Democracy and WIRES Structure

rwsqThe most important reform needed in WIRES is to amend the Constitution. Stronger democratic principles need to be embraced so that every member is treated the same by management, with respect, irrespective of their political views. All WIRES members should be entitled to an equal say in how their organisation runs, and must be given equal opportunity, in principle and in practice, to both stand for election, and be elected to, the Board of WIRES. This is not the case at the moment.

Go to topGo straight to commentsAdd a commentOne of the reasons that a new constitution was written in 2007 was to rectify a system of regional representation which was largely skewed towards country branches. This was changed in the new constitution so that every branch had equal representation on the State Council. Each branch had one representative. The Council would then elect a Board of Management to run the organisation from those members elected to Council. This meant that every member of WIRES had close to equal say in the running of the organisation through their Branch representative. It also meant that every nominee for the Board had a near to equal chance of election to the Board as did every other nominee, coming as they did from a similar electoral base.

The draft constitution was recommended to members by a letter from the Secretary which said the “ownership” of WIRES was with “its membership”, and that the previous system was “clearly undemocratic”. Members were told that the new Constitution would provide for a Board elected from, and accountable to, the WIRES Council. This was claimed to be a more efficient way to provide management “which is both democratically elected and accountable”. Members were also told that “No person is eligible to vote on the State Council, other than those elected to the positions by their branches. The State Council will be a body representative of WIRES Inc and WIRES branches best interests”.

WIRES is now undemocratic, as each representative does not have a nearly equal electoral base, and therefore each member does not have equal representation on the governing body

It is very clear from this letter that the members involved in the preparation of the 2007 Constitution did not intend representatives of permanent committees and sub committees to have the right to stand for the Board. However, in 2010 the Council agreed, on a “show of hands” vote, to let representatives of standards teams nominate for election to the Board. This was a decision clearly in conflict with the statements made in the letter to WIRES members in 2007 when asking them to vote for the new constitution. It is suggested that WIRES should have sought advice from a constitutional lawyer in relation to this contradiction, making sure it was legal, before representatives of standards teams were allowed to stand for election. WIRES is now undemocratic, as each representative does not have a nearly equal electoral base, and therefore each member does not have equal representation on the governing body. The Council is now made up of two types of representative: Those representing Branches, and those representing Standards/Management Teams.

Branch representatives have a large constituency of 100 or more members. These Branch representatives are nominated and voted for by the members of their own Branch exclusively. Standards/Management team representatives on the other hand have a very different representational base. They have a constituency of approximately nine members who vote them on to Council. The Standard/Management Teams were set up to advise and deliver training, and formulate policy, on each species group. They were to report and assist Council on animal matters, that is, as advisers and not part of the governance structure. There is now the situation where some Branches have up to five of their members on Council, one officially representing the Branch, with the others technically representing a number of Standards Teams. This also means that representatives of Standards Teams are themselves represented on Council by their Branch Representative.

A representative of a Standard/Management Team only represents at most a group of 5-9 members from which that representative might seek direction on how to vote on issues at Board level. These Team representatives are already represented by their own Branch representative (as each is also a member of a Branch). The result of this situation is that an individual member of a Standard/Management Team has an enormous say and representation on the Board and deprives WIRES members of anything close to equal representation.

It is even possible under the present system for the Board to consist mainly of members from the one Branch... effectively a gerrymander and this disproportionate representation will only increase as more Management Teams are created by the Board and Council

Allowing a representative of a Standard/Management Team to vote and hold a Board position can result in a branch representative, representing some 100 members, being out voted by a group of members representing less than half their own constituency. It is even possible under the present system for the Board to consist mainly of members from the one Branch. This change in practice, on a show of hands, is effectively a gerrymander and this disproportionate representation will only increase as more Management Teams are created by the Board and Council.

The situation is made worse by the Board being involved in the selection of management teams, even going so far as to vet candidates and issue recommendations to the Council before voting is held. This is a recent improvement, as previously no one knew who was on standards teams, and the Board were unable to supply this information. These representatives are not elected by the general membership, but by a select group of at times unknown people, and there is a potential for “Council stacking” and favouritism being shown towards friends and allies of Board members.

