Scouts not subject to discrimination laws

Roland, Guy, et al.

Really, seriously, do you think we give a f*ck ?

Your entire family seems predisposed towards writing these long and rambling tirades – you should all go on a course or something to address that.

Myself and Thumper have made it very well known that we hang out at the Durham Arms every Friday after work, so rather than jumping to your silly little conclusion, how about doing some research first ?

I’ve also asked some questions of your family that I thought pertinent that have been quite ignored – is that because the topic was a little sensitive ?

Open dialogue goes both ways, and it would appear from my perspective that your family seems to have just about as much in hiding as the Scouts.

P.S. This is not Guy. Before you jump to any conclusions, this is his Brother, Roland.

I made a post without signing out of his account. I made a mistake, and I apoligise to him for that.

If you have any questions/comments about this little mistake, don’t take it out on him, CALL ME. I’m happy to post my phone number on this site. Just bear in mine that I too work, and I can’t answer the phone in regular working hours. It is 0402915943.

I am better then those people who hide behind their computer screens!

If scouts didn’t disctiminate, just like Neville fucking Tomkins said then why do they need to hide behind this ludacris loophole?

getitright, you are a little shit stirer. Just from what you have been saying, I wouldn’t put it past anyone that you are involved in this matter. What you’re doing is pretty harsh. Seems to me that you’re out for revenge. You take something that was intended as a joke, and obviously intended for people with a higher mental age then yours, and you made it sound like he’s a fucking whacko. Bighead got it! Revenge attack; piss weak from someone in your position…

If anyone should grow some balls, it’s you. Why don’t you tell everyone who you are, and why you’re here? I’ll tell you why. It’s because you don’t want the general public, and the people in scouting knowing what a slimy little meat head you are. You have something to hide.

Steve Lemmon, you sound like you were friends with Guy. If the only reason you’re not friends with him now is because if a splitting of friendship groups you are just as small as getitright. It sounds to me like you were close to the people involved, but in reality had nothing to do with this matter. Why are you choosing to take sides? You’re making it sound like Guy is making such a whooha about nothing. From someone who knows Guy, do you really think he would do something like this, to go so far with such a “trivial” issue just for the fun? Is he really that kind of person? Or is it that he was hurt so badly, that he feels so strongly about getting justice?

It is one of these two things. He is cold bastard that does stupid shit for the hell of it and was wrongly identified by his friends; or his “friends” (directed at you, Steve Lemmon)didn’t know him as well as they thought they did. I tend to move towards the latter…

My comments still stand about getitright until they identify themselves. Lets all just see how much integrity you have…

The only ADHD I’ve ever had is After Drinking Head Disorder.

thumper – you said your kids had it. Then you said it is really inadequate parenting – something you want to tell us??

Hey Guy, I knew you from Gang Show back in the 80’s. Daniel Lalor was a cub with the now closed Kippax Group. Daniel left when he was in scouts. Shame, because he was a pretty cool kid. Don’t know much more than that. Grant Lalor wasn’t involved in scouting other than being just a parent of a scout.

i actually do have slight adhd, and i’ve been in scouts for almost 10 years now.

and no, i’ve never thought that scouts were discriminative. Its most likely just one group, that just spoils the whole thing.

(and for the record, they are polo shirts 🙁 lol)

But i agree, just reading one thing in the media, and thinking ‘omg scouts is so discriminative, im not letting my son or anyone i know join it’ is just stupid.

So really, your the one who should grow a brain, and some balls for that matter as well..

/rant

ADHD is a good way of saying parents who can’t impose discipline/ good diet on their child. It’s funny how so many people have something once you give it a name. When I was growing up no one had ADHD etc.

That’s a very interesting observation, Peter241. What more do you know about Mr Lalor and his family’s involvement with Scouts? What group/pack was Mr Lalor’s son in? Do you know if he went on to Scouts or Venturers?

It would be a real shame if Mr Lalor has omitted to declare a conflict of interest.

The scouts are NOT an intolerent group. Only a few, but mostly the antiquated, old aged fossils that run the organisation who still want to live life as if it was still the 1880’s!!!

As i understood it scouts is supposed to be for everyone, not a friendship group that can ostracise people at will.
I don’t know if it is worth a discrmination case tho.

Funny….Grant Lalor’s son use to be a cub in my pack in the late 1980’s.

They’re not actually polo shirts… but yes, i’m sure that’s of comfort to all non-Scouts.

at least he wont have to wear a polo shirt.

Are you saying that because one unbalanced Rover was asked to leave his crew because of his behaviour by a couple of impatient young people, that you’re going to judge the entire Scout movement as an intolerant group?

Then i say to you (and your neighbour), that perhaps it is you who is narrowsighted and judgemental. I feel sorry for your child and all he will miss out on because of your intolerance and overprotectiveness.

wow. that IS interesting.

What a giant whingefest.

Guess what – there’s plenty of us here that have mental illness in our lives.

I’d wager there’s quite a few of us that suffer (or have done, previously) from one, too, so you can shove your contempt fair up your holier-than-thou arse.

Possibly of interest is that Tribeca’s email starts gjones@

But that’s all I can say on the subject, it could be a coincidence but you’d think it’d be something Tribeca would be aware of and explain.

But we’re hated by loonies? Wahoo!

This will be my one and only post on this site as I don’t see the need to stick around and be flamed by people for whom I have nothing but contempt.

I found my way here through a posting on one of the mental health sites. I frankly didn’t believe what was being written about this site until I read it for myself, but I must say that what I have read here has left me appalled. As a professional with considerable experience in mental health crisis intervention, I have been left wondering just where some of you people are coming from. Are you still living in the dark ages? If you want to replace your superstition and prejudice about mental illness with enlightenment, please take the time to visit sites like http://www.beyondblue.org.au or simply Google mental illness and follow the links.

From what I can see, it seems that those of you who knew Guy Jones towards the end of his time in Scouts still haven’t worked out that his apparently odd behaviour (which someone ‘sympathetically’ described as being a ‘jerk’) was probably an early manifestation of the onset of his illness. You were such ‘good friends’ to him in your little Scout group that instead of supporting him and helping him work through his illness, you shunned him and kicked him out. Sorry, but that sounds a lot like discrimination to me. The fact that Scouts and you were able to avoid responsibility for your actions because of some legal loophole doesn’t make you right. It just makes you lucky. What is more, reading your comments here since your so-called ‘win’ simply adds to the weight of what has been said by Guy Jones and his father.

To the person who said Guy should ‘grow some balls’, I think that you will find that he did that when he first took positive action to rectify the persecution he had suffered. There are other comments on this site which are clearly made by members of ACT Scouts and members of Guy’s old group. From what I can see as an outsider, those who have made this comments exhibit a strong propensity to want to kick Guy when they think they have him down. Isn’t that what he complained about to the discrimination tribunal? This certainly leads me to think that if your current behaviour is anything to go by, then Guy was at least morally right, if legally unlucky.

I have a child who suffers from ADHD and has been nagging me to let him join cubs. After what I have seen in the press, followed up by what I have read here, I will be finding another outlet for him. I simply do not want my child to run into one of the people who have participated in either the treatment of Guy Jones or his vilification on this site. My next door neighbour is now looking to take her young son out of cubs after I showed her this site and highlighted the coverage in the media to her. She was also considering doing the training to become a cub leader but has dropped that idea too. Still, you probably won’t miss us, unless, that is, we turn out to be part of a wider exodus.

Some of you need to grow a brain. Others need to grow some compassion and a soul. If you are the results of what Scouts advertises as its leadership and development of youth, Scouts ought to strongly consider being much less vocal about its ‘successes’.

My final comment is reserved for the people who showed friendship and support to Guy during his ordeal. I applaud you and hope that Guy understands you are his real friends. To the others, I simply say, “Shame on you.”

!

iluka – nope.

Bringing something to RA and then politely inquiring if we could keep it highbrow is probably the most hilarious post I’ve seen since our Queanbeyan friend Peter stopped by last year.

