Mt Gambier City Council - Couldn't Lie Straight In Bed

Howdy dear availees...I know it's been many weeks between posts, again, and I've no probs admitting that I'm somewhat occupied with a massively critical re-surfacing of my "bizarre trial" (The Border Watch)...I have been very politely and patiently waiting for others to address the issues they have recently 'ventilated', not least of all in State Parliament...(it says here 'Cue- release the crickets'-Ed)...yeah, it's sortta' a joke-attempt at saying 'suddenly, nothing happened'...(well why not just say that and save us all the confusion?-Ed)...I'm just doin' that thing we do where we try to dilute the harsh realities with a bit of (often forced) humour...(oh okay, I see, excellent, carry on-Ed)...cheers...where was I? ah yes, but in the meanwhilst, let us address the relentless deceits, gas-lighting, and outright lies that spew relentlessly from MGCC...(anything specific today or just a general spray of abuse?-Ed)...well today it's the usual, you know, special deals and lucrative contracts and unlawful planning decisions for Councillors families/friends/associates...(so all the usual MGCC cronyism of Nepotism, Insider Trading, Conflict of Interests, executed with the trademark Born To Rule attitude?-Ed)...yes all of that, that and so much more... 

But firstly, another quick shout-out to those whom continue to engage with me and/or provide info, etc, 'cos I said I wouldn't address any 'messages' directly (on TMGI Facebook) but I do always read anything someone sends and/or consider their alternative opinion/info/whatevs...and another big shout-out to the Mt Gambier & Districts Residents & Ratepayers Association and all involved for their efforts in providing an 'official mainstream' conduit through which citizens can petition/challenge MGCC...

In recent TMGI Facebook posts we've covered the 'unlawful' removal of healthy trees from the Hastings Cunningham Reserve Parkland area adjacent to the Apollo Football Club pitch, including healthy trees marked with "sold" before they were even felled...the various excuses/justifications produced by MGCC are transparently false, ie, "those trees dropped dangerous boughs and/or are riddled with borers"...(yes, well the lies would be a little less obvious if Apollo/MGCC hadn't been bragging about how they (Apollo) were expanding their footprint out into HCRP proper, before those trees were deemed "unsafe" and hacked down-Ed)...yes, it's a li'l bit difficult to get that billowing cloud of hubris back in the bag isn't it?...basically, Apollo want to use that bit of ground, the trees are mildly inconvenient, so Apollo have used their mates on MGCC to get what they want...(yes, indeed, and let the rules apply to those other idiots who don't have dodgy mates on MGCC to do their bidding-Ed)...exactly...

Not to say they may not exist somewhere, but I haven't been able to discover a single document/report/approval/Agenda item that supports the MGCC/Apollo statements about the condition of the trees, etc, but in the phone conversation I had with a mid-level MGCC employee (1st May 2024), he claimed he was the one that assessed the trees as "dangerous" and approved their removal, etc, and that therefore Apollo had acted with the official okey-dokes of MGCC...(but Apollo were hacking-down healthy trees in a public parkland, outside of their alleged 'Lease', and sans any sort of safety barriers or other even minimal safety measures-Ed)...yep, and when I put it to that MGCC employee about 1) Apollo's expansion boasts and 2) the lack of 'Leases/Licenses', he claimed ignorance on both issues...(so you politely explained it to him-Ed)...lest he should continue-on in said ignorance...(well we do like to at least try and help others to a better understanding of the world they're standing in-Ed)...yes we do don't we...

For some time now I...(we-Ed)...we have been tellin' folks out HCR way that they ain't got no 'Licenses' no more let-alone any actual 'Leases'...(including the BMX Club and Apollo-Ed)...yep, including them...(and why good sir, have you been scurrilously disseminating such inflammatory none-truths?-Ed)...well, firstly, because my source of info is rock-solid, and confirms that the 'No Licenses/Leases' thing is a fact...(yeah, but some clown passin' info onto you doesn't make it a fact-Ed)...sure, absolutely, but how about a legally-requisite 'Register of Interests...(a "register of Interests"? what be this wonder of which you speak?-Ed)...well in this specific case, that would be MGCC's Register of Community Land Leases and Licences...(ohhh, their legally requisite RCLLL?-Ed)...yes, the RCLLL that MGCC is legally required to maintain and make publicly available...

Ya' see dear availees, the mistake I've...(we've-Ed)...we've been making is that we went to the ultimate source of such knowledge, we've gone to the actual official legally requisite MGCC Register: Community Land Leases and Licenses...(poor, stupid, naive us, fancy thinking that MGCC's legally requisite RCLLL would be the place to go to get current data on current Leases and/or Licenses-Ed)...and there-in it says 'No Lease and/or License', as explained below...  

As we understand it, Mt Gambier City Council and/or Apollo Football Club are now publicly claiming that Apollo does have a current Lease, and not just for their pitch/clubrooms precinct, but also an additional 'Lease' for the entire North-East corner of HCRP proper...(including where those trees were hacked-down and sold-off by Apollo?-Ed)...yep, that fence-line and potentially all the trees right along that Northern boundary...(but these alleged 'Leases' apparently/seemingly include section(s?) of gazetted road but not the Northern carpark area where Apollo have also hacked-down several large trees-Ed)...well as it stands, I would not/cannot believe a single word from either MGCC or Apollo on any topic, but my opinions and/or lack of faith in MGCC, etc, that's all irrelevant...(for the facts scream themselves off of this 'ere page-Ed)...indeed they do, and not just this page...(but also the page where-in resides the MGCC RCLLL-Ed)...exactly, there-in lies the truth...

By Law:...MGCC is required to maintain and publish a current register of all Community Land Leases and Licenses, and quelle surprise, that Register is years out of date, in some cases over a decade out of date, eg, according to the MGCC Register, the Lake City Rod and Custom Club don't even have a license since 2014, and under "Renewal" it says "N/A"...(is that the clown who was mouthing-off in The Border Watch early 2023 about how great MGCC was and his club is safe, etc?-Ed)...it was one of the 'Car Club' dudes yeah, but I can't recall which one, either which way, none of those clubs have even a 'License'...(and don't just take our word for it, here's the link, just go to the Community Land Leases and Licenses heading in the left text box and click on that-Ed)...here 'tis...

https://cdn.mountgambier.sa.gov.au/general-images/Registers-of-Community-Land-under-re-construction-Community-Land-Management-Plans-Community-Land-Leases-and-Licences.pdf

For your convenience dear availee, I've copied across the section that relates to the Hastings Cunningham Reserve...please note that where it has the 'Lease/License' column, and then in the next column titled "Renewals" says "Nil" or "N/A"  ("N/A" is Not Applicable I think)...for example, the tennis club had their "Lease" renewed by 10 years upto 30th June 2016, but that has lapsed and of course the tennis club was evicted by MGCC nearly 2 years ago...as is the case right across Mt Gambier, many of the Community Clubs have only licenses, which in many cases have also lapsed with 'Nil Renewal'...anyhoos, here 'tis...  

