Inland Revenue Child Support Audit
The Office of the Auditor-General is at the early stages of a performance audit of how well Inland Revenue manages child support debt. They are looking to get the views of people interacting with IRD about child support.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the agenda is to find ways to collect money but it can also IMHO be an opportunity to show up the flaws of Inland Revenue’s system and express the ill treatment from some of the staff. If you work with Inland Revenue on behalf of clients … I hope you speak up and if you have an experience of your own to share … I hope you speak up.
Contact Chris Gianos
Email : [email protected]
BTW, belated Merry Xmas and Happy New Year to you all.
Even more concerning then the Criminal Child suppoert Tax on Men who are Decent Fathers
My Dutch Lady Police Friend from The Netherlands, emailed me this particular article last night…….Does any one see any parallels to New Zealand and Canada……
‘Tongue in Cheek’….And really ‘Stirring the Pot’ here…I so overjoyed as a Man and as a Father to be so liberated by Feminism here in New Zealand….I early await your comment Allan to justify this article ….
Kind regards John Dutchie
MND COMMENTARY
Canadian Feminazis Shock Plan To Jail Men For Questioning Feminism
Continuing abolition of human rights for males a worrying trend
June 23, 2003
by Steven Stevenson
A recent report from Status of Women Canada, School Success by Gender: A Catalyst for Masculinist Discourse, has created a “national tempest,” according to one of the many websites which incites hatred against males.
Surprisingly, they got that almost right. The report has created an international storm, which may last for years.
The 150 page government-funded thinly-veiled attack against the feminist authors’ political opponents, mens’ rights advocates, has been criticized in the Canadian parliament and by many journalists in both the mainstream and alternative press.
Extreme femininity man-haters in Canada have reached a new nadir, not surprising considering how Political Correctness rarely goes unchecked these days, and that Canada is one of the most feminist countries in the world.
For instance, Ontario’s Bill 117, enacted in the year 2000, requires that if a woman merely *claims* that her partner has been violent to her, he is ejected from their home, his assets are frozen, and he is jailed. It doesn’t matter whether she manufactured the allegation, as is frequent with many angry partners on the verge of splitting. It doesn’t matter if she has a history of frequent lying and if there is no evidence of violence from him. It doesn’t even matter if she feels guilty about lying and withdraws the accusation. The man is automatically assumed to be guilty until proven innocent, forcibly removed, financially disempowered and jailed for the evening. He can wake to find his partner has applied for an intervention order, that he now owns nothing and has no place to go. He is not asked for his side of the story, because he is male.
A similar domestic violence law is being planned right now for Victoria, Australia. (link, and link)
It will probably end up being enacted since so few people here have as yet woken up to the totalitarian nature of the man haters, who have over the last few decades manipulated themselves into positions of taxpayer-funded power in a large number of government organizations in Western countries. It is not long after one group of them accomplishes another excess before it is duplicated in other parts of the world.
Such is the case with the report in question, produced by a self-described feminist and her two assistants with $75,000 of citizens’ money. Only a fraction of the report addresses the material suggested by the title (females receiving a better education than males, and why that’s good according to feminists, and how their should be more of it). The body of the report involves examining male-positive newspaper and web articles from a feminist point of view.
Any criticism of feminist revisionist philosophy at all, these extremists believe, supposedly oppresses all women (even proudly non-feminist women). This brings us to the real reason for this report. The authors manufacture some ‘solutions’ to the ‘unacceptable’ use of free speech, typically misandrous (man hating) in tone but shocking in their totalitarian extremity.
The removal men’s basic right to justice is, if Canadian feminists have their way, to now be followed by the removal of our rights to free speech and association.
“We make a number of general recommendations for protecting the gains that women have made… there is [a] need to ensure closer monitoring of hate-mongering [sic] sites to determine whether legal action should be taken.” – report excerpt
The feminists want feminists to monitor all men’s rights activist sites, using government money to record, feministly analyze and report on all points of view expressed by individuals and groups which are non-feminist. We men’s right advocates are categorized before it’s even started as ‘hate mongering.’ This is so that existing Canadian hate crime legislation can be used to silence the man-haters political opponents.
