Introduction by Dee McLachlan
I’ve been in South Africa, away from Australia, for about six weeks. Riding through small towns, mountain passes in the Western Cape, I’ve felt the contrast between the two places I know best more sharply than ever: the colonial outpost at the Cape and the penal colony down under.
I rode my motorbike into De Hel, a community that remained isolated for generations. Places like that expose history and have made me think about how a country’s beginnings live on in its people.
Both South Africa and Australia were shaped by British rule, but the colonies served different ambitions. The Cape was a strategic foothold on the route east. Australia became a prison an ocean away. In both places, Indigenous peoples paid the price as their lands and lives were upended.
I sometimes think a country carries the DNA of its beginnings — the habits and attitudes passed down through generations and institutions. In Australia, I still see the brutality of the penal colony in the cruelty of its bureaucracy. I have spent nearly a decade confronting it through the child “protection” system and written about it in The Child Protection Racket. When I describe those cases to people here in South Africa, they are gobsmacked.
There is a sickness in Australia’s bureaucracy. No minister, commissioner or oversight body has the will to cure it. The child “protection” system shows how deeply that cruelty can take hold, and how hard it is for a citizen to challenge it.
My friend Matilda Bawden is doing just that. She is bravely challenging a system that treats dissent and whistleblowing as threats. Her account below shows what happens when the bodies meant to provide a remedy become part of the dead end.
The Anatomy of a Bureaucratic Dead End: How South Australia’s Integrity Machine Protects Itself
By Matilda Bawden (Post here)
When public administration turns hostile against a citizen, ordinary Australians are told to rely on the system. Ministers, departments and government websites assure us that independent oversight bodies exist to curb administrative overreach, investigate misconduct and hold executive officers accountable.
Today, within the span of six hours, that comforting myth was dismantled in black and white.
To understand how the machinery of institutional avoidance functions, one must first examine what happens when an independent advocate refuses to accept a manufactured, multi-agency dossier.
In April 2026, following exhaustive statutory checks, the Department of Human Services (DHS) Central Assessment Unit (CAU) formally cleared me to work with children. Less than four months later, without a single intermediate criminal charge, arrest, or child-protection report, the assessment was abruptly reopened. By September, a final Prohibition Notice was handed down.
The primary allegations concerning two children – unsubstantiated claims dating as far back as twelve years to 2014 – were formally conceded by the Department itself as carrying zero adverse weight. Instead, the State resorted to assessing my political and philosophical disposition, citing in writing that my advocacy arose in the context of a worldview that presents alternative ideas and reasoning that question or challenge the status quo. For good measure, they cited an institutional sentiment of collective unease, stitched together from uncharged police occurrence logs, contentious adult guardianship proceedings in SACAT, and historical healthcare complaints.
When an executive screening unit weaponises statutory child-protection legislation to penalise ideological dissent and contentious adult advocacy, it ceases to be a screening body. It becomes a coercive political instrument.
Faced with coordinated dossier-building across six separate state entities – DHS, the Department for Child Protection, the Adult Safeguarding Unit, the Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner, SA Police and the SACAT Registry – I engaged the formal integrity channels. Earlier today, a comprehensive, evidence-backed complaint alleging systemic maladministration and suspected abuse of public office was formally transmitted to the Office for Public Integrity. Concurrently, statutory notice was delivered to the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment, and Ombudsman SA.
The evidence tendered was detailed: dates, agency references, statutory breaches, and the written admission by the State that a citizen’s “worldview” was being evaluated for questioning “the status quo” which caused the government to”collective unease”.
The response from Ombudsman SA arrived at 3:50 PM. It did not request further particulars. It did not seek to inspect the primary documentation. It took the intake desk mere minutes to produce file reference 2026/06208 and slam the door shut.
The rationale was a masterclass in bureaucratic deflection. First, because the complaint had been formally addressed to the OPI with the Ombudsman copied in, the office announced the transmission would be treated as being for information only. Second, they defaulted to the standard escape hatch: the Ombudsman ordinarily does not investigate matters where a citizen possesses an alternative legal right of review, pointing me politely toward the tribunal system and suggesting I call a free legal advice helpline.
