An Australian MP, Peter Lewis, hits out at the betrayal of the Standing Committee's inquiry into shared parenting.

"This was progress!
One single politician stands up for Fathers in Australia" Ed.

 

HON PETER LEWIS, MP CLIC Independent Member for HAMMOND SPEAKER. HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY MEDIA RELEASE
The Hon Speaker, Mr Peter Lewis, today slammed the House of Representatives' Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs, Inquiry into Shared Parenting (HORISP), Report into Child Custody Arrangements.
"Of course, the existing 'Industry' would say the kind of complimentary things they have said about this report! It's business as usual for them, with a cursory slap on the wrist for the crook, abusive, sexist, racist, biased, criminal things they have been doing, all still permissible under the new regime recommended by HORISP," Peter said.
"At present, a vindictive parent of a broken marriage can still go into 'the system' and lie their heads off under oath, thereby destroying the reputation of their innocent ex-spouse and get away with it! AND WORSE still these liars (perjurers) will most likely get custody/residency of the children, &/or at least prevent the other parent from reasonable (or any) access," the Speaker said.
"Taxpayers will continue to foot the bill for many more years for all the problems which caused the Family Court's rotten reputation to come under the Parliamentary Committee's spotlight in the first instance; namely, anti-father bias and false allegations, including perjury, accusing one or other of the parents of violence and abuse."
"Their No 1 recommendation should have been to make perjury (telling lies under Oath) in the Family Court processes a criminal offence. Such a recommendation would then have allowed an additional criminal charge of Criminal Defamation to be brought against the liar," Peter said. "They don't address this major problem anywhere in the Report."
"However, in their No 1 recommendation HORISP talk about "shared parental responsibility" which is what the current practice in the Family Court jurisdiction now claims to deliver."
"At present, the Court awards 'shared responsibility' by giving one parent responsibility' for residency/custody - whilst giving (compelling) the other parent 'responsibility' for the supply of the money, called 'support', without satisfactory (or any) access, i.e. one gets the kids and the other pays the bills under the 'shared responsibility' model at present. HORISP has not recommended any change to the definition of 'shared responsibility'.
"Yet in recommendation No 2, HORISP want "a clear presumption against shared parental responsibility ... (where there are allegations about)... entrenched conflict, family violence, substance abuse or established child abuse, including sexual abuse".
"Under current case law this recommendation will aid, abet and encourage liars and cheats to an even worse degree than the current practice of the Family Court allows. They seem to me to be shamelessly stupid, or insensitive, or ignorant, or all three."
"The report fails to recommend an abolition of the Family Court case law and precedents flowing from it, which it created. This will continue to effect and determine its future deliberations unless it is abolished by Statute. Any new system which is going to be built on the foundations of the old, will be destined to failure," the Speaker said.
"The only people who will view this Report as progressive will be those who weren't around at the time of the 1992 and 1995 inquiries, and those who depend on the existing injustices of the system to make their living".
"I am angry that this will do nothing to reduce the suicide rate and mental illness which has arisen in consequence of the practices in the Family Court system, until now".
"The Family Court system and the publicly paid servants in the processes which hang off it are racist, sexist, abusive, biased, crook and often criminal in their impact on too many parents who have to go through it". HORISP has missed the need to recommend changes to the law which would change these things."
"They are racist because too often, they assume Anglo Saxon cultural mores". "They are sexist because too often, they assume that a woman will be a better parent than a man". "They are abusive because too often, they assume that a man should earn the money and support the children, after the former wife has lied about and vilified him and obstructs his lawful access to children". "They are biased because too often, they assume children don't need their father". "They are crooked because too often, they allow perjury without penalty in their processes and actions". "Finally, the Family Court system covers up criminal conduct by allowing too many publicly paid servants in the processes associated with its actions to ignore the public duty of the Court to uphold the law, including its own Orders".
"The only significant change has been a recommendation to replace part of the work of the existing Family Court with a Tribunal. Yet the Tribunal will not require people appearing before it to tell the truth nor do HORISP's recommendations compel the Tribunal to try and discover the truth before making its Orders. This will make things worse, not better. Moreover, it is probably un-Constitutional anyway."
"It seems the Committee (HORISP) has attempted to avoid offending the Family Court, the publicly paid people who work in the industry and the entrenched structured, leftist views and injustices of the politically correct ninnies who gave evidence to it."
"The Hon Speaker is concerned that Legal Aid will continue to be used to prop up more litigation against too many fathers, who in most cases will have no access to any fair and comparable representation in court."
"The Committee has wimped out in its duty. The basic reason for its establishment was to discover the causes and eliminate the injustices of the current Family Court system. It was told by the Prime Minister to work out the changes to the Family Law Act to fix the problems with the Family Court system. It has not done that."
"The major parties were represented on this Committee and have had their chance to get it right but failed. They have even recommended things which will compound the felony of the system and which are probably un-Constitutional. The Prime Minister must now kick butt and fix the problem himself".