Another urgent need is to impose a restriction in the Constitution on the time a member can remain on the Board. This solves the problem of the same group of people remaining in power indefinitely. The need for this reform is particularly evident with the current disproportional voting system that leaves itself open to abuse. The previous Constitution at least had a 3 year maximum term for the Chair which allowed for turnover of members, with new blood and new ideas, but this provision was not kept in the 2007 Constitution.

The approach of the Board currently is a personal one... not a professional and impartial one. The underlying idea is that members should blindly trust the Board, that they should not question them as to do so would offend personal feelings

The Board has responded with indignation when these matters have been brought to their attention previously. They are offended, feeling that any inquiry into their conduct is in some way a personal slight or implied accusation of impropriety. This is a very frustrating response as it appeals to the emotional and casts doubt on the reasonable professional motives of the inquirer. However, this reaction in its way reveals the heart of the problem: The approach of the Board currently is a personal one, subjective, just like the reaction; not a professional and impartial one. The underlying idea is that members should blindly trust the Board, that they should not question them as to do so would offend personal feelings. This goes against the whole meaning of an association where all members are equally entitled to not only the benefits of association but also the responsibility. All members have a right to know how their group is being run and who is running it. It needs to be realised that in professional relationships trust is important but transparency is of greater importance. Trust is good when things are going well, but accountability is insurance against them going wrong.

In conclusion, the present practice of allowing representatives of management teams to have a vote on the State Council and to be able to stand for election to the Board is undemocratic and alleged to be unconstitutional.


# Who is the MONITOR of WiresLeannedathol. 2014-01-05 17:44
Recently a MOP rang wires and informed me of the conversation. I rang myself on her behalf only to learn from the operator that there are no pigeons that are Native therefore the birds are feral and she hung up on me.
To date Wires do not remove dangerous lizards, native pigeons, wood ducklings, pacific duck families, or pelicans . it seems that our local police are doing the job for wires as wires has the money but no Indians to make use of it for good rather than evil.

To deceive the public into donating into wires and not revealing that 2% is spent on care and 12% is unaccounted for is in my eyes FRAUD. Which is why most people leave wires. If you stay you are tainted. and if you raise the subject you are sent to Coventry. WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THIS COUNTRY? This country was built on altruistic deeds Now it is being destroyed by greed .
# ... and the list goes on and on.Muffin 2014-01-06 14:13
Have you also come across these situations? A 71 year old widower living on her own found a venomous snake in her hallway. WIRES responded they cannot help. The 71year old caller ended up ringing the local news agent who got the grand son to remove the snake.
In another instance a young single mother of 3 small children had a venomous snake encounter in her house. WIRES also told her that they are unable to help.
The WIres database shows 6 separate reports for one and the same animal requiring urgent assistance but it was not attended to. The locals who were calling in for the animal were not impressed, another organization eventually attended.
In another occasion a wombat joey stayed 2 days with the MOP after Wires received the call. The MOP upset and unable to care for the joey rang another Wildlife group. To top the situation a Flying fox stayed 24 hours in a box waiting for a Wires rescuer to attend? The mother Flying Fox had a little baby under its broken wing. The Wires rescuer finally arrived and was very apologetic and would have arrived earlier had she been informed at the time of the call.
In another case a MOP saw the car ahead hit a kangaroo resulting in a serious compound fracture of the leg and reported it to Wires. A follow up showed that Wires recorded and transferred the rescue to the local police for their attention. But Police had no records for such any such incoming call!
Whilst they are a lot of good operators at SRO the Wires centralized call centre cannot cope with the incoming calls. Wires has obviously lost the plot and their main goal.
a member
# RE: ... and the list goes on and on.a member 2014-01-07 08:49
Hello Muffin, what you know should be reported to OEH. One day it will do something to intervene in what is happening. Change is needed at the top.
Lorry Van Driver
# No Monitors for WIRESLorry Van Driver 2014-01-05 13:25
It seems that wires do not have the expertise to catch a Monitor lizard confined in a room. Wires no longer rescue native pigeons and insist that ducklings be chased out by use of a broom into the traffic to get rid of them. Hard jobs or jobs after 4.30 PM are fobbed off to other groups and there is nobody in our region to pick up a possum off the ground. Old ladies are expected to do the job and put them in the basket of their Goffer and head for the Vet. The last possum rescue ignored by wires ended up drowning in a pool. Our local Vet has had a perfectly healthy turtle for 5 days waiting to be picked up by wires, Not even a phone call came back to them. Luckily I happened by, dropped him where he was found and he took off like a Bondi tram. Wires do not answer the phone out of hours and trying to get through during hours is so frustrating that 2 vets I am aware of find it not a viable option. Consequently the pressure to EU ways heavy upon them.
What happened to Joanne and the other drivers? They worked for a mere pepper corn wage and ended up Gillarded in the back. The Van driver was just the one to attend to the Monitor Problem.