This matter will now be closed, the email concluded. It carried the obligatory statutory disclaimer warning that disclosing the contents of their refusal could constitute an offence under the Ombudsman Act.
This is the reality of administrative oversight in South Australia. The system functions as a circular conveyor belt designed to exhaust the individual:
- The department abuses its statutory powers to construct a retrospective file.
- The oversight body refuses to intervene because the tribunal exists.
- The tribunal is inundated with Crown-backed administrative delay.
- The citizen is left bearing the immense emotional, professional, and financial cost of proving their innocence against amorphous, unparticularised claims.
A refusal to investigate is not an exoneration of the State; it is primary evidence of institutional paralysis. When an oversight agency can look at a government instrument explicitly penalising a citizen’s worldview and close the file before the close of business, the complaints architecture is broken.
The gatekeepers have made their choice. They have declined to look behind the curtain, but every closure, every deflection, and every stamped refusal is being logged, timestamped, and preserved – for the next Royal Commission or inquiry into ICAC, and for the next chest-beating speech on the floor of Parliament when the Premier or Attorney General once again declare how deeply they value the courageous work of whistleblowers in keeping government honest, accountable and transparent, because when the next scandal finally forces an inquiry, nobody should be permitted to stand in Parliament and say: “We didn’t know.”
The venue now shifts squarely to the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Under Section 40, the Tribunal possesses the power to compel the production of unredacted files, transmission headers, and internal drafting notes.
The integrity bodies may prefer to look the other way, but when the subpoenas are answered, the architects of this scheme will have to explain their actions on the public record. The paper trail does not disappear simply because an intake officer marked it closed.
Indeed Dee,
But how to get a normie to understand reality
They turn off, either because they could not give a stuff or know, but refuse to get off their assss in the face of so many genuine reports of the evil that surrounds their little world.
It is the same story in the US and apparently world wide reaching the highest social classes of psycho control freaks and incomprehensible degrees of primitive evil.
Oh well, the normies here will continue to ignore it with a couple of brave exceptions.
So AGAIN, I BRING TO NOTICE REPORTS THAT WILL Be ignored BY THOSE WHO PRESENT AS HUMAN BEINGS.
“Judy Byington 107 Obama HRC – Intel update 28/926—- tribunals will be televised”
At where cowards fear to tread:
http://www.beforeitsnews.com – people powered news for those who have the backbone to look, know and care.
All is on record here, pity those who realise in due course their complicity IN SILENCE AND DENIAL because they would not LOOK.
Start, just listen and if you do not weep, you are a callous arsehole.
617
WELL DECIDE!
You lot!
Want to remain as a stupid dumb hostage?
Well, tell your children what their future is.
Then do not whinge when they spit on your grave and have your headstone engraved; “here lies a dumb idiot. F U”!
707
Dee,
Thanks for always saying as it is.
What’s happened staggers belief.
All children didn’t deserve this.
Now they erase truth by erasing us,
the real Aussies who built this nation.
Penal colony, me feels it’s some thing far worse.
Now digital, hearing and watching every move we make. Cutting of umbilical cord if we complain.
Never in my worst nightmares… a technocracy enslaving all. The love I have for this country and all children cannot be changed.
Well change it!
Then Get off your arse
847
Ned,
I never got paid for sitting or talking for over 50 years. Role was making things, no time for gossip, with machines and tools installing relative to job at hand. Having to work within 0mm, there was no time for bs, after hours recovering for next day. Been broken mentally and physically for 3 years, please don’t tell me to get of backside.
Pardon error, meant off instead of.
Thanks Ant and Ned.
Bless you for sharing my story! It means a lot to me to know I’m not alone in this fight!
Over the years on this site I have described the many conflicts that I’ve had with the corruption in Australian institutions. There is NOT one institution that I have any confidence in. You cannot negotiate with liars. You cannot expect fairness from institutions/individuals that are inherently unfair.
