Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Supporting services - the story of MAACS, and activities by Government Departments
The Mens’ Accommodation and Crisis Service (MAACS), run by the LFA ACT, was
established by Minister Stefaniak in the ACT in March 1999.
MAACS was designed to provide emergency accommodation and support to fathers, and in many cases also their children, left homeless as a result of domestic discord. (But you got Stefaniak to tell the Government enquiry that you had helped 60 men and 100 children?)
MAACS was the first service of its kind in Australia. (Yeah if ripping off the Australian taxpayer on the fruadulent misrepresentation of Domestic Violence is a first then you can have the accolade.) The LFA had been lobbying for this service for 20 years. It was established against strong opposition from the ACT Domestic Violence Crisis Service (DVCS), which has an avowedly “feminist” charter. (You mean it's "feminist" because it helps women and you say that like it's a bad thing to help women and yet here you are saying you're setting up the same service for men and yet if you do it, it should be considered something to brag about?) MAACS received ongoing funding of $100,000 per annum (yes and the rest) , compared with an average of$400,000 per annum per refuge for women’s refuges. (you know yourself that that figure isn't true and that all the refuges received the same $100,000 but that doesn't sound as good when you're whining does it?)
The LFA, during its three-year tenure in running MAACS, filled an increasing part of
the yawning gap in current practice in the ACT in relation to:
- genuine holistic case management and coordination with other relevant
services for men and their children. This included, importantly, assistance in
obtaining legal advice and legal aid; (where was it stated that you were required to provide legal advice, your funding was for accommadation for homeless men and children)
- information services for men about relevant issues and services; (where was it stated that you were required to provide information services, your funding was for accommadation for homeless men and children and information on what?)
- advice to supplement and temper that coming from sources such as the now
officially established Office of Women, and from some groups associated with
Partnerships Against Violence, and (where was it stated that you were to provide advice, your funding was for accommadation for homeless men and children)
- peak body consultation with the community about relevant issues. (where was it stated that you were required to provide peak body consulation and to whom?)
In late 2001, the former ACT Department of Education and Community Services
(DECS) decided, following continuing lobbying by certain opposition groups, to put
MAACS out to tender. (as is required by law and also to provide a fair and TRANSPARENT method of funding. And it was put out to tender because when they evaluated the "service" you were providing they found huge problems and terminated your funding.))
For the proper administration ofthe contract with the service provider, it was, in the
LFA’s view, incumbent on the funding authority to act in accordance with the
considerations that: (The government decided to do the right thing and look into your crony relationship with Stefaniak and as a result you lost your position, you don't have any rights then).
- the contract between the service provider and the funding authority
specifically provided that any declared dispute between the parties should be
subject to a mediation process; and (when you lied to the Evaluation tema you lost all rights.)
- there was a requirement to comply with relevant policy guidelines in
formulating the decision to put the service out to tender, a requirement to
carefully consider the criticisms made by the LFA of what was, in this
particular case, considered by the LFAA to be an extremely. faulty
“evaluation”, and a requirement, under Government guidelines, in assessing
tenders to check referee reports back with the referees themselves. (Bottom line is you lied and got caught out.)
It was also, in the LFA’s view, necessary for the proper administration ofthe contract
that the funding authority avoid:
- recording, maintaining, and/or utiising incorrect and prejudicial information
about MAACS’ operations which MAACS had no effective chance to correct
- asserting a requirement under law to do things that were not in fact legally
required ( e.g., to put the MAACS service out to tender), and/or impeding the
LFA’s legitimate political role, by the letting of the tender at a time which
would preclude action by the LFA (e.g., the day before the ACT election); being unduly influenced, in drawing up tender Terms of Reference for the
tender and in making assessments, by the opinions of any other agencies
which may have been opposed to the establishment of MAACS in the first
place, and/or by arranging, for example, for Departmental officers in receipt of
incorrect and prejudicial information, to sit on the tender evaluation panel.
Unfortunately, the above stipulations were, in the LFA’s view, not met.
As to the reasons for why they were not, it not our place to speculate. However, in
the LFA’s opinion, the tender process for MAACS’ successor service was
The LFA was primarily responsible for the policy initiative leading to the
establishment of MAACS. (Get over yourself. You had an idea to rip off the government, stop patting yourself on the back.) Its successor service played no role in those
developments, apart from some of their leading members actively seeking to block
them. (yeah but at least they were honest.) To replace the initiator ofthe project with the opponent of the project, and a
different ethos, should have required very strong supporting reasons - which were not
available. (you lied and you created a shoddy service that self supportd your own outdated ideals...get over it.)
