From : Victims of Kevin Lynch Royal Commission Case Study 34 Re : Brisbane Grammar School and Royal Commission Case Study 34 URGENT ATTENTION : Response from Brisbane Grammar School Fee Refund Refusal Further to communication dated 8 January 2017 to the Minister outlining position of victims in Royal Commission Case Study 34 request for Brisbane Grammar School to refund School fees. Victims submit to the Minister, a copy attached of a generic Letter from the headmaster of Brisbane Grammar School dated 13 January 2017 outlining the School’s and Board of Trustee position on this very important subject of School fee refund. Victims respectfully request that the Minister respond to the following key issues : 1. The petition for Brisbane Grammar School to refund School fees to victims of sexual abuse has now in excess of 5200 supporters who agree from the significant numbers of comments displayed on the Change.org petition that refunding School fees to victims is the “Right thing to do, under the circumstances.” 2. For ease of reference, the petition can be found and viewed with a wide selection of comments being drawing from victims, parents, old boys of the School, friends and family of Brisbane Grammar School : https://www.change.org/p/the-board-of-trustees-of-the-brisbane-grammar-school-refund-of-tuition-fees-to-parents-of-kevin-lynch-s-brisbane-grammar-school-victims?source_location=minibar 3. There is obviously a significant financial cost to Brisbane Grammar School in refunding School fees to parents of over 100 victims of serial sexual abuser Kevin Lynch. The School was very much aware since the Royal Commission Case Study 34 hearings in November 2015, that refunding School fees was an item victims wanted the School to address to demonstrate at the very least a sign of “Genuine Remorse.” Without needing to specifically request, a refund, Brisbane Grammar School or more importantly those individuals elected to govern the School out of kindness and compassion, but also more importantly in the longer term financial best interests of the School should have done what many consider who have supported the refund as “Morally the Right Thing to Do.” Yes there is inevitably a short term cost, but under the circumstances continuing to the deny and delaying the very real financial costs associated with previous School inaction in relation to this matter is likely to further destroy even further the integrity of the School. As previously suggested to the Minister, parents may begin withdrawing their child or children from the School if left unchecked for much longer. This is a very real prospect and the Minister should not underestimate fickle public confidence in Prestigious Institutions when they do not act according to the expectations of the general public. 4. It should therefore come as no surprise to the Trustees of Brisbane Grammar School, that a refund of Schools fees is almost certainly all but inevitable in the long run. That is despite the attached refusal notification dated Friday 13 January 2017, victims are unperturbed as no-doubt a moral compass will eventually prevail and School fees refunded as morally the values of the School are rather hollow otherwise. 5. As Trustees of Brisbane Grammar School appear to have made no contingency plans in respect of the financial budgeting to refund School fees to parents of victims in Royal Commission Case Study 34, this is exceedingly poor financial management and very poor governance. As the Minister has previously refused to question the suitability of Trustees top continue, this surely is an issue the Minister needs to consider in regards to the applicable legislation, as previously highlighted. 6. The attached letter from the School has angered and incensed so many victims. Victims have been devastated at receiving such a callous letter. There is now a steely resolve, by victims to now do whatever it takes within the confines of the law to force the Board of Trustees to acquiesce and immediately refunding School fees is simply the only option. 7. The contents of the attached letter very much suggests to victims, the Board of Trustees of Brisbane Grammar School are still more concerned with upholding a misconceived public image the School would like portrayed, rather than considering the real needs of victims and their families. This can be evidenced, as the School in their response have accepted responsibility for banning and suspending certain Old Boy email communication accounts and Social Media links from promoting the petition to the School Community. Such actions by the Board of Trustees and senior leadership, speaks volumes in terms of the School’s priority. There certainly would not have been any need for victims to have been banned or restricted, if the School showed genuine remorse and compassion from the outset. 8. The banning and suspension, as highlighted in the attached letter in the minds of now middle aged victims who attended Brisbane Grammar School in the 1970’s and 1980’s clearly demonstrates that despite what the School claim in public, a climate and culture of fear, intimidation and bullying still very much exists at the School. There is clearly no doubt now of obvious consequences at Brisbane Grammar School, if those who speak out of turn, do so, and this includes Old Boys of the School and those Old Boys as victims of sexual abuse. There is no better evidence, asserting what all victims allege to be true, even to this day of the fear and intimidation suffered at the hands of the School, than the attached letter from the Headmaster Mr Anthony Micallef, dated 13 January 2017. Mr Micallef even appears rather proud that he resorted to blocking certain accounts, but only restoring access if everyone “behaves themselves,” ie victims would take this to mean, that a permanent ban and expulsion would result if continuing to share or comment about the Petition to refund School fees on Official Brisbane Grammar School social media platforms. 