Everyone needs to ask if concealing of evidence is the same as lies and half-truths that are often published to influence public opinion!
Zali Steggall who openly opposed the family law inquiry and then campaigned to be on it, is reminiscent of an episode from “Yes Minister”.She then stated “it needs to be “balanced” and “handled sensitively”” and the committee made confidential any submission that:
- “makes allegations of domestic violence” – when some people claim 85% of Family Law cases have an element of Domestic Violence
- “contains adverse reflections” – If people did not have some adverse reflections on the Family Law Industry then we would not need an inquiry. This made around 80% of submissions confidential and hidden from any form of scrutiny. Does the parliamentary committee need to be so condescending and hide the realities of the family separation industry from the public? Is it that bad? Most people that have experienced it will tell you yes!
- So that leaves many of the remaining submissions made by sector profiteers like the legal services and domestic violence industry advocates that say its all good, but we need more money and it will be better (to line our bottomless pockets)”
Where are the submission from the likes of:
- Aaron Cockman – From the Margaret River Massacre who lost his entire family and already publicly stated how lawyers ramped up conflict.
- Trevor Cooper whose book has been endorsed by a Chief Justice of Appeal (ret) & Former Member UN Human Rights Committee, that states “A truly depressing tale with valuable suggestions for reform” and was released two weeks before the inquiry announced.
- Rob Tiller that was forced to resign after 8 years of service with Relationships Australia for daring to whisper women can be violent too, against their gendered policy stance.
- Harley Cuzens – From Port Dennison when in 2011 Heather Glendinning murdered two of their daughters and then suicided when the mental health signs were apparent from police reports (reported a coven of witches next door) and drug use. Even with all these signs there was no action (even though the coroner absolved all their fellow public servants)?
There are so many lessons to be learned from the history of these tragic failures and if we do not learn from the past, we are doomed to repeat it. Finally, if we are expected to abide by the law, when the committee’s recommendations become law, then surely we should we have the right to know why these laws exist?