The lot of you are a bunch of dumbasses, really, given any historical research into this website and you will find several instances of users trawling through screeds of documentation to prove each other wrong – it’s our gig, and we’re unashamed to admit it.

That you brought your issue to RA in an all-guns-blazing manner with tomes of legalese compounds the humour.

I reserve the right to trawl through any publicly avaliable source at my discretion, and even if I find it only perversely related, or for that matter, not related at all, I’ll make the election whether or not I choose to hit the Say It! button.

Dirty filthy secrets kind of amuse me, which in a way, is why I continue to read this site – there’s a lot of them seem to come out…

No worries Tony.

Cheers Steve.

haha, that harry the hamster line is funny as. Check out the video, makes me laugh everytime

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8oJJWP6_zo

ok ok.

I’ve already posted my thoughts on the matter, and while i don’t agree with what Guy is doing and the way he’s going about it, i certainly don’t think that dragging Guy’s MySpace or song lyrics he’s written into the argument is appropriate.

It’s true that Guy has courted the media on this occasion, and as such has opened himself up to this kind of scrutiny and critisism. However, surely we can keep this as highbrow as possible without resorting to New Idea-style exposes….

Methinks you protest too much Tony. Build a bridge, move on…

This is very Nathan Barley..

As the parent of two of the individuals “Named and shamed” by Guy and his father in his allegations about what my or may not has happened, and the Father in law of a third, I must thank Steve Lemon for presenting the other side of this affair. I, unlike Guy and his father do not believe in trial by media, and have, and will not comment on the specifics of the case other than to say that the Jones’ version is far far from the truth. I also believe that their “Leaking” of the case the week before the decision was handed down was an example of their less than honest approach to the process of arbitration through the Discimation Tribunal. ie they deliberatly attempted to influence the decision by attempting to create a media firestorm.

Good on you Steve & “onetwothree”, I am proud that my three kids have such strong support from their friends in and out of the Scouting Movement.

Sadly it is obivious from some of the comments on the preceding string that some people actually believe Guy’s warped version of events without hearing, or wanting to hear the other side. In may ways it is a shame that the case was not heard as I suspect that both of the Jones’s would have had egg on their faces.

I suggest that all parties respect the privacy of the individuals involved and refrain from airing any more dirty washing on the web. There are comments in the string that if repeated in the open forum may lead to slander action, and I suspect already breach libel laws.

Again many thanks to Steve and the others who have supported the kids through this vendetta campaign by two very misguided and I suspect very ill people.

also,

Myspace: Nevefollowguy

how about discrimination against an entire gender? pretty serious.
credibility at an all time low.
just incase GJ changes his page, i have put the juciest bits here for all eternity.

“Nice boots. Wanna fuck?”
“Hello, my name’s Harry the Hampster. I’m about eight centimetres tall, a little bit chubby and a little bit hairy. And I’m looking for a female, so I can SHOVE MAH FUCKING COCK IN HER MOUTH AND UP ‘ER SHITTER, AND RUB MAH BALLS ALL OVER ‘ER EARS AND POKE MAH CLAWS OOP ‘ER AHSEHOLE!!!

Seriously though, everyone else is on here to get laid, so why shouldn’t I? Does it help that i’m in an awesome band? Or that I earn more than all your friends? How about my cool car? In any case, I’ll give you the best sex you’ve ever had, or your money back – provided you’re a hot chick with nice titties and a cute arse, and you remembered to leave your brain in your pile of clothing at the bedroom/car door.

Even more seriously though, I really couldn’t care less about Myspace dating, I just have a profile because everyone else does and thought I’d make it look like everyone elses too – which means talking a whole lotta shit. “

maybe if you didn’t spent all your time trying to bring down an entire organization and making its members feel like shit, i wouldn’t fell compelled to make you look like an idiot.

here some of GJ’s lyrics. taken from memorandom.net

PLASTICITY 101
G. Jones

I’m sick of the words that you say
‘Cause they suck and you know that they lack meaning
You’re just making it difficult for everyone
And you know that they see through you

Don’t respect what you say
Never did anyway
So bite your arse and be sure that you won’t win

We don’t need your opinion about anything
‘Cause we know that its all bullshit
Try to tell me i’m wrong till you see it yourself
Your ego won’t let you back down

Tell me what motivates you to be like you are
It really seems so destructive
The Romanian Gymnastics team don’t compare
with your ability to do backflips

are you singing to us? or your father? or yourself?
but then again, you dont need my opinion, or anyone else’s. its all bullshit apparently.
correct me if im wrong, but you seem to be discriminating against the Romanian Gymnastics team.

I never had a problem with perverts but i did once get handed a chainsaw and get told to clear the trees out of the backyard.

Something at 12 years of age I was not qualified to tackle.

IIRC I ended up getting paid $2 for an afternoon of dangerous hard yakka and needed 4 stitches.

bob a job has been arsed off. too many concerns about boy fondlers, liability insurance etc.

I thought the GG biscuits were an annual thing -like the Scouts “bob a job week”.

Although possibly that dates me – I’m sure they’re calling it something different to “bob a job” nowadays…

GG Biscuits are a semi-regular feature at Kippax Woolies plaza – I thought that they were pretty standard.

I’ll post an article to notify when they come up on sale again given the interest (and obviously because everybody remembers how nice they are).

Having read all of the comments on this thread, I have to add my 2c’s worth.

Building a bridge and “getting over it” is a load of shit. Mental illness and its effects aren’t so easy to get over, neither is the paranoia attached or the depression.

FFS, this shit happens all the time and people don’t talk about it for fear of reprisal.

I’m not saying I agree with Guy or his dad, however, I do believe that people do get discriminated against for their mental illness.

Hell, I’ve been discriminated at work for being a navy wife!

As an aside (and not directed towards those involved in the case) cover-ups happen all the time. People are harassed and nothing is done. I’m surprised that Guy had the guts to take it as far as he did given the obvious toll.

Ok, Well JB, just read through the whole lot of this, how interesting.

First things first, I was in a job last year, I was forced out due to what I feel was my disability. Nothing major and I have since continued to fight it.

Now, I could go all out in taking them to court, but no, you know what I did, I got over it, sure it may come as a shock to be fired when you are 18, but fuck, its life, shit happens.

I now have more supportive people in my life than what that company could provide me.

So my advice to Glenn and Guy. Glenn, you are a dad, you are doing what is right by looking out for your son before anything else. I give you that.

But Guy, Grow some balls and get over it. It is not worth taking it further. You may have been hurt by your version of events. But other HAVE been hurt by what you have put them through, we know that for a fact now.

Anyhow thats my 2c, anyone know where I can get me some of these biscuits?

Yes Guides still sell biscuits – with chocolate on the back! Mmmm!!

My 2c?

It’s a volunteer organisation, they do their best, they don’t get paid for it. Their best is almost always better than not doing anything.

Don’t like it/them? Do something else.

Everyone is free.

Boys Brigade? link [ED – linked text does not go in the title field]
OMG!!!!!

CEBS?
See cebs-australia.com.au

Shudder.

Glenn,

As organisations such as scouts and guides, and other volunteer organisations aren’t covered by the act, I don’t really think there is any sort of duty to disclose to say one way or the other.

I would say most volunteer organisations try to accomodate everyone they can, whether or not they feel they are bound by law to do so, thats why they are volunteer organisation and not corporate entities doing it for money.

Realistically, if organisations like Scouts, Cadets, Guides, soccer teams, playgroup etc were all commercial entities there is no way that anyone could afford to be a member.

Think about how much a weekend camp would cost if you needed a ratio of 1 ‘supervisor’ per 6 kids, and each supervisor could only work 8 hours a day with 2 tea breaks and 1 lunch break – and at the rate of someone who is qualified to commercially care for children. At a very low guess i would say it would be at least $100 a day in labour costs per child, realistically it would be closer to the hourly rates charged for childcare.