This, in our opinion, tended to undermine public confidence in the allocation and
distribution of public funds in the welfare and support sector in the ACT, and
damaged the overall ability of the community sector in the ACT to provide this
necessary, unique, and very valuable service to a seriously disadvantaged section of
the community. (No it's people like you who spend a whole lifetime sponging off the tax payers in this country that undermine public confidence.)
MAACS was able, in a high proportion ofcases, to help families not only to deal with
their family crises but also to reconcile in a way that was safe for all the family
members. (What are you implying here...who was safe? The women because you had the men in your government sponsored house of hate? The children , if there were in fact any, certainly weren't safe were they?)
MAACS’s clients were overwhelmingly positive about the service they
received while at MAACS (see attachment). (Do you mean Emily the 10 year old that supposedly wrote the same letter as other people in exactly the same words that you tendered as evidence of your success?)
The LFA believes that, in the interests of fathers and their children in potential marriage breakdown situations, services of this kind should being strongly encouraged, not only in the ACT but in other locations around Australia, but should not be run by self-proclaimed “feminists” or their close associates. (You think they should be run by misogynists like you so you can get paid to sit on your ass all day and whine about women with newly separated men?)
The failure to establish such services would be yet another example of failure to deal
with the many cases where separated families could, with better policies and
administration, have been reconciled, in the interests of both the children and the
other members of the family. (The failure to establish such services means that the government is not going to be taken in by leeches like yourself who mooch off other peoples unfortunate situations and hide behind a faux concern for children.)
"The LFA receives at least 5 calls a fortnight from the parents or wives of men who
have suicided as a result either ofbeing hounded by the CSA or as a result ofthe nonenforcement ofFamily Court access orders. Ifthe Parliament continues to allow these
things to happen year after year, when it is aware ofthe situation, it will be culpably
We challenge you Barry Williams to name names. We're sure some families of those that have suicided as a result of the CSA hounding would love to have their voices heard and have the CSA held responsible. Or is it that you lied???
Then Barry Williams saw a new avenue to fund his lifestyle down in Canberra, Get the government to pay for a Mens Crisis and Accommodation Service (MAACS) which surprise surprise did not allow women. What's that? Discrimination? Isn't that what you bleat about now about Womens Refuges? The service was for men AND THEIR CHILDREN to be all placed in one cess pit of violence and anger. If in fact you did get any clients and again we challenge you to name names of people who actually used this service, you thought it was ok to place children in an environment full of suicidal and quite likely violent men that most likely had allegations of child sexual abuse levied against them because as you say yourself, all women do this to gain an advantage in the property settlement? What the hell were you thinking? Thank goodness someone saw some some sense and got rid of you.
"I should finish this preliminary foray into the issues by referring to a major new development in the ACT, namely the establishment of a Men’s' Accommodation and Crisis Service in Canberra (known as MAACS), being run by the LFA ACT.
We are very appreciative of the ACT government's help with MAACS, which opened on 14 April 1999, the first of its kind in Australia. Already it has proved successful. The service has been in use at almost all times, and we have had to turn a number of people away because they did not meet our criteria, e.g. because they were not victims of marriage breakdown or had not been residents of the ACT."
5. The Lone Fathers' Association's fixed lease agreement with ACT Housing expired in March 2000. From that time the Lone Fathers' Association was on a standard two week Community Organisation Rental Housing Assistance Program tenancy agreement. The Lone Fathers' Association was served with an eviction notice on 21 January 2002, when the organisation made it clear that they would not vacate the premises when their purchase agreement with the Department of Education and Community Services expired on 31 January 2002.
6. The Department of Education and Community Service's purchase agreement with the Lone Fathers' Association allocated $105,859 per annum (excluding GST). An additional $10,000 per annum was recently allocated to MAACS under the Community Capacity Building initiative.
In addition, the department allocated an additional $5,000 per annum to the Lone Fathers' Association to purchase professional supervision services to improve the performance of their workers.
