Go to the link and read the statements from SEC


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/investigations/michael-quigley-and-us-court...

A HOST of public claims made by National Broadband Network chief Michael Quigley about French Telco giant Alcatel-Lucent, of which he was formerly president, are different from allegations made in court documents filed by US authorities and a telco stung by Alcatel's corruption.

Mr Quigley, who spent 36 years with Alcatel and was the group's global president and chief operating officer in 2005 and 2006, has said that as soon as Alcatel's executive committee became aware of corrupt activities associated with the group it launched an investigation and "took immediate steps to inform and co-operate with all authorities".

In legal documents filed in a Florida court, the US corporate watchdog, the US Securities and Exchange Commission, says Alcatel kept paying bribes to sham consultants for more than 18 months after executive members became aware of the payments.

The SEC says that, even though Alcatel's executive committee knew in October 2004 that Alcatel employees had "paid bribes at the highest level of the Costa Rican government using sham consultants", which was "widely covered by the local press", Alcatel "continued to make these illicit payments until June 2006".

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/investigations/i-got-it-wrong-michael-quigl...

NATIONAL Broadband Network chief Michael Quigley has admitted making more incorrect claims about his past as one of the top executives of French telecommunications giant Alcatel, which was involved in widespread corruption across the globe.

In 2009, when Mr Quigley was appointed to the $1.8 million-a-year job of running Australia's biggest infrastructure project, the federal government was unaware that Alcatel was then the subject of a five-year US government investigation.

I note defenders of this bloke such as alevine and buzz are quiet on this matter

And NO leftard makes ANY appearance.

smacking gutless ostriches, you sicken me

Why is anyone surprised? We've had a drug user and drug dealer appointed as the DG of NSW Education. How comical. A person who could sit in on an interview and judge a person's fitness for the job of a school teacher yet if it were him being interviewed his record would prevent him from gaining a job as a teacher. Makes sense.

Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull launched directly into a precise and highly targeted personality attack on NBN Co chief executive Mike Quigley, who appeared before yesterday morning's Sydney meeting of the Federal Parliament's joint committee on the National Broadband Network (NBN).

Turnbull, it appeared, had examined with a fine-tooth comb Quigley's previous statements about his lack of involvement in the allegations of bribery and corruption at his former employer and current NBN supplier, Alcatel-Lucent, and compared them with tiny details recently released in a series of disclosures by the company to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Over a fraught series of exchanges with Quigley, Turnbull extracted from the NBN Co chief executive a series of acknowledgements that he had spoken "too loosely" in the past with respect to the investigations by the SEC and the US Department of Justice into Alcatel-Lucent.

Quigley had said that he had no jurisdiction over Costa Rica, whose government was said to have been plied with bribes for contracts, due to information he had been given from a former colleague. However, he found out later that he did in fact have jurisdiction over the country. Quigley also adjusted what he'd said about which organisation had brought the issues to light.

As has been widely reported in the past 24 hours, Quigley was forced to apologise about his errors.

Now, if you believe Turnbull, there is no witch hunt being conducted with respect to the NBN Co chief executive. "Nobody is making any allegations against you, least of all anybody here," Turnbull told Quigley yesterday, noting he just wanted to give the executive the chance to "correct" some of the statements he had made.

However, nothing could be further from the truth.

The fact of the matter is that Turnbull has latched on to ongoing speculation by a small number of media outlets about a potential link between Quigley and what went on at Alcatel-Lucent half a decade ago to launch a considered and deliberate campaign against the NBN Co chief. Turnbull's attempting to undermine and ultimately destroy Quigley's personal credibility as the man responsible for implementing Labor's flagship NBN policy.

As Quigley has repeatedly stated, there is no evidence of any link between the executive and the bribery scandal in Latin America which has led Alcatel-Lucent into a $130 million settlement with the US Government. The US investigators were so convinced of this fact, they had no interest in speaking with Quigley or NBN Co finance chief Jean-Pascal Beaufret, who was also high up in Alcatel-Lucent at the time.

Yet the constant moves by Turnbull and other members of the Coalition and the media to bring up the issue in connection with Quigley speaks of a desire to create that link in the minds of the public.

Turnbull's carefully considered attack on Quigley yesterday was calculated precisely to take advantage of his own sky-high media profile and tarnish Quigley's personal and professional reputation by forcing him to acknowledge in public that he was wrong.
   
It matters not to Turnbull, it would seem, nor to most of the media, that the issue on which he forced Quigley to correct himself and apologise for was an issue that, as Quigley pointed out yesterday, he could not be expected to know anything about, as it was half a decade in the past and it was something in which he had no involvement.

But it matters to me.

When Quigley was appointed to the role in 2009, ZDNet Australia conducted an investigation of his background, speaking to telco executives and industry experts but could not find anyone to say a bad word against him.

As the profile of the man emerged, it became clear he was well-respected as an intelligent and capable leader, a man who stayed true to his Australian roots yet had emerged on the global stage. It was perhaps also true that Quigley was disappointed not to have risen to the chief executive role at Alcatel-Lucent — yet he appeared to have borne that disappointment humbly, and has been content to work in lesser roles.

Quigley is also a survivor of life-threatening illnesses that many in similar positions would have succumbed to — as well as a family man and a loyal supporter of other Australians in Alcatel-Lucent when he was there.

In the many times I have seen the executive in action — whether it be at a press conference or doorstop interview, watching him being questioned in Senate Committees, or even in televised interviews or live speeches, I have never seen Quigley lie; I have never seen him tell half-truths in order to placate his audience, and I have certainly never seen him evade a question.

There have been times when he could not give his audience satisfaction in his answers; for example, when he was precluded from doing so by tendering regulations, privacy legislation or even the necessity of not slandering important NBN stakeholders such as ministers, customers and regulators. On these occasions he has explained clearly why he could not disclose all of the information that he might like to. It's called "professionalism".

http://www.smh.com.au/national/a-reputation-at-stake-as-coalition-seizes-stick-t...

A SEVEN-YEAR corruption investigation winding its way through the United States courts is haunting the head of NBN Co, who last week apologised for not knowing Costa Rica fell under his responsibility as the former head of Alcatel North America.

Mike Quigley has found himself facing questions about bribes paid to Costa Ricans by an Alcatel subsidiary, for which it has since been fined $US137 million by US authorities.

Quigley was Alcatel's president for the Americas from 2001 to 2003 and was appointed global chief operating officer in 2005. Some of the bribes were paid during that period.

US authorities allege Alcatel's old decentralised structure made the company prone to corruption when seeking contracts through third parties.

Since Alcatel sent investigators to Costa Rica in 2004, it has sacked several staff, paid that substantial fine and restructured its corruption-prone business model.

A criminal case between the US Justice Department and Alcatel-Lucent is to be heard on June 1. The civil case was settled on December 28 with the imposition of the fine.

The chief financial officer of NBN Co, Jean-Pascal Beaufret, also worked at Alcatel and has been accused over inconsistencies between key dates listed on his LinkedIn profile and the NBN Co website detailing when he was Alcatel's chief financial officer, and what appeared in Alcatel's annual reports.