The $100 MIllion Question

{Published on 9 October 2014} PR 9 Oct 14   The Chairman of the National Australia Bank (NAB), Mr Michael Chaney AO, and other Board Members have been recently provided with copies of genuine Deeds of an occupational pension fund established in South Australia on 23 December 1913 {Refer below}. This fund was once known as The Provident Fund. The genuine Deeds have until recently been criminally concealed from the members and beneficiaries of this fund by a Victorian resident “Trustee” and were only obtained with the assistance of the Deputy Premier and Attorney-General of South Australia, the Hon John Rau MP, and the Attorney-General’s Department. A “Members’ Handbook” signed by John D. Elliott purports to eliminate survivorship pensions for widows and reduce the value of retrenchment and retirement benefits for male officers by around 80%. This purported reduction in benefits created a large “actuarial surplus” in the Trust Estate of The Provident Fund. Evidence obtained from ASIC shows that over $100 million was transferred from the Trust Estate of The Provident Fund to the purported Trustee resident in Victoria that had not been lawfully appointed to the office of trustee. The National Australia Bank (NAB) has recently assumed the responsibility to pay benefits to members of The Provident Fund. Mr Elliott needs to be able to provide an explanation to Mr Michael Chaney, the Chairman of the National Australia Bank, as to who signed any Deeds of Variation that would amend the Regulations of the Fund to allow such a large reduction in benefit entitlements. There is also the question of what happened to the large actuarial surplus created after such a large reduction purportedly occurred and what is the explanation for why over $100 million was transferred from the Trust Estate of The Provident Fund to a purported Trustee who had not been legally appointed to the office of trustee.