9. Victims put it to the Minister if broken yes, but courageous middle-aged men who were sexually assaulted at the School are attempting to be silenced by Brisbane Grammar School, what hope is there for any young boy currently attending the School who may feel frightened, threatened, bullied, victimized, physically assaulted or even worse sexually abused? Victims doubt very much given the response of Brisbane Grammar School any young voice will in fact be heard under the current senior leadership of the School and Board of Trustees. It is submitted to the Minister given the response received by victims from Mr Micallef, that some form of punishment would more often likely be given to those who may act in defiance of social conventions, rather than a compassionate understanding of why those social conventions may in fact have been broken in the first instance and to adequately address those issues, rather than punish. It does not appear to be in Brisbane Grammar School’s DNA to do anything other than, “Punish.” 10. It was after all well evidenced by testimony during the Royal Commission Case Study 34, that fear, intimidation, bullying and punishment at the School is exactly the contextual environment that allowed the serial sexual abuser, Kevin Lynch to flourish and why nothing was done about it. Furthermore as there was no external oversight, senior School leadership could not themselves be held to account for their inappropriate actions or lack of positive action in safeguarding young people attending the School. 11. Given the response of the headmaster Anthony Micallef, dated 13 January 2017, victims in Royal Commission Case Study 34, can only but urgently request the Minister to use legislative powers to immediately conduct a School Inspection of Brisbane Grammar School, in order to safeguard current students attending the School. 12. Most victims, older members of the School community and younger members currently attending the School would agree and accept that in a civil society we all abide by certain social conventions, most of the time. However there are times when someone in society feels vulnerable, persecuted and or their voice is not listened to nor heard, that creates the context for what the “School” may deem to be inappropriate action and a punishable offence. Who is to say the posting of certain information is not appropriate, other than the School who would rather silence certain information? To some members of the School community, it may have in fact have been very important, relevant and or highly appropriate material. Such as in this instance, posting links to victims petition for a Refund of School Fees on Official Brisbane Grammar Communication. Now the question that victims would like the Minister on behalf of victims to ask, both the headmaster of Brisbane Grammar School and each and every member of the Board of Trustees is, Question A :“Why suspend and ban certain information such as the petition from circulation, as long as it was not offensive in terms of rude words or pictures etc ?” Question B: “What if another parent had a concern about Brisbane Grammar School’s conduct in relation to the victims of sexual abuse in Royal Commission Case Study 34, how would they raise it with the School? Question C: If the School senior leadership and management refuses to review past decision, if it was not via the School social media channels. how can the general community be informed about such matters that might in fact be of interest?” Question D: “If the School suspends and bans certain social media accounts from raising such concerns about the conduct of the School, how can the School have an open, transparent and honest debate on this highly sensitive issue of sexual abuse or for that matter any concerns the School does not resolve to others parent’s satisfaction?” Question E : “Rather than banning or suspending accounts and the information posted would it have been more appropriate to engage and discuss with victims in Case Study 34 what the real problems are and why victims may feel the need to actually post a petition on Official Brisbane Grammar School social media pages?” Question F: “What would the School do if a Student attending the School was posting information the School controllers of social media, thought was inappropriate? And would the individual student be punished or disciplined or would the School conduct an investigation to understand why a student may feel the need to post information that is subsequently banned?” Question G: “Apart from School Prefects, does Brisbane Grammar School have a student led council to discuss with Senior School Leadership these types of issues in a collaborative and non threatening environment?” Question H: “Could the Headmaster and Trustees clarifying and clearly articulate the School Values?” Question I : “Could the School clarify what is meant quoted verbatim in letter dated 13 January 2017 as : “To date the School has reached settlement with more than 100 former students.” 13. It should be highlighted to the Minister, as per the overwhelming response to the petition for a School Fee Refund, that apart from a couple of victims, Mr Stack highlighted in his Royal Commission testimony, by far the majority and that is 99% of victims in Case Study 34, do not see that their claims against the school have in fact been adequately settled and do not see them as in fact settled, under their definition. Mr Stack and the Board of Trustees may wish the true liability to vanish into thin air, but this is clutching at straws and wishful thinking, as the voices of opinion for a School Fee Refund are now getting louder. The Minister ought to resolve this dilemma without any further delay, by ordering a School Inspection so the facts, rather than the public communications myth sprouted by a School still in denial can be reviewed and the true extend of the School financial liability can quickly be assessed. 14. It should be reiterated to the Minister and the Brisbane Grammar School Community, that it is definitely not victims in Case Study 34 intention to destroy the School. But rather it has been the exceedingly poor governance of the School by Trustees and senior School leadership where that fault of destroying the integrity of the School should fairly and squarely be shouldered and definitely not victims. Statement made by victims of Kevin Lynch who attended Brisbane Grammar School in Royal Commission Case Study 34 on this Day the 15th of January 2017 Lynch Victim Signature Respond via email to : lynchvictim@gmail.com