The service tendered for was an extension on that previously purchased by the department. An additional $50,000 was made available from the Supported Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP) for the purchase of outreach support to families who have either recently left a refuge or who are at imminent risk of becoming homeless.
ame of Organisation
Name of Service
Funding provided in 2000-01 (inc GST)
Funding provided in 2001-02 (inc GST)
Lone Fathers' Association
"Mr Speaker, the government subsequently decided to provide funding for this service to the Lone Fathers Association, without any transparent decision-making process. The service was funded under a cloud of inappropriate process and we believe it is appropriate, as the new government, to set in train a process that is transparent."
Interesting bit of Cronyism here in that Jim Carter was also the Caretaker. How convenient!
MR STEFANIAK: My question is to the Minister for Education, Youth and Family Services. Minister, I refer you to the yet to be resolved saga in relation to the crisis accommodation service for men and men with children, formerly run by the Lone Fathers Association in Belconnen.
Minister, no doubt you are aware that the Lone Fathers organisation did not spend all of the money allocated to it when it was running the service, and that a sum of approximately $20,000 remains unspent. I understand that there is some dispute in relation to who should keep this money. The Lone Fathers have sought to do this, but the department has apparently placed the matter before an auditor and put a freeze on those funds.
Without going into what should happen to that money, would you tell us whether you are you aware that the department has refused to allow the Lone Fathers to pay the former live-in caretaker the money owed to him as a result of the redundancy in the change of contract, and his other entitlements? I understand his entitlements amount to approximately $4,500. Is the minister further aware that the Australian Services Union has advised that this money should be payable to him, and wants it paid to him. Will you, Minister, direct your department to allow Mr Carter to be paid the money that is duly owed to him out of the abovementioned $20,000?
MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, the responsibility for this program is now the responsibility of the Minister for Disability, Housing and Community Services, so I will ask Mr Wood to respond.
MR WOOD: Mr Speaker, I am aware of half of that story, that is the half in which there is $4,500 owing in redundancy payments. I am not aware that the $20,000 has been frozen. However, the advice that I have is that such commitment as there is is a responsibility of an organisation. There was a claim earlier that it should be paid by somebody else, by the government or something. The suggestion in reply is, as I recall, that the money owing to the person should be paid out of the remaining funds. If they are frozen, I can see there might be a problem, so I will check the second half of the story and see where we may take it.
MR STEFANIAK: Minister, I do thank you for that, at least, and I will liaise further with you. Will you endeavour to do that as a matter of urgency, as I understand Mr Carter has been seeking what is rightly his for some time now?"
Rightly his eh?
Here is Bill Stefaniak the Liberal MLA that was responsible for a lot of the misallocated funds.
Here is where Stefaniak tells the Government that despite "homeless men with children" being very rare, Barry Williams is receiving calls "at all hours of the day and night from men with children" in order to defend his friends deception to the government. More lies Barry? Is this the same guys that are threatening to commit suicide? And now it's HOMELESS MEN that you are receiving government funding for instead of men who have been victims of domestic violence? Wow you sure are one busy guy.
MR STEFANIAK (11.09): This matter has been hanging around for a while. I must admit I was a little bit concerned about the government response. Homelessness is a very serious issue. In the latest Chronicle we saw a very sad story about homelessness. Homelessness among men particularly is a distinct problem. The Chronicle referred to some figures that have been with us for almost 12 months. Up to 2,000 single men have been unable to find crisis accommodation. The St Vincent de Paul Society indicated to me and to the committee that they turn away up to six homeless men a night.
It is not common to see homeless men with children. Nevertheless, that is a very real problem. The committee looked at accommodation and the support services for homeless men and their children. The inquiry arose out of a motion I moved in December 2001 in relation to some problems with the contract that was awarded to group to run a shelter in Belconnen for a homeless men and children. That contract cut short the tenure of the group running the shelter at the time, Lone Fathers. There were a number of problems with the way the department looked at that service. There were significant concerns with the report by the so-called independent consultants. There were factual errors, from what I could gather, and there were some real concerns with the way the department accepted that report. There were all sorts of allegations of bias in the way the consultation was done. I thought that with the significant problems the minister should have put everything on hold and have the new minister investigate it. He did not-I think that is an absolute shame-and another group took over.
I said at the time that I was not going to bag the other group. They went in there with every good intention. They were the successful tenderers. Their philosophy was somewhat different from that of the previous runners of the service. The question here is the need and the government addressing the need.
We saw a clear need for not only one service on the north side but also a service on the south side. For months after that, as housing spokesman I kept getting figures from Barry Williams, the founder of the service for children and men in Australia. He was getting phone calls at all hours of the day and night about men with children in crisis. Quite clearly, there is still an unmet need. There is a real need for a similar service on the south side. I am disappointed that the committee report does not go far enough. I think it has a bit of window dressing. It could have made more useful recommendations to the government about this service.