The fact that we want only equality for men is irrelevant — to extreme feminists any increase in men’s rights before &*all* women get *complete* equality is ‘discriminatory.’ They have been trained by taxpayer-funded feminists Women’s’ Studies classes to believe this, and it is not in their interests to learn or admit the real truth. They are paid to oppress men and boys, who feminist lore has it, are responsible for every evil throughout history (a word that by the way was recently banned on campus at England’s Stockport College. ‘Herstory,’ which isn’t in the dictionary, is allowed. Nothing at all to do with etymology. Merely that extreme feminists hate all things male).
The small injustices against women which used to exist have been almost entirely abolished, and inertia will do the rest in a very few years. Of course, there will always be small pockets of discrimination against women, for instance most women are not aggressive enough pigs to make it to corporate boardrooms. The feminazi solution? A fairer social system to cater for the majority of men and women who have less than the few at the top? No, rather keep on discriminating against men, in every possible way, while *any* injustice against *any* woman persists, in other words forever.
That’s feminist ‘reality.’ The real reality is that males in Western societies are severely and increasingly discriminated against in many areas, such as the school system, although masculist arguments receive of course only pooh-poohing in this anti-male compendium (some arguments about which reams have been written are not even discussed in the report but instead categorized under ‘type of mistake’).
Boys from the age of zero receive a barrage of matriarchal messages from TV programs, advertisements (when was the last time you remember seeing a male in an ad who didn’t act like a fool?), and an education system tailored to the needs of females. More women enter universities and more women graduate, but it is not Politically Correct to suggest that too many feminist-initiated rules are the cause, so the problems are never addressed.
Statistics show increasing numbers of men being driven to suicide, a multiple of the female suicide rate. Even men dying of ‘natural’ causes these days live shorter lives than women. In many cities there are a multitude of women’s health services, but no men’s health services. Why? Because the latter help only males.
“In light of the growing use of the Internet by masculinist groups to develop misogynist sites inciting violence and the growing number of discussion groups used to promote hatred of women, we suggest that a monitoring organization be established, similar to Hate Watch, but focused solely on gender social relations. It would also be useful to maintain, publish, disseminate and update a list of misogynist groups.” – – report excerpt
So contact details for all those with political views different to the report’s authors will be ‘disseminated’ to feminist groups to enable easy harassment of us. But this will not be necessary for long:
“We have made a number of recommendations regarding monitoring of Internet sites. We also recommend that consideration be given to whether legal action can be taken under section 319 of the Criminal Code… Discussions should also be held with access providers to suggest a conduct protocol.” – the report
After defining us masculists as ‘misogynists’ and ‘hate criminals’ (our opinion on these is irrelevant, being already ‘prejudiced criminals’) we would obviously be prosecuted by our government-employed feminist enemies, our Internet access would be removed (websites and e-lists abolished), protesters would be arrested, and those who persist in the unapproved speech would of course be jailed.
The report’s misandrous authors have initiated this witch-hunt by listing the names of around 100 men’s and fathers right associations and pro-male individuals (including health professionals) in a special appendix to the report. This clearly has nothing to do with “School Success by Gender” but everything to do with harassing political opponents using manipulative tactics.
How long before the ‘final solution’ one feminist I know of is already practicing privately becomes the norm – aborting all male fetuses in the womb. Does this sound extreme and paranoid? Is removal of both the presumption of innocence until proven guilty and of freedom of political speech extreme? Is being very concerned about this paranoid?
Millions of Jews were tortured and murdered by the Nazis in World War II. This didn’t happen in one day. The Jews had all their rights removed, one at a time, smaller ones first, because they were presumed to be inferior to those in power, and a danger to ‘good’ people. They eventually lost the ‘right’ to life itself. Western men are the new Jews. Our minor rights have already been abolished, and now the major ones are being removed. Hence the term ‘feminazi.’