I look forward to the COLLAPSE of the present Australian system. Those petty bureaucrats do not have any substance as human beings, they have no real life skills, they are totally reliant on the system to provide their way of life.
When the system collapses their paydays will be composed of worthless pieces of paper. They will be forced to survive in a real economy. I refuse to support such unworthy POS, they can all dry up and blow away. – If there is violence that is put upon them, I will applaud it. I have enough popcorn stashed away that I can sit back for years and enjoy the show.
Brill-yantay, Ms Bawden, brill-yantay!
I’m thinking you could apply to the Melbourne Fringe (Adelaide Fringe is now “by invitation only”). How about you ask other Firee’s to gather and together you dance like in Chorus Line,
(I hope you don’t think I’m being sarcastic. This is NOT sarcasm.) The Ombudsman could also appear in the show, to stop the dancers from trying out — cuz it’s ILLEGAL to divulge anything, you know.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQSAc4-QlZo
Last Great Reset Survivors Left the Cities Will You?
Adapt 2030
David Dubyne
Something ancient is repeating and this time it has a name that looks a lot like AI. In this conversation, Cindy and Mike of Evolutionary Energy Arts connect biblical “Ai” (heap of ruins) with vanished grid cities in the deserts, collapsing magnetic poles, data-center water grabs, programmed frequencies in your tap water and a non-human control systems. Tighter technocratic cage or a consciousness split into a higher organic timelines?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V211a4W4ZCE
0:00 Ancient clue: the town of Ai
1:07 Hostile invasion setting up colonies
6:05 Why the change is ultimately a great thing
7:25 Caterpillar liquefaction — we’re in it
10:21 Magnetic fields changing blood and brain
19:12 The fake “AI race” used on every continent
23:23 Data centers as siege engines
26:31 Bible, mythology, and the same construct
35:38 Previous data-center civilizations in the deserts
49:15 Destructured water released downstream
53:16 Relearn prayer to restructure food and water
1:15:07 How to stay outside the technocracy grid
Australia does not own its money supply – the RBA, therefore it is not a sovereign country. Politicians re-present the money power, not the Australian people. Continual immigration of tax payers is needed to keep up with the RBA’s interest bill.
BANKS CONTROL GOVERNMENTS
“I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire*, and I control the British money supply.” – Nathan Mayer Rothschild
Whoever controls credit, controls policy, and with it, power over and above the heads of Government. ( The ABC of Social Credit , page 25, by E.S. Holter; Heritage Bookshops).
Richard McKenna, former president of the Midlands Bank of England said, “Those that create and issue the money and credit, direct the policies of Government and hold in their hands the destiny of the people” ( NDCC , page 41).
Once a Government is in debt to the bankers it is at their mercy. A frightening example of this was cited by the London Financial Times in 1921, which revealed that … “Half a dozen men at the top of The Big Five Banks could upset the whole fabric of Government finance by refraining from renewing Treasury Bills.” ( NDCC , page 41).
The RBA which issues Australian money as an interest bearing debt is a foreign owned corporation and is not a documented part of the Australian government – neither is the ATO.
Section 44 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1901 – says
“Any person who:
is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power; or
is attainted of treason, or has been convicted and is under sentence, or subject to be sentenced, for any offence punishable under the law of the Commonwealth or of a State by imprisonment for one year or longer; or
is an undischarged bankrupt or insolvent; or
holds any office of profit under the Crown, or any pension payable during the pleasure of the Crown out of any of the revenues of the Commonwealth: or
has any direct or indirect pecuniary interest in any agreement with the Public Service of the Commonwealth otherwise than as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company consisting of more than twenty-five persons;
shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives…………………….”
‘“We didn’t know.”’
Willful ignorance, maybe an excuse to the chosen ones hiding behind commissioners and their self imposed term’s of reference
But who are ‘we’, well we could start with “the28”
But how can we know, well the stench always precedes a fox before it doubles down/back
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyam_Maher
he has a lot on his plate, not sure what sausage rolls are code for