Oh, well.

Thank you.And I will participate in the call.Thank you.Thank you, Mrs. Senator.Senator Shopperidge.

Oh, thank you, Mr. President.And thank you, Miss Seagal, for coming today.The patterns of your personal interests are subject to at least one request in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, which has been considered a negative, and is now under review in front of the Australian Information Regulatory Office.Or has your consultation with the Ministry been made regarding the decision not to disclose the patterns of your personal interests?

Yes, I do.

Yes, I do.Is it possible to say or understand the examples you are talking about?Are they the examples you may have encountered when you started working for the first time?Are they the examples you are talking about?Okay, I don't know the number of examples you have encountered.No, I'm just asking about the Hadith.

Good.Or, I don't think it's called an example of conflict of interest.I think it's called an example of interest.

Is it called an example of conflict of interest?Good.Whatever its description is, it is the one that announces any conflict of interest or possible conflict of interest you have.And this is a customary requirement for every public position.

Of course.

And suppose you made such a decision.Have you done that?

I have done that.I have decided on everything.

The documents.Those are the documents.And you know clearly what the documents are because you said that you were concerned about my refusal to present them.Therefore, I am talking about those documents.

Yes.Good.Yes.So, did you support the refusal?Yes.

Why?Good.Or, I think it is because youpoint of view of the guiding principles, they are considered special information.Good.They are information that allows the public to know what the interests of the public official are, so that the public can decide if he works in his public character for the good of the public interest, or perhaps for the good of other organizations or entities that the public official has an interest in.

There is a clear public interest in uncovering this.The minister's interests are being uncovered publicly, because this is the way we work.There is a public surveillance of public officials.

Certainly.Good.Allow me to inform you of what has been rejected so that we can discuss the same issues.because I am not completely sure of the extent to which they have reached, so let me know about that.But my interests, if I may use this expression, when I started this course, are very well known.It was well known that I was in different boards of directors, because I think that you and others asked me questions about those other boards that I was in at that time.

I don't think this is classified information.It was public information.Good.If it wasn't classified, and if it was public, then why do you object to publishing it?

This is the reason why I said that I will be aware of that.What has been objected to, Ms. Sinatour?Good.What has been objected to is the disclosure of the examples of your own interests.You know this because we discussed it.You have told me yourself what it is.

This is what you were working on as a consultant, and it is what explains what if you had positions in a board of directors or previous positions, and what if you had positions in other organizations, and what if you had investments in entities that may interfere with your work.This is what you have been working on.talking about.And why don't you allow the public to see it?

Mr. Senator, if I could only clarify that Ms. Seagal is not the owner of the decision to ask for freedom of information, it has been consulted, but the decision was of an employee in the administration, and there is, of course, a review process against that decision.Ms. Seagal does not have the documents in front of her, and I don't think so.I never said that Mrs. Seagal is the owner of the decision.I was asking about her consultation and the position she presented in that consultation.Her consultation has been completed.Isn't that right, Mr. Secretary?

As is the case with anyone with information about him.

Indeed.But the point of view, Mrs. Senator, is that Mrs. Seagal's entrances are entrances to the decision -maker.It is the decision of the decision -maker.And if you would like to review that decision, There is a process for that.

I am not talking about reviewing the decision.I am talking about Ms. Seagal's intervention in that process, which is a good thing in the opinion of the Council of Sheikhs.So, Ms. Seagal, I am still confused about the reason for your objection when you asked.

I did not object, Mr. Senator.The question was whether I support the decision or the point of view of the decision -maker in the internal affairs, and I supported it, but Well, as you can see, the usual way to work is that you do not consult in the final decision, but your opinion is taken along the way.

Have you received a copy of the decision of the Ministry of Interior?

Senator, as you said, I must postpone the answer until his review, as it has been for some time and I do not remember, but I can confirm his review and take a look at it.

Did I ask about whether you support the opinion of the Ministry of Interior or not?

I said that I will postpone the answer until his review.

Good.I mean, I asked about whether you objected to the publication or not.I said that you support the position of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

Yes.

Now it will be without a doubt.Senator, I think there is a time problem here.