Cheers Steve.

i love those girl guide buscuits. theyre yummy

Steve,

Thanks for that. So do you think that organisations should publish whether they consider themselves bound by legislation such as the Discrimination Act? Apparently Guides is quite open that they consider themselves exempt because of the significant pressures in having to comply, especially where recruiting leaders with disabilities is concerned.

Glenn

Beacon: I’d be glad to step away from the personalities, it was never my intention.

Mr Evil: could you ever buy them in Australia? i thought that was just a US thing?

Can you still buy Girl Guide biscuits? I haven’t seen them for ages.

Thanks Steve for that fantastic post. Its interesting that in the beginning Beacon was commenting on the ‘personalities to the issues’ and now wants to step away…

Hi Steve,

As you say, you are entitled to your opinion and I respect that. I therefore see no point in arguing the toss. No-one else who reads this is really going to know who is wrong and who is right – if indeed there is a wrong and a right. Can we please move away from the personalities to the issues? What do you say?

Glenn

well theres always the CEBS and boys brigade et al.

if they still exist.

i preferred the cadets, at least you could go to the smallbore range.

May I just say, this strand must be frightening off would-be cubs/scouts (and parents) in droves.

Glenn (Beacon) I have waited and considered this response, while you have sprayed lies in every direction and accusations at people I call friends, and just sticking to the people you have specifically mentioned here, I shall now retort.

Excerpt from Beacon above ——
As you say, you were out of things by the time it all came to a head. My wife and I were right there with Guy throughout it all. You are reflecting one of the many sides to this story and I respect your right to do so. You need to be sure, however, that you are not being misled. At least one of the others named in Guy’s complaint took information about Guy’s illness confided by him and manipulated it to spread particularly malicious and false rumours about Guy. Had the complaint gone forward, this would have come out in evidence from a number of the 25 witnesses we intended to call and from the 6cm of documents we intended to tender to the Tribunal.

Actually, I didn’t say anything about being out of it by the time it all came to a head, as you should know, I was involved heavily in the early stages of this whole situation, as a ‘Crew Elder’ as we liked to call them, I was involved at several levels. I was also involved with the discussions before this situation where GJ wanted other members of the crew removed.. actually both times.

I would suggest that you are either being misled yourself, or are (as you have accused Neville of doing) lying for your own benefit.

You obviously have no idea whatsoever about the abilities/disabilities of the members of Loxley past and present, this is shown by the fact that you would accuse them of discriminating against GJ for having Bi-Polar.

Another frivolous excerpt from beacon ——-
1. Know your limitations. You might have done volunteer work for Lifeline, but you hold no medical or other relevant qualifications. This means that you have no expertise upon which to offer either a diagnosis or a ‘professional’ opinion about Guy or any other person.
2. Keep confidences. When someone shares a confidence, respect it and don’t betray it. This includes not using it against either the person who confided in you or against others.
3. Don’t take information, whether confidential of otherwise, and twist it to suit your own purposes. This includes trying to involve others in your family vendettas or making up malicious stories.
4. Respect human diversity. The world is full of people who are different to you. They too have the right to health, peace, enjoyment of life and the pursuit of happiness. You need to learn this lesson well because Guy is certainly not the only person who believes you have hurt them because they are different.
5, When you stuff-up, own-up, don’t cover-up. If you had admitted your actions, shown remorse and apologised when this situation first arose, it would never have escalated to litigation. You, Guy and the others involved would have been spared more than two years of stress and grief and Scouts’ actions and reputation would not now be under a microscope.

1. Recommending that GJ seeks professional help from a qualified counsellor or GP does not count in any way shape or form as diagnosis.
2. & 3. these are events that did not happen, regardless of GJ likes to think they did, in fact he was the one playing members of the crew off against each other for his own purposes.
4. GJ’s only opinion on that, is if you didn’t see things his way, you were ‘closed minded and a marxist’.
5. There was no apology necessary, Amber did the best she could to help guy out, and without bringing more of GJ’s life in here, you know EXACTLY what I’m talking about.

Neville has done more for Scouting in the ACT than any member of your family, ever. Just because your sons participated in gang show, doesn’t mean they have contributed anything to the movement, have you forgotten that GS is funded by ‘THAT’ money that scouts ACT has? And although their contributions were valued there were other people happy to step into their shoes.

And since you know so much more about the financial position of scouts ACT, perhaps you can tell me how much of that 1.6 million dollars came from when camp cottermouth burnt down? And how much of the movements money should be spent on paying off YOU for the fictional discrimination events you are currently beating like a dead horse? Or how much of the ‘not nearly enough’ money to rebuild the camp should be spent on ‘investigating’ these fictional events.

GJ: I apologise for having to say the above, I know your illness is a serious matter, and no one has ever made light of it, however I can’t help but think that most of the ‘ill-effects’ that you are talking about (time off uni etc) were more related to your illness than your perceived persecution by scouts ACT. I did not want to come on here and rant like I have, however I cannot sit here and remain silent while your father bad mouthes and accuses all that don’t agree with HIS version of events.

BTW: like the newish band tracks off the website.. sounds a little too ‘electronic’ and sampled though.

Remember, this is just my opinion, it’s my right to have it.

Well Guy, I for one are proud of you. And with you 100% What ever the outcome, know I and alot of others think you have balls of steel for doing it. It could not be easy. Don’t let the bastards grind you down eh! Your a good bloke and a damn good musician. I saw directly what you went through. So to hell with them. People here are crapping on about whatever speaking with no basis for opinion (well most of them) so ill just finish with something that someone told me a little while ago; But those times will not be over
If we all remember what we used to do, It’s always so depressing when we’re not addressing the things we know we should.

Rock Out Buddy
-M

Beacon, don’t listen to 123. Opening oneself up to rogue commentary about whether or not somebody should/should not post on RA is for JB and the rest of the Admin team.

As somebody who has taken a firm stance on discrimination in the past, including Fernwood, and I don’t give a rats ass about ‘feeling that men leer at you’. It is not a sound basis for passing discriminatory practices.

I for one am tempted to start an all-male gym in response – but that’s for another conversation.

I have a new pertinent question – although it sits under my first;

Why, if you have such a strong legal platform to stand on did you lose ?

Was the decision (that as a vol. org they were not subject to the aforesaid laws) unlawful ?

If you could, can you keep the response down – I don’t have as much time to read through the tome of info you say back…

YAAAAAAAAAAWWNN!

Hi Onetwothree,

I regret that you seem to have missed my points yet again. For a start, I was not getting up Fernwood. It was established by Diana Williams, a person for whom I have the greatest respect, having been involved with her in the administration of a national sporting body some time ago where we both worked very hard to remove drugs from the sport. Diana’s concept of Fernwood is great and so is her marketing. I was simply making the point that Fernwood is upfront about where it stands and actually makes a positive out of it. I’m sorry that you feel that men leer at you, but Fernwood gyms are excellent facilities and I am sure you will be happy there.

As to me being ‘grandmaster’ of the debate, far from it. A few people on this thread have highlighted over the past couple of days that it might be time to move on. I would also like that to happen and therefore wish to move away from the personal issues in the debate to the ‘public policy’ issues. That way, we can, perhaps, have an open debate about the discrimination laws and how they should operate without the recriminations and personal issues which have crept in. I would have thought that was a fairly rational approach!

You are, however, partially correct about me sitting in front of my computer. But I am working on a rather lengthy report (I’m self-employed) and therefore, every so often, I just check the thread for a diversion. It helps me to break up the day and appreciate the points of view held by others. Again, it seems fairly rational to me!

at least debate has finally shone the light on that great scout mantra;
give, give, give dob, dob dob.

Beacon, on the subject of Fernwood, why are you getting up them? I go to Fernwood and its great to be in a gym where there aren’t guys who leer at you. Discrimination is everywhere, whether you like it or not. Every single person discrimiates on probably a daily basis. Anyone who says they don’t is a liar.