Wires are Doing a Ruddy good job of mismanagement They are doing for animals what the RUDDYARDS did for Australia.
a member
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurea member 2013-11-11 12:53
To all those wanting change in the governance of WIRES,

Send in your ideas and complaints to the Dept of Fair Trading on this link and you may at last be heard:
an eagle
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurean eagle 2012-07-13 20:24
Thanks for the post card reformwires. I agree that the constitution needs to be changed urgently so that every member has the right to stand for election to the Board and has the right to vote for the board. The Law Society, which has more members than WIRES, has a structure that gives all members the right to stand for election and ballot papers are sent out in the mail to every member. There is no reason for WIRES not having a similar democratic structure.
white ant
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurewhite ant 2012-07-14 09:02
Yes I got one too! Very nicely put as always Spartacus.
That would be a good start. But whose left to stand? We'll see how many changes there are to Council this year.
# @yellowtail 2012-07-19 14:42
Bet there will be no changes and the same old group will be re elected with maybe a change or two in positions. The Board has the numbers through its control over the management team reps to get elected who it wants on the Board and who they want are themselves. No hope for any change there.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structuremargaret 2012-07-11 17:46
Evelyn Mason is a strategic fundraiser and seeks bequests for WIRES. What is she paid for this work and does her payment come from the bequests she gets in. If she is paid a % of the gift then this should be disclosed to the donor like insurance brokers have to do.Really any payments made to Evelyn Mason for money donated should be disclosed to donors. A job for the commissioner of charities perhaps.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureguest 2012-01-22 19:13
Not only did the Board vet candiates to influence the vote of the new members on the Management teams they then voted as well. This meant the people who were not recommended by the Board knew all the Board would vote against them and they would have to get 7-9 votes just to stay even. Isn’t this double dipping?
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureyellowtail 2012-07-03 18:30
Double dipping, conflict of interest, lack of due process, undemocratic, you can call the selection by the board of the members of the management teams all of this.
an eagle
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurean eagle 2011-12-14 09:46
I hope Chelly that you will stay in WIRES as you are obviously conscientious and keen to learn. This website will hopefully encourage reform, either within WIRES itself or from action outside from the government or pressure from the donors who no doubt want to see all members happy with the way it is run. Once there is change in the management structure and all members feel they have an equal say and are respected, then you and many others will feel much better about your role and be able to work better for the sake of the animals.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurechelly 2011-12-11 22:51
As a new member I too feel the bureaucracy of WIRES. Older members seem to dominate and despite the supposed ’encouragement’ for new members, it seems a lot of the older ones just want to hog everything, being over controlling and only choosing the animals ’they’ want to look after and passing the rest to the newbies. Then when newbies find themselves struggling and have questions, the advice given is brief and quite frankly- not very helpful, meaning many of us have to figure it out on our own. It’s not until something goes wrong that a blaming game begins. When I joined WIRES I had the impression it was a group of like minded people wanting to help the wildlife and lend a helping hand where they can. Now I’m in it, it just seems like it has a lot of people that think too highly of themselves and forget that once upon a time they were a newbie too.
Clearly the image WIRES portray to the public eye and that experienced by it’s members are two different things.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-11-02 22:19
The Board won’t let anybody read their minutes - they won’t even discuss any issue with members even in their so-called Mediation Meetings. What a joke. I would suggest that they have a set of rules for themselves and a completely different set for the general population of volunteers. [EDIT - rest of comment]
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureFortheUnicorns 2011-11-02 07:37
Hi non-WIRES person here. Y’all need to get those Board Minutes exposed. There should be no secrecy at any level. The Government could help you there. Dept of Fair Trading.
a guest
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurea guest 2011-11-02 18:38
No unfortunately Fortheunicorns, fair trading won’t help as it is internal so there is no way members can see what they are doing and no one can check on them.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureWattlebird 2011-10-31 10:04