If ever there was a ‘hate crime,’ government-funded feminists producing this report is it. Women have always been protected and nurtured by the huge majority of men. It is mostly men who die in wars. Men traditionally work the most dangerous jobs. Women were first off the Titanic, while men courageously died in their place. If the Canadian well-funded expertly manipulative bureaucratic bitches have their way, men will be effectively herded onto Titanic II and it will be forcibly sunk.
“We stress the urgency for women to ‘take ownership’ of the Internet.” says the report. A search on Altavista shows vastly more “feminist” webpages (around 45,000) than “masculinist” sites (around 550). And a random selection indicates most pages in both categories to be pejorative against men (many of the hits on ‘masculinist’ resolve to hate sites by feminists).
Males and our female supporters receive zero dollars from government for promotion of the rights of men and boys. Feminist departments, organizations, individuals and projects receive many millions of dollars in total. Money and power corrupt, and the feminists in power are about as corrupt and misandrous as it’s possible to get. It is time we in Western societies stopped paying them to promote their hatred and lies.
Here is a webpage by a men’s right organization, which includes video of a parliamentary challenge about the report to a sneering government feminazi:
http://www.fathers.ca/the_status_of_women.htm
You may need to turn your browser text size down. Slightly amateurish hunh. Of course, men’s rights advocates receive $0.00, not $75,000, for our research and its promulgation.
For those with a strong stomach, the misandrous report in question is here.
Please complain about it, and keep complaining until something is done. Men deserve freedom and justice too.
Steven Stevenson
beam.to/stevenstevenson
[© Copyright 2003 Steven Stevenson. Article may be reprinted in entirety only, including this statement, for non-profit purposes, otherwise ask.]
* Crucial: Ask the Memory Experts(sm)
-Free technical and customer support
-Help available via mail, phone, online chat, or forum
Choosing and buying a memory upgrade doesn’t have to be intimidating.
Our experienced, friendly tech support and customer service can help.
Visit us at: http://www.crucial.com
Read more…
* Makes Great Gifts! The Top Conservative Shop on the Net!
Exceptional Conservative Gear. Makes great gifts!
Don’t let the Libs getcha down!
Come see the Largest Collection of Liberal-baiting Merchandise on the Net!
Read more…
Advertise here
Comment by John Dutchie — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 8:03 am
Notes to self: Never visit Canada! Tell my friends/family to avoid ever buying Canadian products.
Comment by SicKofNZ — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 8:53 am
Interesting read, but I think it’s a bit off topic John. Perhaps you could start a new topic with something like this 🙂
Comment by noconfidence — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 9:06 am
I was just thinking the same. It is a powerful comment JD has made, yet it will take the thread in a whole other direction. IMO.
Comment by julie — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 9:34 am
Is there a faint possibility that the OAG could be a little more impartial than the lawyers that Mahoney appointed to investigate family court complaints. Given what we do know, if the OAG didn’t prosecute some of the IRD staff for their crimes, then we would know that they where just another electrolux attachment.
Comment by downunder — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 9:39 am
i guess the auditor will be tightening up all the nuts’n bolts in the child support machine…tightening the screws…making ird’s job better and more efficient…and what is it ever about?…money…
Comment by ford — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 10:48 am
Reply to SickofNZ
…..Just inform every one and enlighten everyone I was talking to my Dutch Police friends via email….Oh how I really enjoyed my short stay in Canada in 1982…And was thinking of emigrating there to live permanently…
My Dutch Lady Police Officer friend said, don’t even think about Feminism is just as strong over there as it is in New Zealand….Hence the email to validate her statement ….