Gee, I’m sorry, didn’t realise that you were the grand master of this debate.
People are entitled to their opinion, you’re entitled to yours and I’m entitled to mine.
And this is exactly the place where people can express their opinion. If you can’t handle that then perhaps you shouldn’t be sitting at your computer watching every single word that passes through this site.
I have no intention of getting into a debate with you, as you don’t seem like a very rational person at the moment, even if you do use big words and long sentances.
I can’t see you getting anything positive from a debate about anything at the moment as your judgement is clouded by the pain you feel for your son. Perhaps you should turn off the computer and come back in a day when you have calmed down and are able to look upon this rationally, rather than trying to force your views down everyone’s throats.

The legislation is quite specific about what discrimination means in respect of the law. We are really talking about race, religion, gender, sexual persuasion and disabilities. Not who are your friends or your drinking companions as a given point in time.

The question of what constitutes a ‘voluntary’ organisation is also a very complex one. If you have any doubts, just spend some time reading through the various court cases from a range of jurisdictions. A good starting point would be the NSW case of Strong –v- HCF.

But what about organisations that claim to be voluntary? Should they be required by law to publish to their members and to the general public that they do not consider themselves bound by the discrimination laws? As I said, previously, Fernwood (while not a ‘voluntary’ organisation) does and actually makes a plus about it in its advertising. It is not so much a question or ‘apples and oranges’ as ‘fruit’.

Mind you, if voluntary organisations were required to publish their position, one could foresee a situation where some people would not join, while others might choose to leave. Some people (the Govt included) might think twice about making donations or grants to organisations that discriminate. Is it a good thing to know where an organisation stands before you seek to join it? I would have thought so, if for no other reason than it avoids unreasonable expectations and possible grief later.

On the question of ‘nice friends’ raised by onetwothree, as I previously said, in formal organisations the law requires that there be rules and procedures that must be followed before ‘kicking’ someone out. Those rules exist for everyone’s good. These are laws that even voluntary organisations are bound to follow and you can find them in the Associations Incorporation Act of 1991(as I recall). If there was no formal hearing in accordance with the rules of the organisation or if the person was not given the right to natural justice, then that might constitute a whole separate ground for litigation, but I don’t think anyone wants that, so what do you say we move on and stick with more general questions about how discrimination laws should be applied? Who know, we might all get something positive out of the debate!

Not for profit organisations are not bound by the same rules as for profit organisations because they are out there for the people. They’re not working for the almightly dollar, nor do most not for profit organisation have much money. You may think that $1.6million is a lot of money, and for an individual it is, but its not that much money for an organisation. Its actually quite a small amount to have in savings/rainy day funds (compared to for profit organisations). So saying that they have a lot of money to spare is not really accurate.
I am glad the legislation exists to keep people from sueing not for profit organisation, because they always try to do what’s in the best interest of the people as well as the organisation.

Scouts ACT and the people involved have conducted themselves in an exemplory manner. They have tried to sort this out through a number of different avenues, but unfortunately you and your son seem to want them to suffer forever.

Everyone is human, and everyone makes mistakes. Does that mean that if someone you are friends with doesn’t like you anymore and starts ignoring you and then you get kicked out of the friendship group, that you should take them to court and claim discrimination? Because that’s really what Scouts is. Its where friends come and do fun stuff together. And if someone isn’t a nice friend anymore, what more can be expected?

This site is all about discrimination – it’s one of the few pleasures we bigots can now enjoy.

Terubo hovers outside the pool-room door, cue in hand.

This site is all about discrimination – it’s one of the few pleasures we bigots can now enjoy.

everyone practices discrimination whether they admit it or not. i choose to have certain people as friends, other people i actively discourage.

next time you make a list of who to invite to your drinks session, remember the folks you dont invite are being discriminated against – for whatever reason.

I am old enough to remember the furore around women not being allowed in the ‘public’ bars of hotels and the feminist push for access.

Apples and Oranges, and quite a ridiculous reference to bring into all this.

Building a bridge and getting it over with is the best advice I’ve read in this thread so far.

onetwothree,

Just a quick one. If an incorporated association is unhappy with the conduct of one of its members, there are rules and procedures which need to be followed. Scouts ACT has such rules. Overall, the law also requires that the person who is the subject of this unhappiness is entitled to the right to natural justice and to procedural fairness when being dealt with.

We both know that was not the case with Guy. Some of the 25 witnesses who never got to give evidence would have attested to that and to what really went on behind the scenes.

Enough about Guy, Amber and the others. How about we move from the specific to the general in this debate? What do people think about the operation of discrimination laws? Should there be exemptions? If so, what and for whom? Should an organisation state up front that it does not adhere to the legislation or has sought exemption? For example, Fernwood Fitness Centres make a plus out of saying they don’t accept us blokes. Whether we like it or not, at least we know where they, and we, stand. I am old enough to remember the furore around women not being allowed in the ‘public’ bars of hotels and the feminist push for access. Are there situations where discrimination is appropriate? Is the Scouts example such a situation. What about Fernwood or the Canberra Club?

Glenn

The world is full of inequity and prejudices – based on whatever reason.

Walking away and retaining some degree of decorum and sanity would probably be the best thing to do.

If the CT does get onto it, perhaps they’ll try and get to the nitty-gritty of the case. The closest we’ve come to it so far, courtesy of onetwothree, is that someone was perceived to be “acting like a jerk”.
-What does that mean? Balancing teacups on his nose like a performing seal? Farting in tune with whatever passes for the Scouts anthem? More detail please…

i wonder if the canbera times will mine this seam for a story just like they did with the summernats thread… (see yesterdays CT)

To Peeved, there is, at least on my part, some sense of bitterness for the discriminatory manner in which individuals treated my son and for the manner in which Scouts treated him when he sought their assistance. It is hard not to be bitter, but we are moving on and I am sure that distance will add perspective while dulling the pain.

For those who crave the details, you may have to do without as there are laws relating to defamation which limit what can be said outside of court, especially about the individuals involved. Sorry.

To Vic Bitterman, I can’t say it any better than ‘Sammy’ said it this morning. My wife also has had serious health issues, so I have a personal measure for comparison. I hope that your wife triumphs over her adversity and that you both live long and healthy lives together.

To iluka, our family has received a lot from Scouts and we have given a lot back over at least three generations that I can count. We never treated them with contempt and didn’t really expect it from them. There are many fine people within both Scouts and Guides, especially those who work tirelessly at the grassroots level and we are proud to call some of them close friends. But we know of others who blacken the name of the movement and some of them are at more senior levels. We know there are people with disabilities existing happily within Scouts. We have spoken to some of them during the course of the past two years. We also know of others who were forced out because of their disabilities. We have spoken to some of them too. I only pray that some positives come out of this whole episode and that no other Scout suffers what Guy suffered. Am I wrong to hope that?

I’d like to put my two cents in as someone who knows the people involved on the side of Scouts ACT.

All the people involved in this case were friends. Then GJ started acting like a jerk. So they put up with him for a while and then he didn’t stop acting like a jerk so they stopped putting up with him. (I can’t claim to know anything about bi-polar, so don’t know whether it could have been that or not, but from their point of view, he was just being a jerk)

He was hurt by the fact that he got dumped and that he started losing friends. He thought he was losing friends within Scouts because of the people he has named in the case, and thought they were spreading malicious rumours about him, but in fact it was because he was being a jerk to everyone.

GJ – I have this advice for you, be the bigger man and grow up. Taking people to court does not give you closure. It just makes you think and agonise over it more and more. If you’re not at it for the money then you must be doing this to hurt the people involved. Well, believe me, they have been hurt. Going though court is not a fun thing, and to be so mean as to claim they have discriminated against you because of your bi-polar, or any other reason is ridiculous. You can’t force people to be your friends, and if you’re acting like a jerk they will not want to be around you. Its as simple as that and that’s what happened. Move on.