Reidy Park Tennis Club Inc Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Portion of Reidy Park Tennis Club Inc "Lease" 31/07/1996 30/06/2006 10 Years 31/07/2006 30/06/2016 AR11/2178
 Lions Club of Mount Gambier Inc. Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed 10 Lions Club of Mount   Gambier Inc. "Licence" 01/01/2015 31/12/2019 Nil AR11/2178[v2]
Lake City Rod & Custom Club Inc Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed 13 Lake City Rod & Custom Club Inc "Licence" 01/01/2010 31/12/2014 Nil AR11/2449[v2]
Mount Gambier Caledonian Society Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed 4 Mount Gambier Caledonian Society "Licence" 01/01/2015 31/12/2019 N/A AR11/2178
Mount Gambier Gem Club Inc. Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed 6 Mount Gambier Gem Club Inc "Licence" 01/01/2015 31/12/2019 N/A AR11/2178
Lions Club of Mt Gambier (Gambier City) Inc. Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed 9 Lions Club of Gambier City Inc. "Licence" 01/01/2015 31/12/2019 Nil AR11/2178[v2]
Mount Gambier and District 4 WD Club Inc Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed No. 1 Mount Gambier and District 4 WD Club Inc "Licence" 01/01/2015 31/12/2019 N/A AR11/2178
South East Street Machines Inc Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed No. 12 South East Street Machines Inc. "Licence" 01/01/2010 31/12/2014 N/A AR11/2178
Rotary Club of Mount Gambier Lakes Inc Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed No. 2 Rotary Club of Mount Gambier Lakes Inc "Licence" 01/01/2015 31/12/2019 N/A AR11/2178
Mount Gambier Woodturning Club Inc Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed No. 3 Mount Gambier Woodturning Club Inc. "Licence" 01/07/2020 30/06/2025 N/A AR11/2178
Rotary Club of Mount Gambier West Inc Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed No. 7 Rotary Club of Mount Gambier West Inc. "Licence" 01/01/2020 31/12/2022 N/A AR11/2178
Rotary Club of Mount Gambier Inc Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Shed No. 8 Rotary Club of Mount Gambier Inc "Licence" 01/01/2020 31/12/2024 N/A AR11/2178
Apollo Football Club Hastings Cunningham Reserve - Soccer Field & Clubroom Apollo Soccer Club "Lease" 01/04/2017 31/03/2022 Nil AR11/2178; AR14/21474 map
Blue Lake BMX Club Inc Hastings Cunningham Reserve, 98 Shepherdson Road, Mount Gambier Blue Lake BMX Club Inc. "Lease" 01/11/2012 31/10/2022 N/A AR11/2178

The first immediately obvious point, very few if any Community Groups have any sort of "License" let-alone a legally applicable "Lease"...(well I'd have thought the first point was the difference between 'Lease' and 'License'-Ed)...fair dues, it's fairly simple, the main issue being that with a 'Lease' the leasee has specific rights to occupation including lengthy lead-time to vacate should they be ordered to do so, etc...(but with only a 'License' a group can get evicted by MGCC literally with a day's notice?-Ed)...pretty much, as a tenant with a 'Lease' you've got 'Rights', with a 'License' you got diddly-squat...(well I'm not quite up to speed on some a' them highfalutin legal terms you're usin' there, but I think I get the gist of it-Ed)...super... 

And just on the possibility that I was looking at an outdated Register or in the wrong 'Register', whatevs, I searched from scratch again today, twice, and it bought me back to the same Register copy...(in which it says Apollo Football Club - the "Lease" expired on 31st March 2022 and under "Renewal" it says "Nil"-Ed)...exactly...(so their 'Lease' expired in March 2022 and hasn't been renewed?-Ed)...not according to the legally requisite MGCC RCLLL... 

And I'm just waiting for MGCC to trot-out some lame excuse for the often decades-long gaps between the info available on the MGCC Register and the various club's current 'Lease/License' status...I'd guess the 'excuse' will be that MGCC simply haven't bothered to keep it current...(as they are legally required to do?-Ed)...as I understand it yes, as they are legally required to do...(so why haven't they? why haven't MGCC kept their basic, legally-required, RCLLL current?-Ed)...no idea mate, like we've been through, all I do know is that MGCC/Apollo are apparently claiming there is a 'Lease' but the RCLLL begs to differ...

(But hang-on, that 'Register' says the 'Lease' expired in March 2022 and there's no 'Renewal', so where's this alleged 'current Lease' come from?-Ed)...great question again, and again I've got no idea...granted maybe I just couldn't find it, but I did find this (below) on MGCC Minutes from July 2016...(so that does mention "additional license area at Hastings Cunningham Reserve" but doesn't define what/where exactly that is-Ed)...and it says both 'License' and 'Lease' and there's no mention of either being renewed in the RCLLL...(well in fact the RCLLL identifies a 'Lease' but doesn't mention 'License'-Ed)...and if it were included under 'Lease' then why is is identified separately as "additional license area?...yet again, the lack of specific information about actual areas referred to, the failure to maintain the MGCC RCLLL, and conflicting statements/allegations circulating, etc etc etc, it's literally impossible to discern just exactly what the shreck is happening...here's the Minutes thingy...

13. CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT NO. 53/2016 -
Leasing - Apollo Soccer Club - Licence Area - Ref. AF11/1428
Goal: Governance
Strategic Objective: Demonstrate innovative and responsive organisational governance
moved:
(a) Corporate and Community Services report No 53/2016 be received;
(b) The Apollo Soccer Club’s additional licence area at Hastings Cunningham Reserve
be continued and included with future renewals of their main clubroom and pitch lease, including permission to install bollards on the condition that public access is not to be restricted to the area when not in use by the club.

In conclusion, MGCC and/or Apollo are apparently claiming/stating that Apollo have a current 'Lease' that allows them to effectively control not just the pitch and clubroom area, but that entire North-East corner of Hastings Cunningham Reserve Parkland...I've been unable to find any evidence that any such 'Lease(s)' or even 'License(s)' exists... 

Tomorrow: We're Going To Need A Bigger Fan

What with the sheer volume of shizzle gettin' flung about the place lately...and not just as regards the extraordinary shizzle-show that has just kicked-off recently re my "bizarre trial", but also by the openly desperate MGCC...another totes hilarious pro-MGCC pantomime on the ABC SE Radio again on Saturday, with the ever-entertaining MGCC CEO Sarah Philpott eloquently gas-lighting her way through 10 mins, 10 whole bloody minutes of my life I'll never...(keep it together buddy, you've got this far and so far so good-Ed)...yep, sorry, it just gets so damningly infuriating to hear the same sweetly-worded deceits over and over and over...(oh I know mate, I know, right there with ya'-Ed)...we'll complete this li'l rant next post, but suffice to say that an angry packed gallery at Tuesday's MGCC monthly meeting didn't stop the CEO from praising herself/Council for the wonderful work they've done in stampeding Rates to a staggering 14% (total) increase...(and "Ray from Naracoorte", "Ray" apparently thought it was all just terrific, and particularly the CEO-Ed)...apparently, yes caller "Ray" did, or at least Ray's" comments that were read-out for him did...

We'll continue this issue next post 'cos it is a critically important issue when the rabidly pro-MGCC ABC SE Radio is nearly as cooked as The Ambulance Chaser...(hoohoo that's a big call-Ed)...I said nearly, but they're both wantonly complicit in protecting their mates/family on/at MGCC...(and don't ya' love it that we can just say The Ambulance Chaser and everybody knows who we.re talkin' about-Ed)...totes hilarious I'm sure...(so hang on, not a single caller from Mt Gambier, let-alone one who was furious at the massive Rates increase and/or attended Tuesday's meeting etc?-Ed)...apparently not, not that I heard all morning anyways...(just "Ray from Naracoorte"-Ed)...just "Ray from Naracoorte"...(who thought it was all fantastic-Ed)...pretty much...(wow-Ed)...indeed, "wow"...

I am Nick Fletcher and this is my blog...cheers and laters

Sth Australian ICAC Comm On The Importance of Protecting Whistleblowers...I Shizzle You Not

Howdy dear availees...pardon my brief absence/break from this 'ere blog/Facebook, but about a month ago 'My Stuff' suddenly went ballistically sideways in ways I'd never anticipated and did not instigate...(yeah, it all went from 0 to 100 like real fast, and nothing to do with you specifically-Ed)...indeed, and we've all been here before, often, for example, with the St Martins Lutheran School Child Abuse Cover-up of "text-book grooming paedophile" teacher Glyn Dorling, where-in us parents forced SAPol (police) involvement, then we forced Flinders Child Protection Services involvement...(and then the Teachers Registration Board, you lot forced them to get amongst it-Ed)...indeed...(and then the Parliamentary Inquiry into the TRB, an Inquiry officially justified off the back of the appalling TRB Hearing that exonerated Dorling-Ed)...and then Child Abuse Commissioner Ted Mullighan's involvement, etc etc etc, right upto and including my bizarrely and definably corrupt prosecution/persecution by ICAC/SAPol/Courts...(including where you proved "Abuse of Process" and Magistrate Anderson "recused" herself, and also proved you'd been retrospectively prosecuted under the wrong and/or no actual definition of "to publish"-Ed)...yeah it's been a zany ol' ride hasn't it...(if by "zany" you mean 'Profoundly Pro-Paedophile Corrupt', then sure, "zany"-Ed)...mmm...