Spartacus please collate all these suggestions and ideas and have them forwarded to the relevant Ministers requesting that the government step in and appoint a professional body to oversee the setup, in WIRES, of proper and correct procedures. We need help from outside and it is up to the government to provide some guidance for the management of an organisation which could be just fantastic. The volunteers are here - the animals will be cared for properly with the correct management.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-31 19:59
What if the government just doesn’t really care so long as it doesn’t have to take responsibility? Have you looked at the minister for envirnomet saying logging is good for koalas lately?
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurewhirlwind 2011-11-02 02:26
I suspect you are correct Guest. I dont see this new Government making many wildlife friendly moves and its been more than a year. The only thing they will take notice of is a noise, therefore there needs to be lots of letters and or some publicity to make them take notice. If there were more publicity it could elevate the profile of the matter. They have lots of pressing and difficult issues, so if they never really hear of this they wont give it any priority. It needs to get in their face.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureWallaby 2011-10-30 16:29
These sort of problems not only happen in WIRES they are happening in groups all over Australia. I have witnessed first hand bullying, swearing and yelling, AGM rigging, meeting minutes amended, slandering, misappropriation of funds, animals being given to MOP’s. I now refuse to be a member of a group - here in QLD we can but I wonder for how long.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-30 19:42
Not just in wildlife groups either. I’ve seen it in paid employment but there its better because its easier to fire paid people than volunteers and make them meet standards. Its hmans but in wildlife most of the talk of bullying I’ve seen come from people who aren’t good carers even if they think they are and don’t want to train and be supervised to meet standards like not feeding macropods buscuits while sitting on the olounge. Or trying to be coordinator when the carers have naother candidate but screaming and whinging when they don’t get in.
a guest
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurea guest 2011-10-30 20:33
As you say guest in employment situations there are laws to sort out the problems but in wildlife and other volunteer groups there is no where to go for out side help or to get these disputes sorted out by compulsory mediation and arbitration. That’s where the government should be doing something.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurewatsgoinon 2011-10-29 01:11
what a lot of pathetic, petty bickering regarding legacy & estates. Perhaps, if the deceased had NOT been friends with the Wires-members-executors, there may have been NO bequest at all!. One can only trust that executors will interpret the will of the deceased, based on their knowlege of the person - she trusted them - why can’t Wires members? Smacks of sour grapes! Without anything in writing, by the deceased, to the contrary, these arguments/ complaints appear simply to be ’sh*t stirring’.... if the same person left the remaining two-thirds of estate to RSPCA and Cat Protection Society - one wonders are those organizations carrying on in the same ungrateful & complaining way as these whingers?! Grow up & get a life people!
strange indeed
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurestrange indeed 2012-07-14 07:07
Hang on, are you suggesting these members-executors have influenced this person to make a bequest to their branch Executors have no right to be interpreting the will only the court. If the branch is the beneficiary the branch has a right to see the will.
seeking change
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureseeking change 2011-10-27 10:09
So Where do we go from here.....
How can we care for the animals to the best of our ability...
with fantastic support... sharing our skills and knowledge...
Lets get it together people...
Yes there are big big problems that really need to be dealt with, they can no longer be ignored
but then what...
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureguest 2011-10-28 17:42
Suggestion -the Board stands down and an independent professional administrator takes over to work with members to bring in a new constitution prepared by an expert to set up a democracy for wires or set up a corporation. Then hold elections for the board (if there is to be one) or to a governing council where only those elected by the membership can stand. Also suggest Wires employs a professional corporate secretary.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureMcGyver 2011-10-29 10:45
I agree with guest, those that are in Board/Management positions need to step down for the benefit of the organisation. The Board should be made up of professionial people some from outside the organisation with specific skills like entrepreneurs, marketing or financial skills.
Those applying for any position within WIRES BMC, Standard teams, should have the qualifications to do the job. There should be a mentoring program for all Management positions within WIRES on how to their job and how to deal with people. Keep the carers happy and the animals will be looked after.
The branch structure needs to be looked at, branch responsibilities, almalgamations, or redrawing of territories specially for branches which are not working well or continue to have personnel problems. Working together as one organisation not 28 plus a call centre.