To GJ’s dad – (before you spout off about ‘having an adult discourse without purile comments or personal abuse.’)
There are two sides to every story. You only know your son’s side. I’m trying to point out another side. These people who are involved in the case have been hurt by GJ. This case will not end happily for either parties. Hopefully you won’t prolong your son’s and your agony by taking it further. Focus instead on putting GJ in positive environments so he can move on.

The moral is – everyone has been hurt. No one has been left unwounded. You’ve done your damage GJ, now is the time to focus on your healing, and let the others do the same.

Peeved, perfectly stated. Couldn’t have put it better myself.

So what you’ve found is that you went through the legitimate channels and based on that it was found that you did not have a case.

That you see it as hiding behind a technicality is your inability to accept that you do not have a case.

It is a frivolous waste of the courts time and unjustified angst caused to the people you have named.

That you are now embarking on a media shame campaign goes to show how unaccepting of your situation that you are.

Be ready for the counter claim.

As has been pointed out to you regular posters on this site have been known to flame anybody. If you don’t like it don’t push your agenda here.

Before you ask I haven’t had anything to do with scouts for 12 years and I had a great time when I was in.

Peeved

So beacon, you’re saying that my wife’s bowel cancer, which I pray and hope has been beaten, is the same sort of illness as your son’s schizophrenia?

It’s not the same — physiologically — but has the ability to severely debilitate and ultimately lead to death.

Agreed 100% Terubo. It’s kinda hard to be sympathetic with the scant amount of actual details on the matter.

It’s so sad to read this thread. The underlying sense of bitterness is overwhelming.
In my experience, when a situation deteriorates to this level, there is no possibility of a win for anyone, because both sides of the argument get so deeply entrenched in defending their position and saving face that they are unable to concede any wrong on their own part, or any positive behaviour on behalf of their opposite numbers. And because they are nurturing their hurts and pain, the fight for justice can easily become the essence of existence, with all other areas of life relegated to a secondary place.
Don’t get me wrong, I believe in standing up for your rights, and have much experience of the same with immediate connections to physical disability and bipolar, but it reads as though you are pursuing an ethereal ‘WIN’ where you are completely vindicated and the scouts are proven to be completely in the wrong, and there is buckley’s chance of that happening. Even without all the facts at my disposal, it’s pretty clear you’ve got a he said/ she said type of scenario, and you’ll never get an absolute conclusion to one of those.
The only way forward here is for you to forgive them for being stupid, wrong, hurtful, human, and then you’ll be able to forget about them and get on with your life.
Best of luck with that.

As was stated a while back, is it discrimination to ask someone to leave your Rover crew simply because you do not like them? Because they have proven themselves to be the sort of person the group does not want to associate with on a regular basis? Because their behaviour has been considered threatening towards members of your crew?

I do not know all the details of the case as i was not closely involved at the time. Unfortunately, as Guy and others have said, we all have to rely on Guy’s family’s strong and booming opinion on one side, and gossip and hearsay on the other. I choose not to take a very vocal stand because, as i said, i do not have all the facts and will not get involved in an argument with the Jones’s. (They have proven on several occasions to be a wordy force to be reckoned with, not least on this thread!) But i am currently involved with ACT Scouting and resent claims that they are discriminatory. I know them to be accepting of all kinds of people, and does this one isolated incident really indicate that they should be accused of discriminating against people with mental illnesses?

(And before Glenn starts accusing me of not knowing how bad it is to live with a mental illness, my older sister was diagnosed with schizophrenia when i was 16, and it was a traumatic experience for my family. It still continues to be difficult.)

The Rover Crue i am involved with has a member who has been diagnosed bi-polar. He manages his illness well, and many crew members are not even aware of his disease.

It is the individual who was judged here, the individual who was thrown out of Loxley and gossiped about. Claiming that this was all because of a disease seems a bit of a cop-out.

P.S. I find it interesting that Glenn has pointed out on two occasions all the things that Guy and his siblings “have done for Scouting in ACT”. Scouts has never been about how much you can do for the Movement and the accolades you should receive for it. Do you feel that Scouts owes Guy something for all those years of participation, as if Guy has done Scouts a great service by merely being a member? If anything, Guy owes it to Scouts to recognise that this was an isolated and blown-out-of-proportion case, and to drop it and move on.

Strike me Un-Australian, but I thought the discrimination laws they passed applied to pretty close to everything. They were that Draconian that Australia became flooded with the amount of driftwood left laying in the river to coin an analogy.

AFAIK the only thing the Scouts could discriminate on was Peodaphiles, on account of the Scouts is an organisation with young boys in uniform blah blah.

Speaking from within the Public Service, I can certainly speak of a number of people who know the discrimination act backwards, generally they are the least productive members of the team.

The most pertinent question I suppose is why do you want to remain with an organisation that wants to move you on ?

Surely you must consider that if your values and work effort are being disregarded or unappreciated, then it is more important to move on and let them see how well they do without you than remaining to litigate every moving shadow – again, another analogy.

I’d want to defend my kid just like you are, even if it is quixotic.

but once again you ascribe something which isnt true – presuming i have no experience of mental illness.

maybe this pattern of assumptions is part of teh reason you are where you are today.

evidence and opinion are very different.

In some respects it is like living with any serious illness , including illnesses such as cancer.

So beacon, you’re saying that my wife’s bowel cancer, which I pray and hope has been beaten, is the same sort of illness as your son’s schizophrenia?

The futility of this strand lies in the absence of any meaningful detail – it’s like chasing shadows. What precisely were the events that are being talked about – who did what to whom, when, where etc. And of course, why. There’s an awful lot of talking around the subject, but having read through all this stuff I’m none the wiser.
-And, despite appearances, I’m not entirely thick.

No offence taken. Perhaps I am a little naive, but it is human nature to share one’s opinion in the hope that at least others might see some merit in it. Thanks for your good wishes.

Glenn

You would be a little naive to come to this website and exepct everyone to agree with you.

Its also equally as useless to try and convince people to come around to your point of view.

This site proves very much that opinions are like bum holes. Everyone has one, and most stink.

Don’t take it personally. I know you have your side of the story but I am guessing that someone has an opposite opinion to you, and is equally as passionate. I hope it all works out for you and your son, but this site can be quite brutal towards opinion

Bonfire,

I sure you will understand that there is a certain rawness about the situation at this point in time. The action in the Discrimination Tribunal was part of the process of ‘moving on’ and an appeal may also well form part of the same process. We are moving on, just not as quickly as you might want. I have no knowledge of your personal situation, but you appear to see mental illness as being akin to a cut on the finger – just put on a bandaid and it will be better in a couple of days. Nothing could be further from the truth. In some respects it is like living with any serious illness , including illnesses such as cancer. You try to ease the suffering of the ill person and provide them with whatever support you can. But it takes a toll on everyone involved. Cures can take years, if at all.

You are correct in pointing out that the Tribunal might not have agreed with Guy. We are certainly aware of this possibility and it is a risk that anyone who steps into court must contemplate. What is concerning is that Guy was prevented from having his day in court because Scouts ACT hid behind a legal technicality, thus avoiding being accountable for their actions and inactions.

Being concerned that our son received some element of justice does not make us paranoid. It simply means that we care. You are entitled to your point of view and I am entitled to disagree with it. But I respect your right to air your views.

Amber,

No, I did not presume that ‘getitright’ was you. But I am glad that you are on the forum and prepared to participate in the debate.

I do not wish you physical or any other form of harm and regret that you have interpreted my comments that way. My point was that Guy has behaved in a civilised and lawful manner throughout this process, but you can’t assume that the next person you discriminate against will behave the same way. It is simply a point worth thinking about, not a wish or a threat.

