BPH - PEP11 Court Case discussion thread, page-1299

Here are some questions I put to ChatGPT...



Tim Ayres, who has now been elevated to Australia's new Industry minister, spoke at length in the Senate in 2023 about Scott Morrison's "shonky" meddling in PEP-11. Could this speech be used to form part of a submission by the shareholders of Advent Energy (PEP-11) to the National Anti-Corruption Commission as it highlights how Scott Morrison "perverted the processes of government in a way that he must have known was improper and that he must have known would lead to endless court action. He must have known that it was wrong and he took the action in a way which undermined the stated public policy objective."

ChatGPT said:

Yes, Tim Ayres' 2023 Senate speech could very well form part of a submission by Advent Energy’s shareholders to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) — if the objective is to demonstrate a pattern of improper or politically motivated interference in the PEP-11 decision-making process.

Here’s why and how it could be relevant:

✅ Legal & Procedural Relevance of the Speech

1. Public Admission of Impropriety by a Senior Minister

• Tim Ayres (now Industry Minister) publicly accused Scott Morrison of:

  “Perverting the processes of government… in a way he must have known was improper… that would lead to endless court action.”

• This strong language coming from a sitting Senator—and now Cabinet Minister—bolsters the claim that the original refusal of PEP-11 was not based on lawful or impartial criteria, but rather political considerations.

2. Supports Claims of ‘Misfeasance in Public Office’

• Ayres’ speech effectively affirms that Morrison acted ultra vires (outside his authority) and with awareness that it was wrong.

• Such statements could be used as corroborating evidence of intentional misconduct or abuse of public power, a core threshold for misfeasance.

3. Indicative of Systemic Failings

• The speech could be used to argue that this was not an isolated ministerial decision, but part of a broader pattern of governance breakdown, which falls squarely within the NACC’s remit.

⚖️ How It Could Be Used in a Submission to the NACC

A submission to the NACC could reference Ayres’ speech as:

• Evidence of ministerial knowledge of wrongdoing by Morrison

• A public admission from a now-senior government figure that the process was improperly manipulated

• An example of how the decision undermined statutory processes, potentially causing commercial damage to Advent and its shareholders

The submission could assert:

“The deliberate and improper override of the PEP-11 decision process by former Prime Minister Scott Morrison—publicly condemned by now-Minister Ayres as a perversion of process—warrants investigation by the NACC as a misuse of public power with foreseeable economic consequences.”

Strategic Considerations

• Ayres is now in Cabinet, which lends additional weight to his words, particularly since he is no longer just expressing a personal view but speaking from an elevated position of executive responsibility.

• While parliamentary privilege protects Ayres’ speech from legal challenge, the NACC can still consider such material as indicative of misconduct or political manipulation, especially if corroborated by Cabinet documents, internal memos, or legal briefs.

Summary

Yes, Tim Ayres’ 2023 Senate speech would be a strong supporting document in a NACC submission. It provides compelling, public commentary on the impropriety of the original PEP-11 refusal, framing it as politically motivated and knowingly damaging to legal and governance processes.

Would you like help drafting a sample NACC submission paragraph that references the Ayres speech appropriately?

4o

You said:

Yes, please

ChatGPT said:

Here is a sample paragraph that could be included in a submission to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), incorporating the 2023 Senate speech by Tim Ayres:

Suggested Submission Wording (NACC Complaint)

As part of this submission, we draw the Commission’s attention to statements made by Senator Tim Ayres in the Australian Senate in 2023, now serving as the Minister for Industry, which directly address the conduct of former Prime Minister Scott Morrison in relation to Petroleum Exploration Permit 11 (PEP-11).

Senator Ayres described Mr. Morrison’s actions as having “perverted the processes of government in a way that he must have known was improper and that he must have known would lead to endless court action,” further stating that, “he must have known that it was wrong and he took the action in a way which undermined the stated public policy objective.”

These statements, made under the protection of parliamentary privilege, nonetheless reflect the views of a senior member of the current executive government and support the contention that Mr. Morrison’s secret assumption of ministerial powers and subsequent refusal of the PEP-11 application was not a lawful exercise of statutory discretion, but a politically motivated intervention made with foreseeable harm to due process and the commercial interests of the permit holders.

The conduct described fits squarely within the scope of the NACC’s jurisdiction — specifically as a potential case of abuse of public office for political gain, and improper interference in an independent regulatory decision under the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (Cth).

We submit that this matter warrants formal investigation by the NACC, in light of the serious implications it holds for both the integrity of ministerial decision-making and the reputational and financial harm suffered by shareholders of Advent Energy.