If Nathan Rees just fixes the Supreme Court, and restores them to their status as Australian Courts, this Act will make New South Wales prosper again.

http://www.community-law.info/?page_id=475

“all levels of govt have pension obligations[the privatisation not only raises cash..to give to the overly generouse supper anuation given to public serve ants...but diminishes the ammount able to recieve these super deeds of grant”

That’s weird though, private companies would also pay their people super? Like in the workforce, you sit on a salary while some contractor wanders on in and makes your monthly salary in a couple of days doing what you know how to do.

Last and lowest figure I read was that DOCS pays five thousand dollars per foster child a fortnight to go to a non government org (they pass on around six hundred a fortnight of this to their foster carers). Same child placed with me and they’d pay four hundred dollars a fortnight. Why aren’t the taxpayers having a fit?

“also govts have been stripped of many of its [our] assets..by clever leveraged advances loaned against our invastructure...leveraged advances that in the past allowed a cash advance..[leveraged against future income return...unspoken is the default clauses written into these advances...that have kicked in penalty clauses...govts can only repay by selling off yet more of the peoples assets”

Sorry OUG, what is an “asset” in this case? Like an example of one.

“of course others could explain it better..but the media is as asleep as it is complicite...funny how criminals dont come clean about their colluded vile...and the dumbed down sheeple slumber in their sleep...the fruits of the two party lawyers boys club bears its vile fruit...and still the mugs sleep"

Oh cause the media is a ngo? “Two party lawyers” – what does that mean?

Belly you talk about this collection of politicians like they are a rugby team, I never heard anyone passionate about a government before. Can you explain it to me?

The Pied Piper
"Last and lowest figure I read was that DOCS pays five thousand dollars per foster child a fortnight to go to a non government org (they pass on around six hundred a fortnight of this to their foster carers). Same child placed with me and they’d pay four hundred dollars a fortnight"
Are you sure for it? I supposed you can not do anything because you depend on them.
Can you give me proofs for your information, the web site or anything else?
I will fight my friend BUT I want PROOFS, EVIDENTS.
I will try to bring the issue in the parliament and mass media.
PLEASE GIVE ME MORE INFORMATION.
I want additioanal information if you have, I will try to find my self too.
Can you tell me if we have any studies, any coments from experts, professionals which environment is better for a child, in organizations or in families. I know my friend that you are very good in your job but I want to tell them that we have a beter, healthier environment for the child according to... with $400 per week, why do you pay $2.500 per week, to non government organizations?
PLEASE TRUST ME! I WILL TRY WITH MY WAY!
Antonis Symeonakis
Adelaide

Belly
You hurt me my friend, I saw many first class unionists to give the batle you are giving now, and who expeled from the party to return back as... chickens.
My friend if we do not convert the Australia Union Movement to an autonomus, independent, democratic movement WE, THE UNIONISTS ALWAYS WILL BE PUNCHED FROM THE LABOUR GOVERNMENTS AND LABOUR PARTY!
Conservatives with their acts strength the union movement but labours with their sweet promises and full control of the it, THEY STRANGLE THE UNION MOVEMENT!
Sorry but you can not do anything, you have no choice! Do you know how many comrades are ready to grab your job? Do you know how many comrades are ready to expell you from the party as traitor?
I moved from country to country hunding a chimera, do not do the same mistake! It is not easy to clean the floors!
If my friend want your party or the Union movement to respect you, if you want to have a voice THEN FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY, FIGHT FOR DEEPER AND WIDER DEMOCRACY, in other case my friend one, after the other we will give up!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

http://www.community.nsw.gov.au/DOCSWR/_assets/main/LIB100039/RED_CROSS_FUNDING.PDF
This program has the mums on centrelink benefits and charges them rent and the young mums buy all their own and their babies clothes, food and pay for daycare.

http://www.community.nsw.gov.au/DOCSWR/_assets/main/documents/ANNUAL_REPORT06_07.PDF
“High Needs Kids Placements”
“Life Without Barriers
Children & Young Persons Placement Service 16,015,219”

This “high needs” is interesting; they take any and all kids.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24619222-2702,00.html
“She was recruited to the industry by a private company called Life Without Barriers, established by lawyers and businessmen from the Hunter Valley in the 1990s.
Life Without Barriers last year received $62 million in funding from the NSW Government.”

Antonios: “Can you tell me if we have any studies, any coments from experts, professionals which environment is better for a child, in organizations or in families. I know my friend that you are very good in your job but I want to tell them that we have a better, healthier environment for the child according to... with $400 per week, why do you pay $2.500 per week, to non government organizations?”

200.00 a week while other carers get 50.00 a week to another 200.00 a week more depending on which NGO. They are all in families, just depends who the family chooses to work for.

No… I have never found anything to say that whether a foster parent fosters through an NGO or via DoCS there is any difference. Good and Bad in both places my friend. The bad can probably hide better with an NGO because DoCS leave them to it and accept NGO reports as proof the child/ren are okay.

This NSW government now wants all of the kids to go to NGO’s, I don’t think they will be safe. I see it as them handing the kids to business people who will profit.

But if Belly could explain – why do they do this? This must cost more than increasing the staff at DoCS and bringing back all the foster parents to work for them.

You be the Judge: Do these cartel conditions apply to the High Court while they maintain their ban on accepting everything submitted for filing with them.

Will NSW remain a basket case until they start competing.
44ZZRD Cartel provisions
(1) For the purposes of this Act, a provision of a contract, arrangement or understanding is a cartel provision if:
(a) either of the following conditions is satisfied in relation to the provision:
(i) the purpose/effect condition set out in subsection (2);
(ii) the purpose condition set out in subsection (3); and
(b) the competition condition set out in subsection (4) is satisfied in relation to the provision.
Purpose/effect condition
(2) The purpose/effect condition is satisfied if the provision has the purpose, or has or is likely to have the effect, of directly or indirectly:
(a) fixing, controlling or maintaining; or

(d) goods or services acquired, or likely to be acquired, by any or all of the parties to the contract, arrangement or understanding; or
Note 1: The purpose/effect condition can be satisfied when a provision is considered with related provisions—see subsection (8).
Note 2: Party has an extended meaning—see section 44ZZRC.

Purpose condition
(3) The purpose condition is satisfied if the provision has the purpose of directly or indirectly:
(a) preventing, restricting or limiting:

(ii) the capacity, or likely capacity, of any or all of the parties to the contract, arrangement or understanding to supply services; or
(4) The competition condition is satisfied if at least 2 of the parties to the contract, arrangement or understanding:
(a) are or are likely to be; or
(b) but for any contract, arrangement or understanding, would be or would be likely to be;
in competition with each other in relation to:

(g) if subparagraph (3)(a)(ii) applies in relation to preventing, restricting or limiting the capacity, or likely capacity, to supply services—the supply of those services; or
(h) if subparagraph (3)(a)(iii) applies in relation to preventing, restricting or limiting the supply, or likely supply, of goods or services—the supply of those goods or services; or