If you are wondering what to do differently next time, perhaps I can offer a few suggestions:

1. Know your limitations. You might have done volunteer work for Lifeline, but you hold no medical or other relevant qualifications. This means that you have no expertise upon which to offer either a diagnosis or a ‘professional’ opinion about Guy or any other person.
2. Keep confidences. When someone shares a confidence, respect it and don’t betray it. This includes not using it against either the person who confided in you or against others.
3. Don’t take information, whether confidential of otherwise, and twist it to suit your own purposes. This includes trying to involve others in your family vendettas or making up malicious stories.
4. Respect human diversity. The world is full of people who are different to you. They too have the right to health, peace, enjoyment of life and the pursuit of happiness. You need to learn this lesson well because Guy is certainly not the only person who believes you have hurt them because they are different.
5, When you stuff-up, own-up, don’t cover-up. If you had admitted your actions, shown remorse and apologised when this situation first arose, it would never have escalated to litigation. You, Guy and the others involved would have been spared more than two years of stress and grief and Scouts’ actions and reputation would not now be under a microscope.

I sincerely hope that you think carefully about what I have said and see the positives in it.

Glenn Jones

“So much for having an adult discourse without purile comments or personal abuse.”

If you had not simply used this forum as another billboard for your ‘fight’ and had some familiarity at how it operates perhaps you would understand that everyone is entitled to their view and to have their say.

You want everyone to support your ‘right’ cause irregardless of how people – with no involvement with scouts in anyway – perceive it.

EVEN IF you had got scouts nto teh tribunal they may not have agreed with you.

Just move on I keep saying, but you wont. Its become part of your life, this great injustice, which you are using as a shield to avoid disussing things like how your son is going to interact in broader society with a mental illness.

” Still, it seems that at least one of those who aided and abetted Scouts has found her voice, even if she can’t spell or punctuate a sentence! Perhaps ‘getitright’ will unmask herself!”

Now you are just being paranoid.

Mr Jones – I assume from the specifics of your previous email that you believe I am the person posting under the name ‘Getitright’. Quite simply I am not, I have not posted until now. I have not felt I needed to.
I think the things that ‘Getitright’ posted were a little harsh and certainly not my style. As I believe you were writing your previous post to me assuming I was ‘Getitright’, I will respond to you.
The last two years have been very unfortunate indeed, there have been many lesions learned during that time. On that note, I do not know if I would have done things differently as I honesty believe that Loxley and I did not discriminate again Guy nor did I do any of the other things he is accusing me of.
Your comments ‘Other less civilised people have been known to slash car tyres, send threatening mail or worse, resort to physical violence.’ I find this very distressing that you would suggest that I deserve a violent act committed against me. This is certainly not a civilised comment.

So much for having an adult discourse without purile comments or personal abuse. Still, it seems that at least one of those who aided and abetted Scouts has found her voice, even if she can’t spell or punctuate a sentence! Perhaps ‘getitright’ will unmask herself!

For the benefit of ‘Tak’, spreading false and malicious rumours in order to force someone to leave an organisation because of their illness is discrimination and I hope it never happens to you, especially as, if it happens in Scouts, you will have no hope of redress as things currently stand.

For the benefit of ‘getitright’, it is a shame that you haven’t learned anything your past 2 years of suffering. It can’t have been comfortable having this hanging over your head all that time. But that fact that you have learned nothing probably means that you will keep mistreating others. You just want to hope that the next person doesn’t choose to do something more drastic than strongly worded responses and a complaint to the Discrimination Tribunal. Not everyone out there is quite as civilised as Guy about such things. Other less civilised people have been known to slash car tyres, send threatening mail or worse, resort to physical violence. You really have been fortunate that Guy was not such a person and sought his redress through the system. I sincerely hope that you wake up and learn from your mistakes! You may not be so lucky with the next person.

Beacon – ‘At least one of the others named in Guy’s complaint took information about Guy’s illness confided by him and manipulated it to spread particularly malicious and false rumours about Guy.’
How is this discrimination? If it happened at all.

All im hearing is wahwahwah. get over it you’re 24 and you dont need daddy to tell the bad man to stop.
maybe you wouldn’t need to write these ‘strongly’ worded responses if you had a thicker skin, which i would have thought an adult would have. i guess that 24 is only a few years away from 12 though. i think there are some serious issues with you personality that you need to address before you go on your witch hunt. walking around with that giant chip on your shoulder can’t be good for your posture.
maybe its time for some perspective on how much of this so called ‘damage’ was caused, not by the scouts, but by your self isolation and alienation of friends.
or maybe guy, get a girlfriend.

scan them in and set up your own website.

at present its just he said she said.

i still say better to just move on.

Hi Steve,

As you say, you were out of things by the time it all came to a head. My wife and I were right there with Guy throughout it all. You are reflecting one of the many sides to this story and I respect your right to do so. You need to be sure, however, that you are not being misled. At least one of the others named in Guy’s complaint took information about Guy’s illness confided by him and manipulated it to spread particularly malicious and false rumours about Guy. Had the complaint gone forward, this would have come out in evidence from a number of the 25 witnesses we intended to call and from the 6cm of documents we intended to tender to the Tribunal.

I think that Guy ended up going to the media because he was denied his right to reflect his side of the story – to present those documents and have those 25 witnesses attest to what really happened. Scouts ACT have hidden behind an exemption to the law while claiming to abide by the spirit of the very same law. If they had nothing to hide, they would have let Guy have his day in court.

Everyone has been hurt by this episode because Scouts ACT refused to act honourably and conduct ANY investigation of Guy’s complaint. I know this because I was there when Neville Tomkins told us that Scouts couldn’t afford the cost of the investigation. When the others involve wonder why it came to this, perhaps they should look in Neville Tomkins’ direction. He could have done something to resolve this matter, but he chose not to. Perhaps it is time for Mr Tomkins to fall on his sword for the good of Scouting.

As I said in an earlier post, we have been a Scouting and Guiding family for decades. We have been deeply saddened by Neville Tomkins’ ‘handling’ of this matter and we certainly believe the best thing he could offer Scouts in the way of healing this rift is his resignation.

My wife and I are proud of our son and of all the things that he and his sibling have done for Scouts, including highlighting this situation. Perhaps the best thing that can come of this whole situation is that Scouts ACT amends its Constitution to adopt the Discrimination Act and ensures in the future that it deals with its members’ concerns in an open, fair and timely fashion.

Rgds – Glenn Jones

Steve,

I will contact you at some point to discuss your comments. You have made some fair observations and it is clear that you are trying very hard to be impartial, but as much of this happened well after your departure from Rovers there is still much that you do not know. You have been left to filled the gaps only with what you have heard from the other side.

Hi Guys,

Just thought i would wade into this one a bit.. firstly i’ll let you all know a little about me.

I was crew leader of loxley rover crew for a couple of years, and was assistant crew leader for one or two before

that.

I am not one of the individuals named in the case, I do however know all the individuals named in the case.

I was not the crew leader at the time that GJ left.

Anything I put here is purely my opinion, and has nothing to do with the case currently.

I have no involvement with any of the current proceedings, however I have offered to be a witness should this matter

ever be before a court/tribunal.

I was in scouting from age 8-18 then 19-26 (with loxley) I am currently 29 and have no membership in the

organisation currently.

I have known Guy for what I consider to be a very long period of time, and although I consider at least some of the

people named in this case to be my friends, I don’t really hold anything against Guy.

I’ll get a few of my broader opinions out of the way right now.

To the best of my knowledge, neither scouts ACT or anyone currently involved discriminated against GJ, not on the

basis of his illness, or any other reason.

I think that Scouts ACT did the best that could reasonably be expected of a non-profit organisation to investigate

all complaints made by GJ.

As I said, I have known GJ for a long time, I find it very sad that he has been affected by this condition, I fondly

remember activities within scouting, and as friends outside scouting, however that was a long time ago, as I look

back I guess it was his illness starting to affect him, but he seemed to transform from the outgoing ” I’m gonna go

ride down that” person that he was, to the very withdrawn, paranoid, emotional and defensive adult that he became.

In the later years, it always seemed that if you weren’t ‘with’ him you were ‘against’ him..

He seemed to push away many of the friends around him, and indeed I haven’t really heard anything from him in years,

I guess thats because at some point we were all forced to ‘pick sides’ regardless of our involvement.