Anyhoos, it's all gone kaboom! again, and whilst the sensation of impending action and even possibly resolution is not new, been here many, many times before, there's a very different sense/tone to this...(well as you said, this time it's not 'Authorities' reluctantly reacting to pressure/lobbying from you and/or other parents, this time it's someone else whom has metaphorically picked-up the ball and run with it-Ed)...and I've got to say, I'm still not entirely sure why they would choose to do that, but they have, and here we are, quietly, politely waiting...and some of the related commentary reminded me very much of some of the totes amazeballs gaslighting bile that the original/former ICAC Commissioner Bruce 'Brews Slander' Lander used to spew-forth, and then up-pops this gem (below) from the current ICAC Comm Ann Vanstone which I've had sittin' part-finished in 'Drafts' ...

Please be availing y'allselves of this trite piece of Institutionalised Gaslighting, where-in what was done to me by ICAC/SAPol single-handedly defines that Gaslighting...(and I'd argue that it further illustrates that either Comm Vanstone has absolutely no idea what was done to you, knows nothing about your case, etc, or, as you say, is deliberately deceiving/gaslighting-Ed)...indeed, 'cos my "bizarre trial" proves exactly what Sow Strayan 'Authorities' do to anyone who speaks-out against Corruption...(and especially against anyone who speaks-out about the Institutionalised Pro-Paedophile corruption of the SA Parliament/SAPol/ICAC/Courts-Ed)...indeed, SA 'Authorities' have been queuing-up to thank me and/or other parents for our commitment to protecting children and our Activism re resolution of the St Martins Lutheran School Child Abuse Cover-up...and when I say "thank" I of course mean Attack, Harass, Threaten, Blame, Bully, Intimidate, Manipulate, Deceive, Betray, Traumatise, etc etc etc...

Anyways, read this through, and I find it helps if you choose to laugh at the vacuous deceits and relentless Reality Re-Defining Gaslighting rather than be angered by it...good luck...***   

Protecting whistleblowers

---

On 21 November 2023 the Commissioner, the Hon. Ann Vanstone KC spoke at the National Public Sector Governance Forum about the importance of protecting whistleblowers. This is what she said:

In a 2022 report by Professor A J Brown and Kieran Pender entitled, Protecting Australia’s Whistleblowers: The Federal Roadmap, the importance of whistleblowers was encapsulated succinctly in this way:

Whistleblowers are a vital part of Australian democracy, playing a crucial role in the integrity and accountability of public and private institutions each and every day.

Australian research confirms it is people within organisations – the officials and employees – who really know what goes on and remain the single most important way in which wrongdoing is brought to light.

After three years as Commissioner of the Independent Commission Against Corruption in this State, I’ve reached the same conclusion as to the central importance of whistleblowers in shedding light on corruption.

Even instances of corrupt conduct that we might expect to be captured by integrity processes – for example, audits designed to detect accounting anomalies – rely for their effectiveness upon people not only conducting those processes, but also reporting on the results. An audit which reveals accounting anomalies is of no value unless something is done with that information. For that audit to be effective, the right authorities must be notified of the results and informed about what those results might mean.

As the principal mechanism for the detection and exposure of past and present corrupt conduct, whistleblowers are of critical importance to the minimization and prevention of future corrupt conduct. In an environment that supports and encourages whistleblowers, many would-be corrupt actors will be deterred from ever acting corruptly (or will curtail their corrupt behaviour) because they fear – and they know – that detection is more likely, with all the consequences that follow.

Why is it that whistleblowers assume such importance? Without pretending to offer a complete or conclusive answer to this question, I suggest it may in part be because of the nature of corrupt conduct itself; that is, conduct that is hidden and secretive, and which often occurs within the corrupt actor’s sphere of control. By this, I mean that the corrupt actor exploits a system which they know intimately and to which there is limited access. Whistleblowers are often people who share knowledge of and access to this system, and so are able to recognize suspicious conduct when it occurs. And they can explain to those outside the organisation why it is suspicious.

While recognizing the centrality of whistleblowers in exposing corruption, it is also important to recognize their limitations. Even those who know and speak up about one aspect of improper conduct, may be unaware of the totality of a corrupt scheme or activity. Although whistleblowers might provide the basis upon which an investigation is commenced, it must be remembered that, how that investigation looks at the end, and the conduct that is ultimately exposed, might be quite different from the initial report. By the same token an investigation might, in the end, result in the exoneration of its subject. In neither instance should this be seen as reflecting poorly on the whistleblower. It should simply be seen as a product of the investigation process.

I referred earlier to the importance of an environment that supports and encourages whistleblowers. But what does such an environment look like? This is a complex question, and one which I don’t propose to fully address today, but I think that first and foremost it must mean that whistleblowers feel safe to come forward without fear of reprisals to themselves or their families, either inside or outside the workplace.

In my view, this is not something that can be achieved merely by legislative protections, such as those in the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 2012 or the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2016. Those Acts protect the identity of whistleblowers and prohibit victimisation on the basis of reporting particular information. But they cannot protect whistleblowers from more general harm that may come from reporting corrupt conduct. The treatment of whistleblowers in the community and the attitude to them more broadly must also be fair and alive to the personal costs that may be associated with reporting.

In this regard, I note that recently, in this state, there has been a tendency in public figures and the media to go after whistleblowers – to suggest that they are merely acting as ‘disgruntled employees’ or ‘vexatious underlings’, or to question the veracity of their accounts. As I said in my Response to Inspector’s Review of the Investigation of John Hanlon, ‘Demonising whistleblowers is both unfair and unhelpful, and it undoubtedly has a chilling effect on those who want to speak up.’

Ultimately, of course, it is not only the individual whistleblower who suffers when statements such as these are made publicly. It is the public.  By discouraging whistleblowers, you create greater room for corrupt conduct to flourish. That can only have the effect of eroding our public institutions and damaging the public interest.

***(What, in the actual shreck, is that?-Ed)...well, in my personal experience, as a Whistleblower, eg, the St Martins Lutheran School Child Abuse Cover-up, the Institutionalised Corruption of the Mt Gambier City Council, etc etc, having been investigated by ICAC Commissioner Lander and then referred directly, personally by ICAC Comm Lander to SAPol (police) Anti-Corruption Branch, and then prosecuted for nearly 4 years under the SA ICAC Act 2012 Sec56, not least of all including specific changes made in November 2014 to the ICAC Act Sec56, and in April 2018 finally 'Convicted' and fined $540,000, etc etc etc, as a Whistleblower ruthlessly persecuted by the ICAC in absolute collusion with SAPol and the SA Courts, after that personal experience, I would call Comm Vanstone's commentary Performative Gaslighting...

Try being a Whistleblower and see how it works out for ya'...and yes, I'm very, very aware of the very specific language used to try and keep me and Jo Average outside a' that definition of what constitutes a 'Whistleblower', but whether anybody likes it or not, myself included by the way, that's what I have become and that's what I do and have been doing for over 2 decades now...it's literally got to the point where I don't know how to not do it...