The Call centre and GM positions and authorites need to be looked at. The money being spent on this part of the servce is excessive and not what donors think their money spent on. More money to branches for the care for animals.
WIRES could be a great organisation.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureWattlebird 2011-10-29 14:15
Hi McGyver & Guest - I absolutely love what you are saying. This is the way to go and to correct all the wrongs that have been done by people without any skills and qualifications in regard to management and the overall running of a growing concern. As most of WIRES consists of volunteers how about calling in a large Volunteering body to give advice on how to deal with some of the issues. Definitely call in professionals to set up a democracy and I liked the idea of having a professional corporate secretary. I ask everyone reading these postings to write in with their suggestions for consideration and then, and only then, will we all have our say in the construction of a new and reborn WIRES which will then bring forth the very best care for our native wildlife. LET’S MAKE OUR NEW MANTRA ’WIRES WILL BE GREAT’.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structuredaffodil 2011-11-02 01:00
WIRES used to be a great organisation till this lot arrived!
The members have been battered and the animals neglected due to the unworkable licencing system in NSW which supports this immoral anti social behaviour.
People should complain to their local members and ask for change. Write to Barry O’Farrell - he has the power to change it. Ask for charities to be accountable and transparent. Ask for much more scrutiny of charities.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureNutsy 2012-01-12 14:12
Hear, hear, Guest. WIRES does need an outside administrator to re-organise the whole structure, both at Board level and branch level.
The big word needs to be TRANSPARENCY in all sectors, and respect and support for carers.
It’s time
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureIt’s time 2011-10-21 22:28
It is time that WIRES is reformed! For too long now the unacceptable practises have gone on unchecked. These practises have been condoned by current and past members of the Board._WIRES has become an organisation that has poor animal standards
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurewatsgoinon 2011-10-20 16:45
I am an ’ordinary’ member with no “position” in my local branch or on the Board nor Council._ In fact, I’ve not ever thought much about the operation of the government and management of Wires, as I suspect is so for most members ( or those who don’t end up in a ’confrontation’) . Perhaps it is only when a personal issue needs to be ’sorted’, that one discovers problems of unfairness or inequality which may exist (& can be seen as of “Branch stacking”, whether this has happened intentionally or by our (2007) Constitution being ignored/overlooked.)_ It seems that most of the comments so far, have been from members focused on individual “issues” relating to injustices ( real or perceived) and the lack of fairness or openness in the ways these have ( or NOT) been dealt. Of course these are areas of concern to them.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureturtlebub 2011-10-20 21:15
As a Ordinary member as well what’s going on is ANIMAL CRUETY because of political egos
I am publicly ashamed to say I am member of Wires because of what happens in our branch. The volunteers doing the work and paying $ big time for the privilege are being bullied, emotionally blackmailed and slandered if they open their mouths because they love our wildlife Further more if you do say anything they run out “ Bring Wires in to disrepute “ ending your membership and any right to handle animals in NSW
? Is it not time for NPWLS and NSW Government to listen for many years it was easier for them to let the Volunteers do the work Soon there will be no volunteers left who want to be associated with WIRES and then who suffer even further OUR WILDLIFE
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureBlogbandit 2011-10-21 11:53
The are already hardly any carers available, its a fiasco, animals are dying in the care of MOP’s.
Instead of WIRES feathering the nests of their office croneys they need to start picking up the slack of getting more trained carers. Why is it always left up the the few in each branch to do all the caring then its expected that we then run training courses and THEN have to run our own fundraising to try and keep each branch afloat.
The carers that do everything are exhausted but WIRES still bleeds us dry, with out the ones that are still dedicated to the “cause” they would be screwed, its about time they damn well realise that with out us they have NOTHING, with out us all those paid staff would be out of jobs, may be its time for a state wide strike of all carers.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-22 08:49
Wires gets heaps of donations and money left in wills so where is all this money going?
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurewattlebird 2011-10-22 19:46
$20,000 plus money was spent on hiring a private investigator to investigate and very worthy volunteer. If they’ve done this once they will do it again. What else are they doing? How can anyone trust them now?
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureBlogbandit 2011-10-22 20:49
20 K is a drop in the bucket compared to what they pay in wages for the 20 plus staff they employ.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-23 10:15