Even though it was quite a long time ago, I cannot agree with GJ’s version of events, and his choice to pursue this

through the channels he has, baffles me. I cannot understand what he is chasing, and sadly one of the only things I

can think of is to punish the people that have been named in the complaint for being ‘against’ him, or for other

reasons, which out of respect for GJ and our friendship that was, I won’t mention here.

I don’t really think he’s doing it for money, I don’t really think he’s doing it to ‘punish’ those involved, the

only real thought I have is that he’s still trying to prove that he’s right.. right about what? i think thats a

question that might have been forgotten long ago, but he just wants to prove he’s right.

And although I believe that GJ ‘knows’ he is right, and ‘knows’ he was discriminated against, it really upsets me

inside that at least in my opinion, its just not true.

This whole affair is having a massive effect on the lives of those named in the complaint, and for every thing that

GJ has listed as an effect for him, I can think of the simular effects its having on the others involved.

Another thing that baffles me is the lengths he’s going to, to publicise this case, and to almost try and win over

the public with one side of the story, in a sort of ‘trial by media’ what about the rights of those proud to be in

scouting, and the effect it must be having on all the current members who are proud to wear the uniform. They will

never get a chance to clear the movements image.

Thats about all I have to say about that, to those who don’t agree with me, thats okay, we are all entitled to our

opinions, and thats all I have stated here, my opinion, please respect it as that.

sub-note – to Beacon: When GJ first started showing signs of being ill, it was some of the people he’s now accusing

that supported, and were generally there for him in his hours of need, and indeed his darkest hours, you need to

know that.

No guy, I have nothing to do with ACT scouts. My last interaction with scouts was in the late 70’s and early 80’s as a lad growing up in Victoria.

I hope you stay on and enjoy the rest of The RiotACT, johnboy has a wonderful forum here. I trust you won’t just use this as a soapbox for your axe that needs grinding and then leave.

Guy, just checking you’re aware Vic and vg are two different people.

It’s quite obvious Vic that you are close to Scouts ACT – don’t you think that your participation in this discussion would be more valuable if you identified yourself? Your comments give the appearance that you are clearly unhappy with me – why is that? Perhaps because bringing media attention to the shonky practices of Scouts ACT have rocked the ‘sanctity’ of the movement? Or perhaps because you are personally involved?

For your benefit, and in keeping with my earlier statement that I have nothing to hide, I will answer your questions:

An apology? Yes that would be nice, I haven’t had one of those yet. Although if Scouts ACT were to come out tomorrow and apologise I would not rate their sincerity very highly – they’ve already demonstrated their tendency to rely on dishonesty.

Some money? As mentioned above any compensation I may be entitled to is not for me to decide. Money is not what I’m after.

Some friends? I still have many friends from Scouting who have stood by me throughout this ordeal, as well as many friends in my day to day life who have also been very supportive. I’m not into the practice of taking legal action to make people like me, and even if I was I don’t think it would be very effective. The Scouting movement is no longer one I wish to be associated with.

To teach someone a lesson? Punishment is not my role. I merely wish to see people held accountable for their actions, and people treated fairly regardless of what differences they may have. What’s the point of having a Discrimination Act if no one is held to account for breaching it? You gain a much clearer perspective on the importance of law when you’ve been made a victim.

So what did you want at the end of all of this Guy? An apology? Some money? Some friends? To teach some people a lesson?

Serious question mate.

I can understand, vg, how you may come to that conclusion from the somewhat fragmented story on WIN news, but there is a bit more to it than that.

It is within the Tribunal’s powers to award damages where it sees appropriate, and to determine how much that should be. Making a complaint to the Discrimination Tribunal is, however, not the same as lodging a civil lawsuit in the Supreme Court for, say, defamation. Unlike ‘sueing’ someone, it does not cost anything to lodge a complaint at the tribunal, though the complaint will in most cases be ‘investigated’ by the Discrimination Commissioner at the Human Rights Office first. There are express provisions for how this process is to be conducted in the Discrimination Act. If you were to research the kinds of payout figures which typically come out of the tribunal you would find that they rarely exceed three figures.

The question I was asked by Meryn Cooper when interviewed for WIN News was, “Isn’t this really just a last-minute cash grab?” I responded by explaining that, should I have hypothetically moved past the strikeout application and into a hearing, and all respondents were found to have discriminated against me, that I would have no idea what amount of compensation (if any) I would have been entitled to – thus making it pretty hard to justify pursuing the matter as a ‘cash grab’. I went on to point out that the considerable amount of very stressful work I have put in throughout this process to gather evidence (with great resistance from Scouts ACT), examine legislation and seek advice would not be worth any amount of money that the tribunal would conceivably award if it was pursued for that purpose. Remember – I do not have legal representation, and have only recently managed to tee up some humble pro-bono advice.

The reason I pursued the matter is its moral principles – that those who perpetrated discrimination and abuse should be held accountable, and that no one should ever be able to discriminate in this way against anyone else.

I will admit that I have suffered financially because of the effect on my health of the behaviour of Scouts ACT and some of its members. I had to quit my job and defer from university for six months (meaning I was also deferring my career for six months). Had I not been abused and stripped of my dignity such that I was I may well have ‘skimmed the surface’ as they say (there’s plenty of literature around on mental illness which details the way that the development of an illness can be influenced by the treatment the person experiences from those around). As such, I would happily accept whatever compensation came my way. But compensation was not a factor in my decision to make my complaint, nor will it be a factor in my decision on whether to appeal to the Supreme Court, save from recovering my costs.

“Guy didn’t sue anyone”

If that was the case was was he talking about monetary compensation (specifically that he couldn’t put an amount of money on it) on WIN News?

I’m not unsympathetic to your cause, but having been through the legal system a few times I feel we’re not hearing both sides of the story

No. But it would seem that there is a lot of disinformation out there.

So no failed romances amongst the individuals being dragged through the courts?

Just to clarify. Guy didn’t sue anyone. He complained to the Tribunal about the individuals concerned on the basis that they ‘aided & abetted’ Scouts ACT in its discrimination against him. This is provided for in the legislation. Unfortunately, the Tribunal determined that if the complaint failed against Scouts because the organisation was exempt from the legislation, then the complaints against the individuals also failed. The advice we have received is that the Tribunal also erred in this finding. Consequently, any appeal to the Supreme Court would, as a matter of course, also include the individuals as well as Scouts ACT.

Getting somehwat office the specific topic, JB asked “Is it discrimination to make someone unwelcome if you just don’t like them?”

The answer, of course, is yes but,as I think has been commented on above, it’s not that discrimination is absent in this only that the discrimination is not unlawful.

We all exercise (lawful) discrimination on a daily basis, excluding from our social circles those that fail to meet our own personal standards, whether they be based on race, disability, gender, sexual preference, boonerism, employment as ACTION bus drivers or just wilful neglect of soap.

i dont think anyones abusing him in this forum.

yet.

but riotact is like Thunderdome, if he cant hack it he shouldnt enter.

my advice would be to just Move On.

youll spend too much energy and passion on this and you wont ‘win’.

Guy, Beacon,

Just curious why you also sued individual members of the Rover crew?

I am Guy’s father. His mother and I have supported him throughout his illness and his attempts to gain some element of justice from Scouts ACT. Guy’s complaint was genuine and legitimate. It is about discrimination on the basis of illness. I would therefore ask that discussion stay on-topic and that purile comments and sexual innuendoes be omitted.

Yes, there are always more than one side to every story. It is just that, as things currently stand, the court and the public will never get to hear the evidence of either side in this matter. Scouts ACT can make all the claims they like about being inclusionary, but while ever they seek to hide behind the ‘voluntary body’ exemption in the Discrimination Act, those claims will continue to ring hollow. If Scouts ACT had nothing to hide, then they would have let the matter go forward. After all, it was costing Scouts nothing as they had pro bono legal representation from one of their own. We know from bitter experience, however, that Scouts ACT had a lot to hide.