"By discouraging whistleblowers, you create greater room for corrupt conduct to flourish."...wow, just wow...ICAC and SAPol and the Courts, the 'Authorities' have demonstrated to the Lutherans and to Mt Gambier City Council that they, Lutherans and MGCC, are protected species, being effectively protected by ICAC/SAPol/Courts...note for example, the disastrous $90million+ Farcical Aquatic Recreation Centre (FARC - Wulanda) with all it's associated MGCC deceits and corruption and incompetence is a direct result of this ICAC Protection Racket...I reported multiple definable instances of MGCC Corruption, ICAC pretended to 'investigate', protected/exonerated MGCC, then prosecuted 'The Whistleblower', and then knowing that they're fully protected by ICAC/SAPol/Courts, MGCC embarked on the FARC... 

Tomorrow: More Sideways Ballistic Results

Apparently, quelle surprise', I'm yet again the subject of conversation in the perfumed parlours of the land as my branded hide takes another floggin' in the stocks of Public Opinion...(duuude! is that Slam Poetry?-Ed)...well no, it's an attempt at poetry that's about gettin' slammed...(nice-Ed)...regular availees will appreciate that when I say "it's been a very, very long month" then that's exactly what it has been...and when I say some of my stuff has gone absolutely sideways ballistic, completely outta' the blue, wasn't me, I mean, of course it's all about 'me', obviously, but I didn't instigate this what's happening now...I'm absolutely serious though about how my name has been 'officially' bandied about, on the public record and that I choose to 'keep my powder dry' despite the repeated denigration...

When I relate this ICAC shizzle to Jo Average the Peep on the Street, they inevitably ask of me...("sorry, who are you?"-Ed)...nice one, but no, more often they say..."hey pal, don't we have like, Freedom of Speech and that, in this, the Lucky Country?"...and I says to 'em I says, "give it a try Jo, buddy, pal, mate, give it a go and see just exactly how that works out for ya'"...and then we all laugh 'cos we all know that any Labor/LNP politician and/or person in 'Authority' who talks it up big about 'Protecting Whistleblowers' is truly a complicit gaslighting clown... 

So one way or the other, this next week is gunna' be huge, and there's nuthin' anyone, myself included, can do to stop that...if y'all happened to hear the 0700hrs ABC South East Radio news bulletin a cpipla' weeks back, you'll have heard my name multiple times and know that one of the highest 'legal officers' in the state has publicly committed to a definably erroneous position that rips-open the gossamer veil of Accountability and Law and Truth they all espouse so vehemently, rips that away to expose the actual reality that is the Pro-Paedophile Institutionalised Corruption that defines South Australia, especially the Parliament...(yay-Ed)...

I am Nick Fletcher and this is my blog...cheers and laters...

Dog & Cat Management Board - More Correspondence re Mt Gambier City Council Impound

Howdy dear availees and welcome to the 4th(?) post on this specific issue, and this post follows-on  from the correspondence included in that immediate previous post...to quickly re-iterate, I became aware of issues re the Mt Gambier City Council's appalling Impound Facility and wrote to the Dog and Cat Management Board on Sunday 28th January 2024...(copy there-of in previous post-Ed)...indeed, and then completely unrelated, that Monday arvo (29th Jan) there was the near-infamous 'SAPol Respond To Animal In Distress Report' incident at the MGCC Impound...(and of course SAPol attended 'cos there is no RSPCA in Mt Gambier-Ed)...that's my understanding, certainly, and given that I still hadn't heard anything I emailed the DCMB again that Monday arvo and attached the video footage of the 'Animal in Distress' as posted to Facebook by a concerned citizen...(here's the copy of your email you asked for-Ed)...cheers, just drop it there...(here?-Ed)...right there...***

dcmb@sa.gov.au

Mon, Jan 29, 2024 4:43 PM

Dear Madam/Sir,

As per my unanswered email and attached correspondence yesterday regarding Mt Gambier City Council's appalling treatment of animale especially dogs, here is some footage just taken at the MGCC Works Depot.

I asked you to act immediately this morning and clearly you have not.

MGCC have refused to respond.

SAPol are in attendance for the welfare of the animal.

You are the responsible authority, please act immediately to protect these animals.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1035014950816552/user/1059870374/

Yours Nick Fletcher 

***And roger me with a prize-winning leek (ack BlackAdder) if the DCMB didn't get like right on it, take like totes control, and rectify the situation...(I thought you said that the DCMB are a pack a' mouth-breathing half-wits far more interested in their own precious positions of privilege and alleged influence than the welfare of animals?-Ed)...I gotta' stop tellin' you stuff, clearly...(I don't understand why you do either-Ed)...point being, the DCMB did 'respond', albeit a dismissive, deceitful response sent at 1723hrs...and here 'tis...***

W: Mt Gambier City Council Dog Mistreatment

 DEW:Dog and Cat Mngt Board

Mon, Jan 29, 2024 5:23 PM

OFFICIAL

 Dear Mr Fletcher,

Thank you for your correspondence dated Sunday 28 January and Monday 29 January.

I understand you were seeking immediate action from the Dog and Cat Management Board. Please note, the Dog and Cat Management Board do not have any powers to remove Council’s authority under the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995. However, we will review the information and footage you have provided in relation to the detention facility approval and compliance with the Dog and Cat Management Act in detaining and disposing (rehoming) animals.

For immediate action, I encourage you to engage RSPCA to report urgent animal welfare concerns, as they are equipped and have the powers to respond to such concerns.

Contact - RSPCA South Australia (rspcasa.org.au)

Animal cruelty complaints

24-hour hotline: 1300 477 722
Alternatively, fill out our online cruelty report form.

Animals in emergencies

24-hour hotline: 1300 477 722
Learn more about our animal rescue team here.

Sincerely,

Ann Gee
Manager
 
Dog and Cat Management
81-95 Waymouth Street, Adelaide SA 5000
GPO Box 1047, Adelaide SA 5001
dogandcatboard.com.au

***And I was somewhat less than impressed with that 'response' so I wrote to them again the next day, Tuesday 30th January 2024...again it's pretty much self-explanatory, so, have at it...***

Ms Gee,

I refer to my correspondence to the DCMB (letter 28^th January 2024 + supporting documents/letters) and Monday 29^th January regarding Mt Gambier City Council's appalling treatment of animals, particularly dogs in their 'care' due to being impounded.

I also refer to my repeated but unsuccessful attempts to contact you, the DCMB, via your phone message service.

Your, the DCMB's, eventual response, received via email at 1723hrs Monday 29^th January is entirely unacceptable and inappropriate.

I identified to the DCMB that MGCC were/are keeping dogs in a tin shed and as of last week also a cyclone-wire cage, both located in the asphalt carpark of their Works Depot.

You, the DCMB, already knew/know this though because it was you, the DCMB, who approved this appalling and entirely inhumane 'facility'.

As I understand it, this 'Approval' was granted 'Site Unseen', that is, the DCMB has given MGCC license to operate this 'facility' without actually seeing what it is, where it is, etc.

Is this true, and if so why, and how is this appropriate let-alone lawful?

As you, the DCMB are already aware, because you, the DCMB did it, this 'license' to hold dogs for 72 hours was retrospectively granted to MGCC after they (MGCC) were caught-out deliberately breaching their 12hr-Hold License.

How and why was this 'retrospective approval' given, and why was no action taken against MGCC for this willing breach?

This 'retrospective approval' completely contradicts your (DCMB's) denial of responsibility for the current situation in your response to me;

“...the Dog and Cat Management Board do not have any powers to remove Council’s authority under the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995 .”

Given what has already transpired, your, the DCMB's, denial and explanation present as a deliberate deceit.

Worse, you, the DCMB, then contradict that statement by saying that you, the DCMB,

“...will review the information and footage you have provided in relation to the detention facility approval and compliance with the Dog and Cat Management Act in detaining and disposing (rehoming) animals.”

In one sentence you, the DCMB deny any and all responsibility, but next sentence then identify/define the exact responsibility/authority that the DCMB does have and that I have requested be exercised, that is, remove MGCC's 'license' to hold dogs.