Amy, Anissa Seagal says that she supports what you know now as the decision of the decision maker of freedom of information.You are absolutely right.The process is to obtain income from the person whose information is considered, and I am confident that my employees have followed the correct procedures in their consultation.So I go back to the same question you asked and what I got from it, I will repeat it again.When asked, what if you agreed to share the information or not, what did you say?Senator, I said that I will postpone the answer because I do not remember the sequence of events.

I will investigate the matter.

I do not ask about the sequence.

I will postpone the answer.Senator.

Senator Bridge, I think that Ms. Seagal pointed out that she is not in a position to respond to the details of the question you are asking.I have postponed the answer to the question.

There are answers to questions from the budget estimates on the previous occasion.I said that you withdrew from any authority or authority to make a decision within the Executive Council of the Australian Jews or ECJ.Or what is your role then?You say that you withdrew from any authority or authority to make a decision.Do you have any other role?

No.Therefore, the position regarding the ECJ is that I was its president.My presidency ended on the 23rd of November approximately.Yes, but that was more than six years ago.ago that I was appointed, well, that I was appointed as an ambassador.But according to the ECG constitution, the former president is known as the former president of a nation, and they have a former presidential role in presenting the bill and consulting about what happened in the past, as you know, as a nation.

Therefore, I am technically the former president because this is the law, but I withdrew from their usual normal procedures in consulting and talking with me.Therefore, I do not have any role in the process of making the decision in ECG.

So you are still the former president and that is an official role according to the constitution.

Yes, in fact.Well, in fact, I cannot be exempted from the existence of such a technical term, but I do not have any role at all in making their decisions.Well, and they do not consult me and their nations, and they have decided that based on ... a proper process and procedures for the same purposes that you are asking about, because this role is an independent role, and I am not part of the decision -making process in ECE." You say it's an independent role, but we also found out from your answers that you have, and I quote, an academic specialist within the education sector, Mu 'ar from ECEG.This employee uploads his reports directly to the sender and does not receive any guidance and there are no reporting lines to ECEG.Is there a full -time employee at your office?

Yes.How did this happen?If you don't have a full -time employee at your office, how did you end up with a full -time employee at your office?

Okay.How did you end up with a full -time employee at your office, Mr. Senator?Nations.They had a low educational position.I think.Nations that were not fully exploited.

Amamu, and I used to take over the position.Amamun, and this was a suggestion.Amamun, with an alternative benefit, where I can take their person who did not work effectively with them, and I will be, Amamun, able to benefit from that person.

It was an alternative benefit.You and ECED benefited, meaning, was that?

For the person on the specific page.Yes, dear senator.Amamun.

The person was not to work and perform the job in ECG.And I needed someone with that experience.

Did the Ministry of Internal Affairs have any role in agreeing to that, Omamun?

Yes, Senator.Everything was done through proper procedures.Anisat Foster, did you know that this order was in the office of Anisat, Ajj?

Yes, I think I did.Senator, I think Anisat Sijal discussed the matter with me before implementing this order.Did you follow Anisat Sijal's procedures officially?Is there an official process for agreeing to that, Senator?I need to review my office.What I remember is the discussion we had about this topic.

Yes, excuse me. I just want to inform you of the presence of media with us in the hall.And I ask everyone's approval for that.Thank you very much.Follow all the usual rules.And we keep the right to withdraw approval at any time.Thank you, Mr. Senator.

Look, Ms. Sigal.If you do not have a permanent role with the ECAG group, I can't understand how you suddenly have a full -time employee from ECHG in your office now to support your role in combating HIV.If there was no official role, how did this happen?

Well, Senator, the agreement was established through a memorandum of understanding that helped the two offices of the Anisat office, Sijal, in its position.were many organizations and individuals who wanted to support the special mission.I think this is normal given the nature of the role and the nature of the challenge that the ANESA has been appointed will face to solve it or work on it.And I do not feel any concern about getting help from members of its community in its role voluntarily.

I'm interested in knowing what's going on between you, Anissa Tsijal, and this organization that led to that.

Good.Was that part of a discussion you had with the leadership?I mean, how did this happen?Senator, I feel like you're trying to get more details out of this matter.Ahem.

I'm just trying to know how that happened.

