You are here:   Forums
Register   |  Login
etter_Future_Ahead_01

Welcome to the Crimes Against Fathers Forums

Minimize
 
ForumForumNews from Freed...News from Freed...News Parent ForumNews Parent ForumNews From Rober...News From Rober...APS fraud in CSAAPS fraud in CSA
Previous Previous
 
Next Next
New Post
 3/19/2013 12:06 AM
 

-----Original Message-----
From: lfant@terrorbyte.com.au [mailto:lfant@terrorbyte.com.au]
Sent: 16 January 2013 01:52
To: Jenny Macklin; senator.Carr@aph.gov.au
Cc: 
Subject: APS fraud in CSA


Honourable Jenny Macklin

And

Honourable Kim Carr

And

Other Parliamentary Members cc

And Community Members Bcc

In the current musings that $34 per day New Start Allowance (pension) is inadequate to survive on and our previous complaint against CSA and SSAT unlawfully plundering that down to as little as $14.14 per day for father Child Support Payers.  Solely on the gender of fatherhood and not making sincere and independent investigations on behalf of The Commonwealth Government and instead advocating solely the mother’s frequent false allegations are infallibly correct to be wholly relied upon by the Commonwealth Government .  Is the feminist’s template unlawfully within Government Administration ensuring that ‘women win’.

Further to our previous complaint to you supported by the primary employee code of conduct is below specifically their duty of being alert and preventing fraud.  Clearly when a Public Servant does no follow the decree of The Legislature they are in breach of the APS Code of Conduct as well as in instances of this ‘manipulative accounting’ using the Commonwealth System then in most instances it is a prosecutable criminal matter.  In this case of CSA and SSAT it does not derive any staff a financial gain but fulfills their misandary gender based ‘ideological’ satisfaction.  By fraudulent ‘overcharge’ that unlawfully financially deprives the father because of his gender to unlawfully ‘gift’ the mother because of her gender.

When the template of The Legislature is correctly followed neither gender preferences nor overcharges occur.  When pensions as in this complaint are plundered in the way of CSA and SSAT do then there is no question these officers are not complying with the law and their APS Code of Conduct.

Robert E Kennedy      Coordinator     NT Office Status of Family, PO Box 988, Palmerston, NT 0831.      Phone 08 8932 3339

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Extract below is from APS Code of Code of Conduct in which APS personnel are tutored in at least each two years specifically on fraud that causes a knowledge resource that should be preventing the grounds for this complaint.

Preventing, investigating and prosecuting fraud

Fraud is defined by the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines 2002 as 'dishonestly obtaining a benefit [both tangible and intangible] by deception or other means'. The Guidelines apply to all agencies covered by the FMA Act as well as bodies covered by the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 (CAC Act) that receive government funding for at least 50 per cent of their operating costs. The Guidelines are available from the Attorney-General's Department website.

The Fraud Control Guidelines outline the Commonwealth's policy and approach to fraud control. The Guidelines are the major reference on agency responsibilities, standards and fraud control mechanisms.

Fraud against the Commonwealth is a serious offence and can result in penalties under the Criminal Code. APS employees who commit fraud may face misconduct action under the PS Act. Both the FMA Act and the CAC Act also provide for penalties for the misuse of resources.

The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions has primary responsibility to prosecute offences against Commonwealth law and to conduct related criminal assets recovery. All prosecutions and related decisions are made in accordance with the guidelines set out in the Prosecution Policy of the Commonwealth.

Anyone who suspects another person of committing fraud should report the matter to a senior manager. Sometimes it may be appropriate to go directly to the agency's internal auditors or fraud investigators. APS employees who report fraud should be aware of their obligations about disclosing official information (see also Chapter 3: Managing official information and Chapter 17: Whistleblowing).

The agency should not inform an APS employee that he or she is suspected of committing fraud unless and until the investigator authorises it. However, someone suspected of committing fraud is innocent until proven guilty, and has a right to expect that the matter will not be discussed with anyone not directly involved.

The Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines require agency heads to:

·                                 develop a fraud control strategy which includes operational arrangements for dealing with fraud

·                                 conduct risk assessments and produce fraud control plans

·                                 investigate minor or routine allegations of fraud against their agency

·                                 train employees involved in fraud control

·                                 foster and maintain high standards of ethical behaviour

·                                 report fraud control activities

·                                 inform their Minister or presiding officer27 about relevant fraud control initiatives undertaken by the agency

·                                 certify, in their agency's annual report, that they are satisfied that:

o                                                        fraud risk assessments and fraud control plans have been prepared that comply with the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines

o                                                        appropriate fraud prevention, detection, investigation and reporting procedures and processes are in place

o                                                        annual fraud data has been collected and reported that complies with the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines.

These responsibilities continue, even where a service or product is contracted out to another organisation.

Fraud and suspension and misconduct action

As well as prosecution under the Criminal Code, APS employees who commit fraud are in breach of the APS Code and may be subject to suspension with or without pay and misconduct action under the PS Act.

Where an employee's behaviour is both a breach of the Code and a criminal offence, misconduct action need not be delayed until criminal processes have been completed. Agencies should seek advice from the police and the Director of Public Prosecutions before alerting an employee of any allegations of misconduct. A key consideration is the need to avoid prejudicing the criminal process.

If there is some risk of prejudicing the criminal proceedings, agencies may initiate a misconduct action (putting the employee on notice that an action will ensue) but may immediately suspend the investigation, pending the outcome of criminal proceedings.

The Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines make it clear that agencies must refer all allegations of serious or complex fraud involving Commonwealth interests to the Australian Federal Police.


26 The FMA Act (s60) prescribes a maximum penalty of seven years imprisonment for misuse of a Commonwealth credit card

27 The Fraud Control Guidelines also apply to the Parliamentary Service

 

Previous Previous
 
Next Next
ForumForumNews from Freed...News from Freed...News Parent ForumNews Parent ForumNews From Rober...News From Rober...APS fraud in CSAAPS fraud in CSA