I respectfully request actual answers to these questions because it must be established why this 'Approval' was given; the manner in which it was given; and to ensure that this disastrous result is never, ever repeated.

Your, the DCMB's, refusal to take responsibility for the horrendous circumstances/'facility' that you, the DCMB, have officially approved is unacceptable.

What I cannot figure-out is whether your, the DCMB's, apparent ignorance as regards the absence of the RSPCA in Mt Gambier, is a genuine ignorance or a more cynical denial of your, the DCMB's responsibilities and/or actions.

As you are aware, yesterday Monday 29^th January 2024, SAPol were called to that 'facility' by a concerned member of the public, to rescue a dog in great distress.

As you, the DCMB, are aware, SAPol did attend, and they did so because there is no RSPCA in Mt Gambier.

You, the DCMB, gave MGCC official 'license' to operate this facility, you and you alone are ultimately responsible for what happens there, especially as it relates to the gross inappropriateness/dangerousness of this appalling 'facility'.

That poor dog was locked in that tin garden shed, and the moment MGCC became aware that SAPol had been called, MGCC staffer Derek Ferguson went to the 'facility' and opened the door of the locked shed.

Senior MGCC manager/staffer Jane Featherstonehaugh allegedly attended shortly after to 'inspect' and 'review the situation'.

These extraordinarily cynical actions by MGCC were intended by MGCC to deceive SAPol, the DCMB, and everyone else as to the genuine state of the 'facility'.

These appalling actions yesterday clearly define MGCC's contempt for all involved, including the DCMB and SAPol, and show exactly how cynically and deceitfully they are prepared to conduct themselves, rather than take responsibility for their disgusting decisions/behaviour.

This entire fiasco is purely economics-driven because of MGCC's gross financial mismanagement, and MGCC has acted with definable contempt for Ratepayers, our pets, and for the DCMB, SAPol, etc, but it is the DCMB who have empowered MGCC to act like this.

This 'facility' issue is literally tip-of-the-iceburg as it applies to MGCC's appalling conduct, eg, dogs are disappearing from the MGCC 'facility' and then re-appearing at interstate pounds/shelters.

I repeat my request that the DCMB act immediately, today, and remove MGCC's 'license' to hold animals.

***(Sweet baby cheeses, no wonder these people hate you, you actually 'literally' beat them back into a corner and then metaphorically slap them all-up side the head-Ed)...one does what one can...(in a sortta' "stop hittin' ya'selves" kinda' context-Ed)...if you mean that I cause discomfort for some by pushing their own behaviours back-up into their own faces, then sure, and I'd be more than happy to see any and/or all of these clowns/stooges completely 'dis-arm' me by not being so gourd-awfully incompetent and/or corrupt!...(you say words, but all I hear is 'Slap Slap Slap'-Ed)...well then, hear this, Slap!!!...(ouchhhh!!! aha-Ed)...and for the benefit of dear availees playing-along at home, I just mimed slapping Ed as he clapped his hands together and feigned a re-coil, etc, etc...(purely for comedic effect-Ed)...and just to lighten the mood further, we now return you to our usual programming...(ooo more slapping, I love it-Ed)...well by the Friday I hadn't heard any response from the DCMB re my letter above of the previous Tuesday, etc, and so I wrote again...***

Ms Gee,

As per my previous letters to you, the DCMB, regarding the approval granted by the DCMB to Mt Gambier City Council for their inhumane Dog Pound Facility.

As you, the DCMB, are aware, because I've written to you repeatedly and explained it to you, this 'Pound' is actually a Tin Garden Shed/Cyclone-wire Cage, both on asphalt, jammed into a corner of MGCC's Works Depot carpark.

As you, the DCMB, are also aware, that Cyclone-wire Cage was only added last week as a supposedly appropriate way to address the 36C+ temperatures and resultant extreme stress/injury to the dogs being held there.

You, the DCMB, could apparently be initially, partially forgiven for officially approving this 'facility' because you granted MGCC approval 'Site Unseen', that is, without conducting any sort of site inspection.

It is immediately obvious from the granting of MGCC's approval that this lack of inspection and/or any apparent appropriate oversight by the DCMB is total, that is, the granting of this approval defines that you, the DCMB, have conducted absolutely no 'Oversight Process' at all.

You, the DCMB, have clearly not seen even a basic plan/summary/outline from MGCC as to what it was they intended, and that you, the DCMB, approved.

It is obvious because no-one with a shred of human decency is going to approve that facility if they have the slightest idea what is being proposed.

However, in today's The Border Watch newspaper MGCC is quoted saying that they received DCMB approval after providing “self-assessment, site plans, and photos”.

So you, the DCMB, you are the Dog and Cat Management Board and, apparently equipped with all the information/details you, the DCMB, requires to grant MGCC a 'Pound Approval', have 'licensed' that appalling facility.

And to that specific point, I only found out yesterday that I've grossly underestimated just how vilely callous and inhumane MGCC are, because I didn't realise that the Tin Garden Shed is the entire 'Impound Facility'.

I had thought that a very small section of MGCC's Work Depot carpark had been fenced-off to create a yard, and that the Tin Shed was just the kennels part of the larger 'Pound' for securing dogs at night, etc.

But as you, the DCMB, know, or apparently didn't know at all, the Tin Shed is it, that appalling little Tin Shed sitting in the middle of an asphalt carpark, that is MGCC's Dog Impound.

I respectfully request that you, the DCMB, provide me with any and all detail in your possesion as to what plans/information was provided by MGCC that satisfied you, the DCMB, to approve this appalling 'Impound Facility'.

It is my understanding that several senior MGCC staff attended at their 'Pound' on the Monday afternoon/evening, following SAPol attending the site, and that MGCC have since declared the facility to be 'just fine'.

As you, the DCMB, are also already aware, 1) there is no RSPCA in Mt Gambier and that as a result 2) SAPol attended at the MGCC 'Impound' in response to an 'Animal In Distress' call from the public.

SAPol attended to rescue a dog in distress (the video footage of which I have already provided) from the MGCC 'Impound' that you, the DCMB, approved.

The DCMB should also be aware that at this time some in Mt Gambier are contemplating legal action for the appalling, inhumane conduct on this matter, and that you, the DCMB, are firmly in that frame as being the 'Authority' that not only approved this in the first instance, but now refuses to take responsibility and act to rectify the situation.

Should others proceed with any litigation, I will immediately provide them copies of my correspondence to you, the DCMB, to prove that you, the DCMB, know/knew exactly what is/was happening and that you, the DCMB condone and support it, and outright refused to act.

You, the DCMB, have not just allowed this to happen, by refusing to act to rectify it and therefore effectively protecting MGCC, you define yourself, the DCMB, as being wantonly complicit in the gross abuse of animals.

You, the DCMB, know the extraordinary trauma and stress this appalling conduct by MGCC is having in the community, and you, the DCMB, know what it is you can do to address that.

Again, there is very hot weather forecast across the weekend, 30C+, and MGCC have just declared that appalling facility to be 'just fine'.

So again I implore you, the DCMB, to act immediately and remove any approval/license from Mt Gambier City Council to operate any sort of 'Animal Impound Facility', and have any and all animals 'Impounded' by MGCC instead taken to the fit-for-purpose South East Animal Welfare League shelter on Penola Rd.

As you, the DCMB, are aware, I have provided the SEAWL a $1,000 surety to cover any immediate costs associated with my request to have any/all animals removed/impounded by MGCC immediately taken to the SEAWL facility.

Mount Gambier City Councillors and senior staff have proven themselves as individuals, let-alone as a Council entity, to be wholly unfit persons to have any animals in their supposed 'care'.

As I conclude this latest correspondence to you, 1315hrs Friday 2^nd February 2024, I have still received no response from you, the DCMB, to my letter of *Monday 29^th January 2024*, not even a polite 'Email Received'.