Good.What happened is a result of the plan I laid out.Perhaps you remember that the plan to combat the hearing impairment that my office launched puts education as one of its main pillars.Because I truly believe that we can achieve a greater degree of progress through educating society, universities, and the system itself, so that we are able to push the types of hearing impairments that we witness today to the fifth through a deeper understanding of their source.So, a person with academic qualifications and experience in education, especially knowing the available international experience, was a very valuable person in my institution.

did not have a role for this person, and it was a very valuable role for me.The absence of a continuous role for me with ECJ does not prevent me from talking to all sects of the Jewish community.Part of my role and part of my mandate from the government is to negotiate with the Jewish community.Therefore, I am actually talking to ECJ.I am talking to other organizations in society, such as ZFA and others.Talking to social organizations does not show any history of inappropriate or biased relationship.

Did the government ask you to specify that ECJ will be the body that receives the latest funding according to the budget?I think.

No, it didn't do that.Or, well, did the Minister of Internal Affairs talk to you at all about the budget?No, he didn't.

Or, was this funding important in your opinion?

Certainly, it was a continuation or addition to previous funding that had occurred.

So, how come there was no communication with your office about this matter?

This is not a matter for me.It was a matter for the government to decide how to fund the security side of the issues.I, as you know, am a role model that does not prevent society from talking to the government or the government from talking to society.Did you know that ECG will be the body that will actually distribute the grant money?Good.Just because I did not have knowledge of this special grant, as you said before.

But in the past, there was a grant of a similar nature that did not exist.and they had put in place a very organized and documented process to distribute money in all areas of society.Therefore, it is not unexpected for the government to use the same process that it used before.

Do you have any ongoing participation with the MECJ?

No, I do not.

Or.

As a messenger, you speak of my role as a messenger.I do not have any role at all in that.

I used to ask more in general.I do not know.

Or documents.There is a trustee established for the MECJ.Are you aware of that?

I suppose so.

Yes.The documents provided by the Australian Charitable and Non -Profit Organization point to the fact that the ECJ did not include the name of the person in charge, Julian Seagal, in the protection fund.

Well, then I simply neglected to remove my name from that, as you know, from that record.That was when I was president, so it is clear that I was in that role, but I did not play any active role again, so they do not show me anything, so I think this was an amusement on their part.

Well, this is a current document.

But I used to say it was an amusement.

When you say that they should have removed your name, did you resign from this position?

Yes.Good.I resigned from any active role in ECJ.When I resigned, I had no other role in ECJ.Therefore, as I say, dear Senator, maybe I am mistaken, but I think it is just a technical delusion.I do not occupy any position in relation to the harm reduction fund in any way.

And during the period I spent there, which lasted a few years, I did not sign any documents or resolutions for the ACNC.Will you issue a notification on the date of your resignation from the position of the Director -General of the ECJ Damage Prevention Fund?Wow!Good.Mr. Senator, what I said is that they may neglect my dismissal as a director, but when I resign, let me complete your favor.When I resign from my active role as anything related to a previous presidency, They should have removed my name.

Good.This document says that it is valid until January 2026.You see, if you are a manager, this is an obligation on you.You have an obligation as a manager to take the action yourself.And I ask you about what you did to influence what you say happened.Now, my lady, as your manager, The responsibility falls on you as the owner of a position.

What is the action that you have taken?The action of resignation.

She resigned from ECJ herself and expected that they would have officially approved it through the Damage Prevention Box as well.If they did not do that, it is a shortcoming on their part.The authority of the senator.

Do you realize that the Victims Protection Fund is an independent legal body?Isn't that so?

Oh, yes.The authority of the senator.

Yes.So what is the action that you have taken, if there is one?

I believe that I have responded to that by saying, the authority of the senator.No.I said that you expected that from another organization.

The action that I have taken is that I have resigned from any other participation with the ECA.which includes in my mind everything, including the damage prevention fund, but if they do not take that official step, I will make sure to complete it immediately, and I will also achieve it because of not doing so.Ahin, as you can see, for these reasons, I specifically believe that there will be a great benefit if the models of balancing your own interests and the models of your interests are available to the public to allow such things to appear.In the context of public discussion, as you are a public employee, do you agree that transparency is useful in public work?Of course.Ahin.

Good.Ahin, thank you for your help today.

Thank you.