Kind regards John Dutchie
Comment by John Dutchie — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 2:16 pm
Reply to Julie
…Hi Julie…Look, I didn’t write that article it was written by ‘Steven Stevenson’ …..And yes,you are correct it is a very powerful article …….and very scary one too…Have a real long think on this one…
Lets put this way Julie, if the situation was reversed and this article was concerning about a Woman rights, as in expressing an opinion on Equality,(and please note which I am all for Equality, as in both Genders}and the right to express an opinion concerning Equality was made an criminal offense
And the consequences of expressing an opinion,and voicing an opinion could land you as a Woman into Prison …Would I fight ‘Tooth and Nail’ for your right as an Woman to express an opinion,and voice an opinion .????…Damn straight I would….And I am sure many a fine Gentleman on here would do the same too…..
Kind regards to you Julie…John Dutchie
Comment by John Dutchie — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 2:43 pm
…My apology to you Chris,I didn’t mean to ‘Hi jack’ your thread..
Kind regards John Dutchie
Comment by John Dutchie — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 2:53 pm
@ John: I was involved with comparing statistics between 81 different countries where Canada showed up as being worse for men and boys than 38 other countries, coming 39th out of 81. It rated worse than NZ which was bad enough at 29th.
There were 4 male suicides for every 1 female suicide in Canada. NZ’s suicide rate was 3.8 males/1 female which is not far off Canada. Canada also rated poorly for the number of males enrolled in tertiary institutions compared to females. Out of the 175 countries rated for their education gap, Canada was equal to Russia coming an abysmal 124th/175 in the World.
In fact Canada’s best rating was for male longevity @ 78.65yrs, coming 8th out of a possible 225. Every other statistic that we compared suggests that Canada is a sh!t-hole for boys and men and should be avoided like the plague. So should their goods & services and tourism advertisements be shunned by supporters of equality.
(Status of Men Index)
soMENi Best Country 2009
Comment by SicKofNZ — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 3:42 pm
public servants can not speak up: There is a law that prevents a public servant to criticize, voice concerns, talk to the media about his/her department. All in the name to project that New Zeal-and is a stable place and free of conflict.
Notice the ACC Saga. Millions of dollars in the drain and guess what no one resigned, no one dismissed, no telling us where and how the millions disappeared.
There is only one scheme to fix the child support problem.
The government starts with the assumption that a child is parent-less
Based on that The government works out an amount of money, say X to support the child.
(A government will never over-estimates its financial commitment to a child)
Only and only that amount X is required from parents to pay for their child.
Any other generosity from a parent is a bonus.
Some parents will happily spend more on their children and some will not and such is life.
Comment by tren Christchurch — Fri 15th January 2010 @ 5:01 pm
The focus of this audit is the effectiveness of collecting outstanding debt, including locating liable parents living overseas, and strategies and initiatives to address the growth in debt, with publication of the results of the audit towards the end of this year.
Comment by downunder — Mon 25th January 2010 @ 6:56 am
Thanks for that info downunder. Information from paying parents would only make the IRD procedure better. It won’t change the laws and it won’t scrap child support altogether.
Comment by julie — Mon 25th January 2010 @ 9:24 am
So someone just dropped that little titbit in your lap knowing what you would do with it?
Comment by downunder — Mon 25th January 2010 @ 5:54 pm
No!
Comment by julie — Mon 25th January 2010 @ 8:10 pm
If the Child support would listen to the side of the battler in this situation then some fathers wouldn’t have to leave the country to survive. From my own personnal experience and pleading with them that I was going or about to go bankrupt their answer to that was pay us first. I have moved away from a country I loved and a wonderful daughter that I have all the love in the world for just to survive. I say that if you family members wish to finish the marriage/relationship get the bills and split them down the middle. I’m sure child support could control this in some way and the father that sees the child stuff all wont have to struggle as he does. I can understand why Child support has suicide victems on their hands. They have no heart or fainess in them.
From one pissed of father.
Comment by Lowie — Tue 26th January 2010 @ 3:05 pm
Hey lowie
I have just been thrown in a similar situation .I have my 2 x boys 50% shared care in a week off/ week on situation.have done so for over 9 years.they are now 14 and 16.Was paying child support up until 5 years ago.she then got a job and I wasn’t required to pay.