All I have is your, the DCMB's, response directing me to call the RSPCA, denying any and all responsibility, but then saying that you, the DCMB, will look into that “approval” if I send more information and/or footage.

This is not just completely self-contradictory, but the statement about 'more footage' is outright offensive, and reeks of bureaucratic indifference and mockery.

Just exactly how many dogs do you, the Dog and Cat Management Board, need to see/hear in high distress in a facility you, the DCMB, have approved, before you, the DCMB, act to rectify the inhumane disaster you, the DCMB, have not only created, but now allow to continue?

Even if you, the DCMB, claim complete ignorance as to what MGCC are doing, I have clearly identified the appalling conditions/situation, for which you, the DCMB, are the 'Oversight Authority', and therefore responsible for both the approval and continued functioning there-of, and I have provided you, the DCMB, with an immediate, viable, and 'paid-for' solution.

Again, please, I formally request that the DCMB act immediately to protect these highly vulnerable dogs because Mt Gambier City Council have indicated that they do not care and intend to continue forward exactly as they have behaved thus-far.

(*Apologies dear availees, doing this post I just realised that should be Tuesday 30th January, not Monday 29th as written which was the email as above.)

 ***So as self-described, that letter was emailed to the DCMB that Friday arvo, and they got right on it again/eventually, but unfortunately couldn't quite get their lengthy response/denial finished and then emailed until 1704hrs, four minutes past the close of business...***

Dear Nick Fletcher, 

I acknowledge the letters you have sent to the Board dated Tuesday 30th January and Friday 2nd February since my previous reply Monday 29th January. 

In response to your questions regarding approval process: 

The Board have an established policy for the Approval of Detention Facilities for Dogs and Cats. The Board ask councils to advise them of new detention facility plans as early as possible, to ensure compliance with the Board’s Detention Facility Guideline. New detention facilities must be inspected and approved prior to use. As you have identified, approval was not attained by the City of Mount Gambier prior to use, and this was rectified.

 Facilities are assessed against the minimum requirements set out in the Detention Facility Compliance Checklist. Inspections may be conducted by DCM Unit Staff, a representative directed by the Board or a council representative. If a self-audit by council has been undertaken, DCM Unit staff will review this for compliance. Assessment can include the provision of supporting evidence of mud maps, photographs and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). 

The Board approved the City of Mount Gambier 72-hr detention facility July 2023. 

Section 32A allows the Board to report Council failure to discharge responsibilities under the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995 to the Minister to whom the administration of the Local Government Act 1999 has been committed (with a view to that Minister taking action in relation to the council under that Act). As the Council worked quickly with the Board to resolve this matter, and the facilities met the requirements and were approved, escalation of this matter was not warranted. 

Compliance assessments regarding third parties are not publicly available, therefore the Board is unable to fulfil your request to provide any and all detail in possession as to what plans/information was provided by the City of Mount Gambier to approve the facility. Should you wish to pursue access to this information, please consider submitting a Freedom of Information Request through the Department for Environment and Water. 

The Board cannot direct a Council to engage in a service or supply arrangement, therefore the Board is unable to fulfil your request that animals seized by the City of Mount Gambier are taken to the SE Animal Welfare League. 

Questions from previous correspondence you have requested are clarified: 

You asked that “DCMB act immediately to remove from MGCC any and all approvals/ licenses to 'manage' dogs”. I advised that the Dog and Cat Management Board do not have any powers to remove Council’s authority under the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995. I apologise if there was a misinterpretation, and what you were asking was limited to the approved impounding facilities. The Board do not have powers to remove council’s ability to appoint authorised officers to undertake their roles and responsibilities prescribed in legislation. 

You asked “DCMB act immediately, as in, first thing Monday morning 29 January 2024 to allow as much time as possible for other arrangements to be made for the dogs”. I advised that we would review the information and footage you provided in relation to the detention facility approval and compliance with the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995 in detaining and disposing (rehoming) animals. I can confirm that on Monday we followed up your report, and throughout the week spoke with the Council, the attending SAPOL officer as well as deploying a staff member to the site to conduct an audit. 

The City of Mount Gambier have been advised of the outcome of this assessment, and the facility remains approved for 72-hour detention. The Board is satisfied that the council has procedures in place to monitor and cater for the health and wellbeing of dogs kept at the facility. I understand that this outcome is not the one you were seeking. 

Under section 270 of the Local Government Act 1999, all councils must have a policy and procedures for reviewing their decisions and actions for decisions. If you feel aggrieved by an action or decision of Council, you may put your concerns or complaint in writing following the council complaint/review process. Complaints of misconduct or maladministration of councils of the public service can be reported to the SA Ombudsman for investigation. 

Yours faithfully 

Ann Gee 

Manager

***And we're gunna' conclude today with an on-line article (link attached) and ask that availees pay special attention to the "Senior Project Officer" MGCC refers to (below) and claims to have asked to inspect, etc, and how that compares to what the DCMB wrote to me (above)...***

 https://www.miragenews.com/impound-facility-approval-reconfirmed-1166595/

Council's impound facility located at the City of Mount Gambier depot has been audited by the South Australian Dog and Cat Management Board, and the existing approval has been reconfirmed.

The additional audit was arranged by Council following community concerns shared on social media regarding the welfare of impounded dogs in our care during warmer weather.

"We want to allay any concerns regarding wandering dogs in our care, so we invited a senior officer of the Board to come down from Adelaide to inspect Council's facility and discuss our process and procedures when handling dogs," General Manager Corporate and Regulatory Services Jane Fetherstonhaugh said.

"Our facility was already approved to hold dogs for 72 hours in accordance with the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995 in July last year, but given recent community concerns we wanted to ensure that we continue to follow the Dog and Cat Management Board's guidelines."

A Dog and Cat Management Board Senior Project Officer inspected Council's temporary impound facility this week and the Board has formally advised Council that it is satisfied with the facility.

"During the visit, we also discussed preliminary plans for future impounding facilities, as we'll also need to consider and plan for the potential requirement to impound cats in the future which is under consideration as part of the current review of the Dog and Cat Management Act," Mrs Fetherstonhaugh said.

Wandering dogs are housed in Council's temporary pound during the 72 hour hold period.

"We keep the dogs as safe and comfortable as possible until we can reunite them with their owner, or transfer them to one of our partner organisations for rehoming."

"During warmer days we visit the temporary kennel frequently to ensure dogs have access to food and water. We also monitor the temperature inside the kennel and if required, hose down the floor, and the dog and enable outside access within an enclosure."

"We have installed shadecloth on the outside enclosure and we have a small plastic children's swimming pool for use on hot days. We continue to investigate making other improvements such as roof ventilation in the kennels and an additional shade sail over the holding pen."

Council's impound facility was constructed in accordance the Dog and Cat Management Board Detention Facility Guidelines which outline that dog pens must be fully enclosed and constructed from impervious, washable and durable materials.

"In comparison to the comforts of home, the facility may appear basic. However, these specific requirements are outlined by the Board to meet health and safety standards for the dogs and our staff," Mrs Fetherstonhaugh said.

"We need to ensure that the floors are constructed of impervious materials that are free of cracks or small gaps that potentially harbour infectious bacteria.""When we receive a dog, we don't know its medical or behavioural history. It may not be vaccinated or may be carrying an infection or disease. The dog needs to be quarantined and there needs to be effective housing and hygiene protocols in place to prevent the potential spread of disease to other dogs held at the facility."

 

Please remember that the best way to keep your dog out of the pound is to ensure that you microchip and register your animal to enable it to be returned to you quickly by Council's general inspectorate team. - General Manager Corporate and Regulatory Services Jane Fetherstonhaugh

 

Since July 2023, 188 dogs have been collected by Council inspectors, 176 dogs have been returned to their owners and 12 dogs have been impounded. Six dogs have been transferred to partner organisations for rehoming and six were fostered.

