(an unofficial court held by a group of people in order to try someone regarded, especially without good evidence, as guilty of a crime or misdemeanour:)
I recently came across an article on the VFFA Facebook page that discussed the President, Jon Russel, being found to be Not a Fit and Proper Person (NFPP). Like Jon, I too have been found to be NFPP and was subsequently removed from the Rural Fire Service (RFS). What disturbed me most was discovering that the person responsible for making that determination was the same individual who made similar decisions regarding myself and two other members of the Cooks Gap Brigade, including my own son.
Background and Service
My name is Elaine Robinson AFSM, a proud recipient of the Australian Fire Service Medal. At the time I was stood down, I served as the Captain of the Cooks Gap Brigade. Over more than 30 years as a member of the RFS, I held many positions within the Brigade and was honoured to be the first female Deputy Group Officer and the first female Brigade Captain in the district. Despite these achievements, they seemed to count for little when I chose to stand up for what was right and to expose the cover-up of criminal actions.
Support for Others and Disciplinary Proceedings
I acted as a support person for both my son and John McGovern, each of whom faced charges that I believe were trumped up. None of us—my son, John, nor I—were interviewed by the investigating officer, who relied solely on one side of the complaint and recommended disciplinary action without attempting to verify any of the allegations.
The Case of John McGovern
To begin, I will share John McGovern’s story, leaving mine and my son’s experiences for later. The complaint against John stemmed from an incident on the fireground two years earlier. The timing was suspicious, as it followed closely after John and seven others signed a letter calling a Brigade meeting, which resulted in the standing down of the Executive—including the complainant’s de facto partner.
John was accused of sexually harassing a male member by exposing himself on the fireground. This accusation is completely out of character for John, and I cannot believe the statement. My husband, who was the Group Officer overseeing that fire, confirmed that the complainant had been ordered off the fireground due to heat stress and that the alleged incident did not occur.
Of the seven members present on the fireground, five were willing to testify that the incident never happened. The sixth member could not recall the event and chose not to get involved.
Issues with the Disciplinary Process
All this information was provided to the Appropriate Disciplinary Authority (ADA), but our concerns were ignored. Although we received a copy of the complaint, it was unsigned, which is contrary to Service Standards. We requested a signed copy; eventually, with assistance from the VFFA, we received one. However, it was dated only a couple of weeks prior, meaning it was signed five months after submission. The RFS, realising its mistake, then provided a third version—this one signed but undated. According to RFS Service Standards, this amounts to fraud.
Given the potential for the complaint to become a criminal matter, RFS protocol requires police permission before an internal investigation can proceed. We sought clarification on this and the issue of complaint documentation, but Senior Staff would not provide answers. We escalated the matter to the Minister but received no reply before the hearing took place.
The ADA claims to have ensured a speedy outcome for John, but fails to mention that the RFS cancelled the hearing twice with less than 24 hours’ notice each time.
Seeking Accountability
After John was railroaded by the ADA on Christmas Eve, I was extremely angry. On 2 January, I wrote a letter to the Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, and Minister, attaching a list of allegations I wished to submit against the ADA. In my letter I stated:
“Please find attached allegations I wish to bring against Chief Superintendent Stimson. As stated, I am seeking advice on other incidents and may bring further allegations.”
I received no reply, presumably because I quoted Service Standards that do not apply to Senior Officers.
Attached are the allegations I requested be brought against the ADA.
Conclusion
I will provide details of my own experience and that of my son’s in this “kangaroo court” process in due course.
Elaine Robinson AFSM
Not a Fit and Proper Person