When we think of homelessness, we think of homeless single men and we often think of women with children in crisis needing special accommodation. Compared with other places, Canberra is quite well served with accommodation for women with children. The crisis services do a very good job.
More and more we are seeing men with children being left out on the street. Under family law, once the mother always got custody of the child. I am advised that in about 40 per cent of cases now the father gets custody. That is just one of the changes in our society. Even though a lot of people might not think of men with children being out on the street, their need for crisis accommodation is real.The service that Barry Williams set up was an Australian first. ....It was a good service that looked after about 60 men and 100 children during its operation. (Name, names Barry) I was very disappointed-indeed, quite angry and even disgusted-that Lone Fathers lost that service and that the government did not look at the matter properly....
Both Stefaniak and Williams were candidates in the 1992 Elections.
We intend to expose more of this scandal and implore the government to investigate ALL of the funding that has been provided to LFAA.
Barry Williams and Jim Carter it's time you got real jobs instead of living off the Australian TaxPayer like you have been doing for the past 30 years!!! No doubt the next project you apply to have funded from the Australian Government will be to do with the indigenous population because there's money there isn't there and someone has to fund YOUR lifestyle.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Posted Yesterday, 04:07 PM
Joined: 16 February, 2007, 07:38 PM
Primary group: Silver Member
Firstly she is in NSW and then posts from Canada.
Secondly her Child Support figures just don't add up in relation to her ex's income.
Thirdly her costs of mediation are way off.
Chrystie do you think the people on this site are as dumb as you?
Posted Yesterday, 06:13 PM
Joined: 12 February, 2009, 05:44 PM
Primary group: Silver Member
Umm Conan, Chrystie must have got it right in thinking that you are dumb!! How embarrassing.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Geoff Bertram is whining all over the internet and using his time (instead of working ) to make death threats and harass bloggers all because we posted copies of what he already had placed on the net.
Hmm good luck with any legal action Geoff. Good to see you have lots of money to do that after paying your child support of course.
See here where he posted his own name on a Dads On The Air Forum bragging about a letter he wrote.
This is what he posted on a Google Forum, pity he didn't mention that it is the truth posted on here and his own death threats made to these bloggers:
|More options May 31, 10:59 am|
site is outright lies.
Since originally posting this, the site has breached my copyright (no
fair use excuse available). I am also taking legal action over this.
harassment - grounds for AVO. I have no idea what this psychopath is
It's funny that he wants to talk about stalking and harassment when we have the log files of just how many times he has come to this blog, along with his wife Annette and neighbour and crony Ross Mitchell (along with his brother Keith Mitchell). We also have copies saved of all threats made on Dads On The Air forum and emailed personally to us.
It's a pill isn't it Geoff when you can't control and bully your way through everyone in your life who does something you don't like? Just how long was that AVO against you issued for?
Here's a snippet of Bertram's stalking of this blog:
Monaro, Barack Obama wasn't referring to you and your cronies in the fathers rights industry when he was paying tribute to fathers. He specifically referred to "loving and caring fathers who are strengthening their families and country."
There is nothing loving or caring about avoiding or minimising the payment of child support, there is nothing loving or caring about discussing your children and your children's mothers on public forums and denigrating those people, there is nothing loving nor caring about advising other fathers on how to avoid paying child support, there is nothing loving nor caring about calling all accusations of child sexual abuse by fathers false. If you genuinely cared about your children more than yourself, you would join the fight to ensure they had a loving relationship with both parents and and you would ensure that your children were adeqautely cared for both physically and mentally. You are not seeking to strengthen any family, only tear it down in the interest of self.
As kids grow and mature, they look to their dad for a special kind of love and support. Providing these necessities can bring great happiness.
Fatherhood also brings great responsibilities. Fathers have an obligation to help rear the children they bring into the world. Children deserve this care, and families need each father's active participation.
Fathers must help teach right from wrong and instill in their kids the values that sustain them for a lifetime.
As they encounter new and challenging experiences, children need guidance and counsel. Fathers need to talk with their kids to help them through difficult times. Parents must also help their children make the right choices by serving as strong role models. Honest and hard-working fathers are an irreplaceable influence upon their children.
