Flawed excuses of Paul Francis

Humpty Dumpty Foundation letter to donors dated 14 December 2015:

"Our priorities are our fidelity to donors, and our singular purpose of delivering life saving medical equipment to children's hospitals around Australia.
Paul Francis, OAM"

The facts suggest otherwise. Paul Francis has - via his private company, Love 'n Deuce Pty. Limited - received "rent" from the Humpty Dumpty Foundation that Love 'n Deuce has no lawful right to receive and, more relevantly, that Paul Francis did NOT have to accept from the Humpty Dumpty Foundation. Paul Francis could simply have declined to accept the bogus "rent" payments. It seems that one of the Humpty Dumpty Foundation's "priorities" is to obtain a financial advantage for Paul Francis, at the expense of sick children.

What was Paul Francis' flawed reasoning used to justify his acceptance of this bogus "rent"? One must look to the article published in the Sydney Morning Herald on 5 October 2015:

"Paul Francis said he had 'no input in relation to the amount to be paid by Humpty to Love 'n Deuce'."

"All establishment costs for Humpty were paid by Love ' Deuce. Consistent with the intention of operating Humpty on a professional basis, the Humpty board, not including Mr. Francis, considered it appropriate that Humpty pay a licence fee to Love 'n Deuce for the use of part of its premises."

First, the "premises" are not those of Love 'n Deuce. The premises were - pursuant to the Lease - constructed and paid for by the Northern Suburbs Tennis Club Limited. Moreover, Love 'n Deuce has always been, at the time of receiving the bogus "rent", an unlawful sub-lessee of the Crown Reserve and, accordingly, has no lawful right to receive such "rent". Paul Francis is fully aware of these facts, as should the Directors of the Foundation. If the Directors of the Humpty Dumpty Foundation made no such enquiry to ascertain these facts, perhaps they should resign. Refer to the words of Lord Nicholls quoted on this website.

Second, if the initial "establishment costs" for the Foundation were paid by Love 'n Deuce, why not simply quantify those costs and repay them from income received by the Foundation? The written proof of how much Love 'n Deuce paid as establishment costs should be readily available in the Foundation's records: If not, there is a serious problem with the transparency and management of the Foundation. Let's say, for example, that those "establishment costs" were $30,000. Then simply repay that sum, plus any interest. HOWEVER, IT IS AN ENTIRELY FLAWED ARGUMENT THAT LOVE 'N DEUCE SHOULD RECEIVE "RENT", YEAR AFTER YEAR AND FOR EVERMORE, TO REPAY THESE "ESTABLISHMENT COSTS". No prudent Trustee could sanction such nonsense, particularly on the reasons given to the Sydney Morning Herald. Once again, refer to the words of Lord Nicholls quoted on this website. Perhaps the Directors of the Humpty Dumpty Foundation should resign.

Third, in a practical sense, it seems absurd to assert that Paul Francis had "no input in relation to the amount to be paid by Humpty to Love 'n Deuce". Paul Francis has at all times been, and continues to be, simultaneously both a Director and Shareholder of Love 'n Deuce and the Founder and Chairman of the Humpty Dumpty Foundation. The assertion seems all a bit contrived, artificial and disingenuous. Could this be a concocted, pro-active defence against the possibility of any future allegation that Mr. Francis allegedly contravened Section 249B(2), Corrupt Commissions or Rewards, of the NSW Crimes Act (as at 1999)?

The incontestable fact is this: Paul Francis is a man who would prefer to receive a personal financial advantage (by accepting "rent" payments), rather than see that money instead used to purchase hospital equipment to help sick children. This is not defamatory; it is a statement of fact based upon the evidence. The real test of character for Mr. Francis is whether he will repay the bogus "rent" paid to his private company, Love 'n Deuce, and insist that the Humpty Dumpty Foundation use the money to be repaid to purchase medical equipment for children's hospitals.