As Guy points out in his posting, the press release of Scouts ACT was full of lies. For example, I was present witg Guy at the so-called mediation, as it was I who sought to try and work things out through mediation in the first place. But for a mediation to work, both parties have to participate in good faith. We came in good faith, only to subsequently discover that we had been told lies and that Scouts had never intended to take any action to address Guy’s situation.

For the record, I have never been a Scout. But my wife and her family have been involved with both Scouts and Guides over a number of generations. Guy and our other children have given countless hours to Scouts and Guides, including participating in numerous activities, including a significant number of Gang Shows and the like. Our family had great faith in the Scouting Movement, but that faith has been dashed by the actions of Scouts ACT management and their decision to hide behind a legal technicality in order to avoid being judged for their actions and inactions.

In preparing our case for the Discrimination Tribunal, we undertook significant research into Scouts ACT and its management. It was during this research that we found out that, rather than being unable to afford to conduct an investigation into Guy’s complaint as Neville Tomkins claimed during the ‘mediation’, Scouts ACT actually has $1.6 million in investments, including $1.2 million in short-term deposits. All of this seems to have been hidden from the general membership. Our local Scouting group had been considering raising money to upgrade their toilets as they are currently unserviceable. The committee were reluctant to fund-raise because of concerns that Scouts ACT would come in over the top and take the funds raised off the local group. It seems they should have started fund raising by asking Scouts ACT for a grant!

Scouts ACT’s management has a lot to answer for and it is about time that the grassroots started asking the questions. With this in mind, it is worth remembering that evil triumphs when the good remain silent.

For our part, we are seriously examining the prospects of a Supreme Court appeal. Magistrates get things wrong all the time. That is why we have avenues of appeal to superior courts. Who knows, Guy might yet get his day in court and the public might get its chance to lift the rock and bring Scouts ACT out into the light of day.

I have one last request. If you disagree with Guy’s position, I still respect your right to say so. I only ask that you show Guy the respect he has earned in standing up for himself by not trivialising his situation or levelling abuse at him.

There’s always two sides to the story!

Good luck Guy with your decision on whether to take it further.

It’s a pity that seeking justice in this country is often beyond the financial reach of the ordinary citizen.

I thought the Courts would have been the best place to try the matter

Geez Thumper, are you sure you know me 😉 I don’t think I’m hard working unless its running my beloved football club!

guy it is a pity you had a bad experience with scouts.
many moons ago i was in venturers and they were very tolerant and inclusive.

Hi Pandy,

I am considering an appeal to the Supreme Court, but will need to weigh up the costs and practicalities of doing so. It’s much easier said than done!

Guy Jones

Well take it to the Supreme court then.

As these forums have a propensity to degenerate into mindless destructive gossip I feel that I should personally comment here.

There was much that the media did not report. Firstly, my complaint was not examined by the tribunal, merely the application to strike it out (see today’s Canberra Times). Mr Lalor’s unfortunate use of the words ‘lacking in substance’ refer to his decision that Scouts ACT is a voluntary body and no complaint against them could be considered substantial.

Neville Tomkins’ assertion to the media that Scouts have a zero tolerance to discrimination is a lie. My complaint was never examined or investigated by Scouts ACT, and the ‘mediation’ which Mr Tomkins speaks of was a meeting at which he simply turned up to state that Scouts had no intention of investigating my complaint because it was ‘too expensive’ – the fact that a high profile ‘mediator’ was present sitting silently in her seat does not make this a legitimate attempt to address my complaint, especially when it is quite clear from Scouts ACT’s financial reports that they were (and still are) in a very good financial position to conduct an independent investigation.

Meanwhile people who had propagated baseless, false, malicious and slanderous rumours about me (preventing me from being able to return due to the untenable environment created, remember I was suffering from severe depression) were able to gain promotion within the movement with Mr Tomkins’ full blessing.

In addition to the above is the false information provided to the tribunal in support of their strikeout application. Scouts ACT stated in their original strikeout application that they, “do not give grants, loans, credit or finance to our members.” After I provided official policy documents and written statements from members to the tribunal as conclusive evidence that they do indeed give grants, loans and credit, Scouts ACT ammended their application to say they give ‘small grants’, and openly admitted the above in the tribunal. Despite the legislation stating that a voluntary body does not;
– provide grants, loans, credit or finance to its members
Mr Lalor chose to overlook Scouts ACT’s activities in this regard.

I have a very strong case, including hundreds of pages of emails, letters and other documentary evidence as well as 25 witnesses, which all demonstrates that I was abusively discriminated against by people in Loxley Rover Crew, people in Scouts ACT’s management (including Mr Tomkins) and people in other organisations. I agree that the majority of people involved in grassroots Scouting in the ACT have no problem in this regard – but to use this as some sort of evidence that my complaint is ‘bullshitty’ is a bit unreasonable.

Unlike the management of Scouts ACT I have absolutely nothing at all to hide, and I have documentary evidence to support all of my claims. I am more than happy to discuss with anyone who is interested.

Guy Jones

id have to disagree jb – we had a scout leader who was a merciless bully. he used to call chubby kids jelly belly, berate kids who fell behind on hikes etc. i coudl go on but you get the picture.

and the blue polo shirt the scouts wear these days is fucking ugly. a scarf with a polo shirt ?

19th Canberra, johnboy? My this is a small world.

I found that group started well, but then it began to play ‘bungee leader’ and when I left it had lost its way. Pity really.

If it was simply the issue of standing, then thats all he would have ruled on. Issues of substance only relate to evidentiary value in this instance I’d suggest

19th Canberra, but I’ll concede it was long ago.

Well Johnboy you must have went to a different troop than I.

Principles of relevance can also be substantive. They probably did look at the facts, but could not make a ruling – it was dismissed due to the status of the scouting body. However perhaps there’s a real lawyer out there? I am just a law student.

I’d suggest it did if the magistrate said the application lacked substance

Growling Ferret, it probably didn’t even get as far as assessing his character or even what his claim about discrimination was. The ABC report says the Scouting body’s status as a voluntary body means it is not subject to discrimination laws, therefore the tribunal cannot even give a ruling. Courts can’t enforce a right if it doesn’t apply or is outside their particular scope. It would be different if he made the claim against a company, as differing rules apply there.

I’m amazed at such a common sense decision by our judiciary. May there be much more to follow in 2007.

Maybe the shock got him to straighten up and fly right?

Speaking as an ex-patrol leader I have to say the scouts bend over backwards in my experience to accommodate people of all different stripes, kinks, and disabilities.

Scouts have always seemed to me a version of Masonism. “othere” are not welcome. Well wogs are not.

I have worked closely with Guy the last 18 months or so, and until I read about his condition in the paper, I had no idea. I have not approached him about the issue, and probably wont, but I would like to defend him.

He managed his condition to a level that those who worked around him would not/did not know unless they are/were told. He’s a bloody hard worker in a technical environment, and has just been accepted into a Commonwealth Graduate program. I dont know what the politics behind the Scouts decision are, but as far as I’m concerned, if the legit reason to exclude his was made because of his disorder, it failed to take into consideration the exemplary (from what I have seen) character of the bloke…

Let’s say this person has a legitimate reason for being deregistered, and also happens to have bi-polar. It’s easy for him to say it’s because of the bi-polar when, in fact, it could be another reason. (Like kids I teach saying “You don’t like me because I’m black”. “No, I don’t like you because you’re a lazy, manipulative brat”).

I wonder what that reason could be …

I wonder if Seven-storey will come out in support of the guy

if only the guy had said he was a boy-fondler, the scouts would have never got rid of him.

The Scouts movement says they in fact tried to help the guy out but he knocked it back.

If, indeed, he said the claim lacked substance, I’m guessing he wasn’t just referring to the fact the legislation doesn’t affect a voluntary group. He could have simply just said the legislation doesn’t affect the Scouts. saying it lacked substance, to me, makes the claim sound a little, shall we say, bullshitty.