Communities must do more to counsel fathers. Family and friends, and faith-based and community organizations, can speak directly with men about the sacrifices and rewards of having a child. These groups can support men as they take on the great challenges of child-rearing.
Through honest and open dialogue, more men can choose to become model parents and know the wonders of fatherhood.
On Father's Day, we pay tribute to the loving and caring fathers who are strengthening their families and country.
We also honor those surrogate fathers who raise, mentor, or care for someone else's child. Thousands of young children benefit from the influence of great men, and we salute their willingness to give and continue giving.
We also express special gratitude to fathers who serve in the United States Armed Forces for the sacrifices they and their families make every day.
All of these individuals are making great contributions, and children across the country are better off for their care.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, in accordance with a joint resolution of the Congress approved April 24, 1972, as amended (36 U.S.C. 109), do hereby proclaim June 21, 2009, as Father's Day.
I direct the appropriate officials of the Government to display the flag of the United States on all Government buildings on this day. I urge all Americans to express their love, respect, and admiration to their fathers, and I call upon all citizens to observe this day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eighteenth day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
There are many organisations, national and international, that support the aims and objectives of, or have affiliated with, the Shared Parenting Council of Australia.
The Shared Parenting Council of Australia
PO Box 2027, Bunbury WA 6231
Domain Name: FATHERS4EQUALITY.COM
Reseller..............: PlanetDomain Ltd Pty
Created on............: 3 Mar 2008 23:28:20 EST
Expires on............: 3 Mar 2010 23:28:20 EST
Record last updated on: 3 Mar 2008 23:28:20 EST
Diversitech Products Pty Ltd
P.O. Box 330
Gosford, New South Wales 2250
Administrative Contact, Billing Contact:
Diversitech Products Pty Ltd
P.O. Box 330
Gosford, New South Wales 2250
Diversitech Products Pty Ltd
P.O. Box 330
Gosford, New South Wales 2250
Domain servers in listed order:
Diversitech Pty Ltd is a company owned by Wayne Butler.
Saratoga Sailing Clubhttp://www.yachting.org.au/db/clubdisplay.asp?ID=2092&Action=Display
If your club details are incorrect, please email your state body with the correct details or get your trusted club official to correct the details via MyClub
|Site Address:||Willaroo Rd|
|SARATOGA NSW 2251|
|Postal Address:||PO Box 6292|
|KINCUMBER NSW 2251|
|Classes sailed|| |
|Activity Days||Sundays September - April|
|Club Activities||Learn to sail programs Regular point score and championship races and monthly meetings Hall hire|
|Open times||Sundays - 10.00am|
|Club information||The Club has been operating since 1936|
|Other information||Saratoga Sailing Club is a family sailing club on the edge of pristine Brisbane Waters on the Central Coast. The clubhouse verandah provides viewing of the entire sailing course which makes it an ideal Sunday outing for parents and guests.|
|Wayne Butler||Club Presidentemail@example.com|
|Andrew Penfold||Club Secretaryfirstname.lastname@example.org|
|Early version of familylawwebguide called Diversitech.com.au ||http://web.archive.org/web/20060819000744/http://diversitech.com.au/ || email@example.com|
THERE REALLY ARE ONLY A FEW PLAYERS IN FATHERS RIGHTS IN AUSTRALIA AND AS MUCH AS THEY WANT US ALL TO BELIEVE THERE ARE MANY, THAT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE. THERE ARE ONLY ABOUT 10 KEY PLAYERS WHO HAVE THEIR HAND IN ALL OF THE PIES...SPCA, DADS ON THE AIR, FAMILY LAW REFORM FATHERS4EQUALITY ETC ETC AND THEY ARE ALL THE SAME PEOPLE.
THEY SEEK TO DECEIVE US ALL...THE MEMBERS, THE GOVERNMENT, YOU AND ME.
IT IS A MEASURE OF THEIR CHARACTER AND JUST HOW LITTLE SUPPORT THEY REALLY HAVE FOR THEIR ISSUES.
THEY ARE NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF LIARS. STAY TUNED MORE WILL BE REVEALED.
From: Peter Saxon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Saturday, 30 August, 2008 7:03:49 PM
Subject: Re: [fathers4equality] letter from FAMILY LAW REFORM ASSOC. NSW Inc.
All this back and forth discussion is clouding some of the facts and more information.
Firstly Michael Green and the SPCA have been outspoken critics of Section 121. The FLRA website evens contains an article of why they think ‘it’ should be rewritten.