***And we're just gunna' pull stumps here 'cos there's a lot to get through and next post we'll be referring back to all of this correspondence in these last 2 posts, etc, so it'll hopefully be easier/possible for dear availees to have these several posts on different 'tabs' of this 'ere blog, and be able to just go 'tab-to-tab-to-tab' where/when necessary rather than trying to go in and out of individual posts...(well that's as clear as mud-Ed)...it's the best I can manage right now...(fair enough-Ed)...

Tomorrow: More Dog Blog Fodder 

I'm Nick Fletcher and this is my blog...cheers and laters...

My Letters To Mt Gambier City Council & The Dog/Cat Management Board

Howdy dear availees...there's been so much shizzle furiously flyin' into various fans that it's all we can do to keep on ploddin' along...(but that is what we're doin' isn't it-Ed)..well obviously...(I mean, who were we really kidding when we said we were gunna' step-away from all this-Ed)...indeed, indeed...and in a reverse cross-promotion I'd like to alert any availees who aren't already aware that there's a TMGI Facebook page and I've been fairly busy on there, so please to be checkin' that out if ya' haven't already, cheers...and on with the show...

A slight step sideways and vaguely backwards from the 2 most recent posts, but it's all good solid background/foundation and as such entirely relevant...please find attached today copies of various correspondence that is largely self-explanatory, so away we go...this first letter was emailed to the Dog& Cat Management Board on Sunday 28th January 2024 so as to be furtively lurking in the digital darkness awaiting their arrival first thing Monday...***   

Dog and Cat Management Board

GPO Box 1047

Adelaide SA 5001

Email: dcmb@sa.gov.au

Dear Madam/Sir,

Mount Gambier City Council have just submitted a 'Dog and Cat Management Plan' with the DCMB.

I request that the DCMB reject this 'Plan' and any other similar or related 'Plan' produced/supplied by MGCC.

I also request that the DCMB act immediately to remove from MGCC any and all approvals/licenses to 'manage' dogs.

Last week, on a 36C day, Mt Gambier City Council was holding dogs in a tin 'garden shed' and then a cyclone-wire cage, in an asphalt 'carpark' in their Works Depot.

As you are already aware, mid-2023 MGCC were caught-out unlawfully/illegally(?) holding dogs there for 3-days, not the 12-hours they were licensed to, then the DCMB gave them retrospective approval.

As you are also already aware, last year a MGCC officer beat a cat to death with a hammer in a public street and then put it in a private bin.

As you are also already aware, the RSPCA officially censured MGCC regarding this incident, but as I understand it, that person remains employed by MGCC, still in that same position.

In their January 2024 meeting, MGCC specifically discussed 'Public Complaints' relating to the Hastings Cunningham Reserve Dog Parks, but failed to even mention/acknowledge my dog's injury at HCRDP and my related correspondence.

I have attached that correspondence as proof of MGCC's contempt for all involved, it clearly shows that MGCC knew a hazard they had created at one of their 'facilities' had badly injured a dog, and that other dogs were also getting lesser injuries, but MGCC chose to ignore that problem until park patrons, myself included, were forced to act to rectify it.

MGCC took 6 months to respond, and then their bizarre reply deceitfully feigns ignorance of a hazard they have had explained to them repeatedly and thoroughly and in writing, and instead has me 'falling down' and then apparently taking myself to the vet.

MGCC has repeatedly demonstrated that they are entirely callous and inhumane when it comes to the treatment and/or management of 'Dogs and Cats', and shown wilful contempt for any related legislation and the DCMB and Ratepayers.

I respectfully request that the DCMB act immediately, as in, first thing Monday morning 29 January 2024 to allow as much time as possible for other arrangements to be made for the dogs.

This is a particularly time-sensitive issue because we are forecast another burst of 30C+ weather later this week; those poor dogs cannot be allowed to suffer.

I do not claim to speak for anyone else, but the July 2023 50-person, 20-dog demonstration outside MGCC's meeting illustrates the level of concern/interest in the community.

Much of this concern now centres around the deeply opaque network of third parties who MGCC is sending dogs to after the 3-days expires.

To help facilitate/expedite the removal of MGCC's licenses/approvals to hold dogs, and for the welfare of the dogs, I will attend the South East Animal Welfare League first thing Monday 29^th January and provide them a $1,000 surety to have any dogs immediately moved to their appropriate facility.

***And first thing Monday I went to SEAWL and made that offer, and as such they are aware that should it be an issue, that offer/surety exists/remains...I then rang the DCMB several times on Monday 29th January, only to eventually discover that the official number for the DCMB is actually a Message Service and they had no contact details for the actual DCMB...(so you wrote to them again, didn't you-Ed)...ahhh, you know me too well, and we will get to that in the next post 'cos it directly links to the SAPol/Animal In Distress Incident at MGCC's appalling Impound Facility that very Monday...but first, 'cos they are a critical part of this, here's those letters referred to above...(the ones to MGCC about your doggo, Seepin' Sack A' Satanic Gasses, hurtin' his paw?-Ed)...that be they, please, read away...***

Mt Gambier City Council

Watson Ave

Mt Gambier SA 5290

Email: city@mountgambier.sa.gov.au

Dear Madam/Sir,

On Friday 6^th January 2023 I was at the Hastings/Cunningham Reserve Dog Park, in the large dog section, and I refer to Councils' notice at the entrance directing patrons to advise Council of any 'incidents'.

My dog was running along the fenceline adjoining the small dog enclosure, toward the Eastern end, when he pulled-up suddenly and started limping. This is not the first time this has happened with my dog, and I am aware of other dogs suffering similar injuries from doing the same thing.

Dogs are hurting their paws on the gravel sticking out of the cement-like sand/gravel mix placed there by Council approx 2 years ago, as I understand it, because one person complained about their dog getting muddy.

I and other owners have repeatedly notified Council about these injuries, including when several of us spoke directly to your 'Works Manager' on site shortly after the lights were installed early in 2022, requesting that heavy builders sand be placed over the gravel/cement.

This time however my dog suffered a very serious injury, ripping the outer layer off his front right paw pad, the main pad in the centre of the foot/paw left hanging by a few centimetres of skin.

He required immediate veterinary attention, including a minor surgery to remove the torn section of pad, antibiotics, etc, treatment totalling $230.00. He has fortunately made an excellent recovery, thanks largely to the prompt veterinary care he received.

I request Council immediately address this ongoing hazard and cover that gravel/cement with several inches of heavy sand, and further request that Council reimburse me for the vets costs incurred from this preventable injury, ie, $230.00.

***That letter to MGCC was emailed 'To Council' 18th January 2023, but also directly to individual Councillors...as identified in my second letter (below, sent 29th June 2023) I received an automated response, but then next day also a specific reply acknowledging my email and saying that it had been forwarded to the relevant but un-named 'Manager'...(and no response at all from any Councillors?-Ed)...not even a polite acknowledgement...anyways, we'll let the letter tell it better...***

CEO Sarah Philpott

Mt Gambier City Council

Civic Centre

Mt Gambier

Email: city@mountgambier.sa.gov.au

Dear CEO Philpott and MGCC Councillors,

I wrote to Council via email on 18th January 2023 regarding an injury suffered by my dog in the large dog area at the Hastings Cunningham Reserve dog park.

I was therefore very surprised to see CEO Philpott quoted in The Border Watch on Friday 31^st March 2023, stating that she “...“remained unaware” of specific maintenance issues concerning dog safety.”

In my letter I clearly stated how my dog had been injured, namely, tearing off his front paw-pad on the gravel placed along the fenceline by Council in 2020.

I also identified that Council was aware of the problem because several park users spoke to Council's 'Works Manager' (about the several instances of dogs hurting their paws due to the compacted gravel surface, when he attended HCR to inspect the (then) newly installed lights).

Then I specifically identified the solution by repeating in writing the same request that was made of Councils' 'Works Manager', namely, that sand be placed along the fenceline on top of the gravel.