Recently I received a letter from child support saying I HAVE TO PAY AGAIN.
MY EX decided to quit what work she had due to an inheritance bought a rental property,takes the children on holidays,[which dont get me wrong is great]
I currently work 45 hours the week i have them and 60 the week I dont. Thats just to survive.Now I get stung for being a father that gives a rats arse .
IRD dont care ,have written a complaint to Human Rights commission FOR SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION against the IRD CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES can be done on line.
It will force me to sell my house to survive.Im not going to suck this one.time to make a stand .
Comment by paul — Mon 5th April 2010 @ 9:57 am
Reply to Paul
…Whoa..Paul I feel for you,great that you are making a stand…Your call here,If you need a Barrister to help you…I do know one, that is very passionate about Fathers rights and loves to fight against injustices and more important as no problem on taking on I.R.D….
All the best to you Paul….
Kind regards John Dutchie
Comment by John Dutchie — Mon 5th April 2010 @ 10:03 am
Completely understand where you are coming from, My partner and I are supporting 4 children and paying child support for one child from a previous relationship who we also have and support in way of shelter,food, clothing, medical expenses if she is with us and needs to go to the Dr ect on a regular basis we have this child an equal amount of hours in our physical care as her Mother does the child is 6 and attends school for 6 hours a day which is classed as the Mothers time even though we share the dropping off and picking up from school. Because of these hours it is not classed as shared custody. The Mother works full time and has no other children to support, we have the child all of the school holiday periods otherwise the child has no option but to go to work with her. The thing here is we are on what they call a good income… our before tax income is $1500pw this is what we get asessed on for child support payments which with partner and 4 children equates to $138 per week our take home pay is $1050 our rent is $400 (housing 7 people) our grocery bill $350 which covers two adults two teen and two Pre- teens and a child we have half time(although not recognised as that by ird) our power is $100 per week Pellets for our burner to keep these children warm are $70 per week add to that public school expenses of around $50 per week fuel to get children to and from school and us to work of $80 per week and min of $10 each a week for clothing/school uniform total $70 for the 7 of us as you can see with out going on and on about all of the smaller stuff eg reg warrant insurance Drs visits Dental etc we come out each week with a debt we are struggling to provide the necessities as required by law for our family all this and we are on a so called decent income I would hate to think how others are surviving this situation on a lesser income than us and I know there are many, as we are going into debt more each week to provide for this. The Questions I pose here is what is the estimated weekly cost of rasing 1 child how do you figure this out. Is it ok that one child in our family gets well and truly more than the other 4 beacause we cant offer them the same things ie to play sports or follow their music lessons up. How is this building stronger family units and healthier children. Why the heck is child support based on Gross income and not take home pay after all thats the “real money” we have to work with, Why are there not other assesments for shared care ie 1/3 and 1/4 care as surely if you can work out 50% or 40% of care you can work out those as well… Why if you take a 14% pay cut from your previous working year will ird not reasess your child support payments, but if you get a 1% pay rise they will most certainly hunt you down for that childsupport on that 1%. Why is it that if child support is overpaid because IRD decide thats what you have to pay you do not get it back.
We do not mind that we have to pay child support thats our duty as parents what we do mind is not having fair grounds to work with and fair policy that entitles all 5 children a fair and equal shot, what we do mind is not getting a fair go when it comes to trying to explain that even though we are not the custodial parent/s we have this child as much in our physical care as her mother yet we are entitled to no reasonable acknowledgement for such a thing (by the way we love having her this much not complaining about that part at all
Who do you complain to and reason with, without finacially exausting yourself by having to hire a Lawyer so you get heard and not just dismissed with the thousands of others that have a huge problem with the system? Why is there no reasonable process in place and when will Kiwi dads get a fair go whet it comes to both custody and dealing with IRD?
Sorry to go on guys my sympathy goes out to all you Dads and Mums alike paying your child support on time in this situation there does not seem to be any repreive on the horizon…
Comment by What to do — Fri 9th July 2010 @ 1:20 am