Coral Slattery heads up the FLRA which is an independent organisation and a member of the SPCA. Apart from providing many submissions to the HORSIP inquiry they do a lot of work on schools policies. There is a recent article about their attempts to get the Attorney General to implement a Nationwide schools information policy for the ‘other parent’.
Michael Green is a retired QC
Michael Green is the president of the SPCA
Family Courts in Australia are not secret Courts and this be may be why Michael Green did not respond in the way you though he should have. The Courts are open and Judgments are published. It is the anonymity of these publications that causes these organisations to rail against Section 121. That said ‘any’ judgment can be ‘anonymised’ and published.
Both these organisation house their web sites on the familylawwebguide portal and both have forums on that site. I am aware that very much tougher rules apply to posts made on flwg because unlike this closed email site, it is a public site and has some tough posting and moderator rules. The site also has ‘go forward’ groups on it that do not appear to tolerate whingers and what they constantly refer to as ‘hot air merchants’. Their agendas are clearly legislative reforms and legislative fine tuning. I suppose with the incredible success of flwg they want to keep it focused.
There are several articles on flwg about a recent meeting with the AG. At this meeting were Coral Slattery, Wayne Butler (Secretary SPCA) and Michael Green. One of the Agenda items was the mis use of AVOs to prevent contact. Other items included the SPCAs long standing opposition to the mis use of Rice and Asplund. This is all public material and freely available on the flwg site.
Have things changed? Well over the past week I have spoken to three Fathers that were in Goulburn Street. Within the same period of a week all three had orders that three years ago no one would have dreamed possible. Two of these were srl’s and part of the SRL Resources mob on the flwg. I am also a member of that group and I understand that is not a member of the SPCA although several of its senior people have been offered SPCA postions. If anything this is one group that because of their constant frontline experience can tell whether there have been changes in the way the Courts work.
From: Peter Saxon <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, 13 November, 2008 8:41:38 AM
Subject: [fathers4equality] Getting the real truth out there
Well folks some of you are aware of the blog site that was attacking the FLWG and SPCA. This expanded into attacks on Dads on the Air, DIDS, F4E and some personal attacks on Debbie of M4E. Strange how all of these organisations have Shared Parenting as one of their platforms and there are no attacks on Anti Shared Parenting organisations.
Rather than anybody post a link to the evil site (and have people drive up its Google counter which is what the evil site is extremely proud of) goto
and add your comments.
Seems like if the evil harpies want to throw mud they will get it thrown back. If they don’t want to play Marquis of Queensbury rules they cannot expect other people to either.
An Austalian site based on the pro pedophile theories of Richard Gardner.
This site is registered to an unlisted public company called Sea Link Pty Ltd based in South Australia and the registrant is a guy called Russell Greaves.
Interesting as to why a public company would align themselves with such an amateurish and controversial site.
Results for IP 184.108.40.206
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Wayne's Headline says "Breastfeeding Mums Forced to Share Breasts" when the article was about Breastfeeding Mums Sharing CARE!!! LOL
Freudian slip or intentional gaff, you choose, either way we think he's stupid.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Joined: 02 August, 2006, 10:11 PM
Primary group: Percolo Alio
FLWG Closed VOIP Telephone: 114888
','auto','http://www.familylawwebguide.com.au/themes/default/images/forum_navigation/members.png');" class="ocf_poster_member">Secretary SPCA
Was my post helpful? If not, please let us know how we can do betterExecutive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia
If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunity
What is an IT worker from Workcover, Gosford doing conducting mediations and what qualifications do you have? More importantly did the parties know that you were unqualified (we bet somehow tha man involved knew exactly about your lack of impartiality) and about your strongly held bias against women? Wow, a man of multi talents, and many personalities (eh Oneringrules er sorry Secretary SPCA)!
SRL Executive, Secretary SPCA, CRC Executive, Website Owner, DOTA Executive, IT worker for Workcover and mediator? Busy boy!
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
"Applications are considered by the SRL-R Execs and not the site moderators. " in response to a post by MOOT as to why he wasn't being let in the door to SRL hallowed ground.
Hahahaha The Site Moderators and the controlling members of SRL are one and the same...Michael Green, Wayne Butler, Lindsay Jackel et al and all the Shared Parenting gang.
Why you keep peddling the same old bullshit that they are all separate entities is laughable as no-one is buying that garbage anymore?