I was therefore shocked to see CEO Philpott claiming in TBW that “...Council...”ensure proper upkeep” and always “strived to fulfil” it's legal obligations concerning the park's safety.” This has not happened with dog park.

My letter also included my request to be re-imbursed the $200.00* veterinarians fee for my dog's injury, an injury sustained because Council failed to mitigate the identified hazard. (*I originally requested $230.00 but the vets subsequently reduced the charge.)

I received an automated response to my letter/email on 18 Jan 2023;

Thank you for your email. This auto reply is confirmation that your message has been received by the City of Mount Gambier. Your request will be forwarded to an appropriate staff member for a response.

And the next day 19 Feb 2023 received this email from Jasmine Taylor;

Hi Nick,

Thank you for your recent correspondence in regards to the Hastings/Cunningham Dog Park.

Your feedback has been forwarded onto the manager of this department who will be in touch within 14 business days.

The reference number for your feedback is AR23/4220

If you have any further questions please feel free to contact us on 08 8721 2555 or by email city@mountgambier.sa.gov.au as this is a no reply email.

As of today Tuesday 20^th June 2023 I am yet to receive the promised response to my letter and attached request for reimbursement.

Council has failed to meet any of the many self-stated obligations, as identified by CEO Philpott in that TBW article, and as specifically set-out in Councils' C200 – REQUEST FOR SERVICE AND COMPLAINT POLICY

By Councils' own definitions my letter/email constitutes both a Complaint and a Request. I refer to C200 Section 3;

A Complaint is an expression of dissatisfaction with a product or service delivered by the Council or its representatives that have failed to reach the standard stated, implied or expected. This includes complaints about a service that has been, or should have been delivered.

A Request for Service is an application to have Council or its representative take some form of action to provide or improve a Council service.

Council has also failed to meet it's self-stated commitment to timely response and/or resolution, eg, under Sec 2 PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING THIS POLICY;

Responsiveness: this will be achieved by providing sufficient resources, well trained staff and review and improvement of the systems

Efficiency: complaints will be resolved as quickly as possible, while ensuring that they are dealt with at a level that reflects their level of complexity

Sections 4.2 Processing a Request for Service and 4.3 Timeframes for Response clearly set-out Councils' obligations as identified by the sections' titles. Again, Council has failed to abide by any and all of these Sections.

To shorten this letter I will not include a full copy of Secs 4.2, 4.3 or of Section 5 COMPLAINT HANDLING which further covers Councils' obligations, eg;

Complainants will be advised of the likely timeframe required to investigate and resolve a complaint and regularly updated as to progress where necessary.

As included above I did receive a very specific timeframe for response, “within 14 business days”, but then nothing further. Who is the un-named 'Manager' that was/is handling my Complaint/Request?

My request to be reimbursed is covered by Section 5.7 REMEDIES;

As a general principle the complainant should, so far as possible, be put in the position they would have been in, had things not gone wrong.

The $200.00 vets' bill is an insignificant sum relative to Councils' Budget but it is nearly ¼ of my fortnightly income (Disability Support Pension) and therefore meets Councils' qualification under Sec 5.7, namely;

Compensation will only be offered in cases where the loss or suffering is considered substantial.

As Council is aware and as identified in that TBW article, dog park users became so frustrated with Councils' lack of maintenance at dog park and with this specific gravel/sand issue that there was a 'working bee' to remedy the problem.

I look forward to receiving a prompt response from Council and the relevant reimbursement.

***And again, that letter was emailed directly to all Councillors Tuesday 20th June 2023...this time I did get a response, of sorts, that very afternoon...***

Good afternoon Nick

I acknowledge receipt of your email and will speak with the relevant Council Officers and correspond with you when I have further information.

Regards

Lynette MARTIN OAM MAYOR

***It's 'Mr Fletcher' to you Lynette...and again, emailed to all Councillors, and not a single response...that was the last I heard from Mayor Martin, upto and including today, but then 2 weeks after that email, on Wednesday 5th July 2023, I did get this rather random/bizarre 'response' from MGCC's Jane Featherstonhaugh...(ah, this is the email you refer to at the top there, in that original letter to the DCMB-Ed)...indeed, and I defy dear availees to read what I wrote to MGCC (above) and then draw a cogent, coherent, or even casual link between my correspondence and this bizarre email...(is it mockery? is this person giving you the big ol' bureaucratic 'Sod Off Idiot'?-Ed)...you tell me mate, that's 100% what it looks like...(mmm, that and/or some sad attempt at Plausible Deniability-Ed)...whatevs, it's bollocks, that's what it is... ***

Dear Mr Fletcher

Thanks for your further follow up.  We acknowledge receipt of your correspondence and apologise that we did not respond in a timely manner. 

I have inspected the area today and cannot find any areas of gravel along the fence line. The entrance to the park is a bit gravelly but that is to reduce slippery surface.  However, if you fell there is still an issue, are you able to provide exact location and/or photos of the area.

In relation to your claim for reimbursement of vet bills, could you please send a copy of your vet bill so we can lodge a formal claim through Councils insurers.

 Kind regards

Jane Fetherstonhaugh General Manager Corporate & Regulatory Services

***Firstly, apology not accepted...secondly, who the schreck is "We"...(is that MGCC's Born To Rule mentality accidentally seepin' through?-Ed)...nice one man, for it surely presents as such...(I mean, when 'we' say 'we', 'we' actually mean 'you'-Ed)...being 'me'...(being 'you' saying 'we' 'cos I'm a confected literary device, so 'I' and 'you' is actually one-and-the-same-Ed)...so, sorry, who am I now?...(no no, 'you' are still 'you'-Ed)...but then who are 'you'?...(well I'm 'you' also-Ed)...I'm gettin' a headache...(me too-Ed)...stop that...and moving onto "further follow up" and "timely manner"...(does that refer to the fortnight since the second letter in June, or the unanswered letter from 6 months before?-Ed)...exactly, more bureaucratic weasel-words defining exactly how insincere that 'apology' is...(well it's an 'apology' designed for the consumption of someone who has no idea what exactly is being referenced-Ed)...spot on, it presents the illusion of 'apology' but deliberately leaves out the specific details, eg, a time-frame of over 6 months...

Jane then claims to have gone to Doggo Park but couldn't find the gravel that I've carefully explained, in writing, has already been buried under the sand that I and another gentleman moved there with our wheelbarrows, etc etc...(well now she's just takin' the piss!-Ed)...settle big fella', you're absolutely right of course, but hold your applause for the big dismount...(oh this bit, I love this bit-Ed)...indeed as do I...having supposedly read my correspondence and allegedly thoroughly investigating, Ms Featherstonhaugh majestically conjures from the ether 'Me Falling Over'...(and the next bit, this is the bit I love-Ed)...and then, having cited myself as the 'Injured Party', then asks that I provide "a copy of (my) vet bill"...(bahahaha, she's sayin' you fell/were injured, and then, took ya'self to the vets for treatment-Ed)...and again, in the absence of any vaguely rational explanation as to how someone could read my letters and then somehow re-iterate that as an injury to moi, that's another big ol' bureaucratic Sod Off Idiot...and the bit about 'send us the vet's bill', that is just hilarious...  

So that 'apology' very carefully avoids and/or denies and/or deliberately feigns ignorance...(and in many ways, is doing all those things at once-Ed)...precisely, all things at once, eg, stating 'I can't see the gravel problem' ignores/avoids my written explanation and denies there is a problem...so there's some solid background/foundation stuff, now I'm off to luxuriate with a freshly brewed hot chokky and a long shower...this is a simple physical mantra I regularly utilise to politely remind myself, should I ever forget or begin to question, that these simple but indicative luxuries are exactly that, modern luxuries that not everyone has access to...but I do, so I quietly celebrate it...

Tomorrow: More Doggos & Puppers Stuff

Hope this post makes reasonable sense...plenty to do from here though so...

I am Nick Fletcher and this is my blog...cheers and laters...