Isn’t they us? most part time and doing phones for 4 million people and about 18 branches instead of the 30K people most branches doi phones for
Magnum P.I.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureMagnum P.I. 2011-10-23 19:54
Why do they have to be paid staff? Didn’t branches come up with ways to man phones with volunteers but the board rejected it? If WIRES had more members that actually stayed or did something - that didn’t leave in disgust and were better resourced - then maybe they could man their own phones in the branches. Didn’t they used to have volunteers on the phones? Why is the call centre in the back blocks of Forestville? Expensive and away from public transport. Why not move it near a train station on the western line? Lots of big companies do that to save money and assist staff getting to work. Why is it always "too hard" in WIRES?
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureguest 2013-12-01 15:34
Move the Sydney Rescue Office (SRO) away from Forestville and away from the ever-present secret police of the WIRES Administration! Wash your mouse out.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureguest 2013-12-01 15:29
That "20 plus staff they employ" is closer to 40 plus!
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-23 10:13
I don’t know about heaps and you can’t spend wills until the person dies. The treasurers report is on the wires sitee
Magnum P.I.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureMagnum P.I. 2011-10-23 19:47
Yes - I think when someone leaves money in their will, the person has to die before you get the cash! Hardly the point made though. I think that the first "Guest" was saying that WIRES gets considerable income from bequests. Where does it go? I know most WIRES members don’t see a cent of it and if they don’t see it then the animal certainly doesn’t. It costs the average member thousands every year to be in WIRES - most people don’t know that. The food, the equipment, transport (most of the time) - all paid for by the guy who rescues the animal. Those who donate think it goes to the carer and the animal - huh! If only!
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureTurtlebub 2011-10-26 11:05
Question for you if a your branch gets at bequest from a will why then [can a member of the branch] and his ex wife then vote themselves via the committee as the executives of that will for the spending of that money on what it would be spent The ex-wife said it was for Bats then at another meeting the [husband] said it was not just for bats because if you leave a bequest it can’t be put to any species but to be used as the Wires see necessary Can you tell me what’s going on because the Treasure issued a statement to members that the branch was broke and there would be no more subsidies for food products only the one from HO AS I always thought if you are the executive of a will nominated by the person leaving the bequest you don’t need a committee to vote you as that PLEASE EXPLAIN
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-27 06:32
Committees don’t vote executors. The person who dies names the executors in their will usually relatives or friends so what they want happens which can be written in the will or said to the people they wnat to be the executors who do their best to make it happen. so say the person wo died loves bats or whatever and tells the executors they are leaving some of their money to wires but they want all bat costs to come out of it then the money is left and the executors are responsible for saying how their friend or rleative wanted the money spent. The committee cna then vote that they respect the dead persons wishes or ignore them and spend the money on other wires things. Why would exes be agreeing on anything usually?
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-27 07:54
If you think the arguing exes are lying about twhat the dead perswon wanted look at what that person did with their money and interest before they died. If they never gave a stuff about bats all the time they were alive they probably didn’t leave any money to them. If they took care of them or gave money while they were alive or were good friends with people who did then that’s probably what they did leave their money for.
I would be really upset if I thought I left my money to something and had my trusted family and friends to make sure it happened the way I wanted and strangers argued about it and tried to force my wishes to be disrespected. And I would tell people not to will their money because what they said to their executors would be disrespected.
an eagle
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurean eagle 2011-10-27 15:27
Looks a bit strange to me. Executors can only use money left in a will to a person or entity ie WIRES as specified in that will. So if the will says it is to be used for bats, it is to be used for bats and if the will says it is for general purposes, then it is to be used for general purposes. What the person said during his/her liftetime has nothing to do with it.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-27 17:29
That’s why the committee would be free to vote on whether they choose to respect the told wishes out of respect or not. It’s still for wires purposes if its for animals. noy likr the executors got the money. Is this really about the spending of the will or about getting at the committee about what they choose to vote on spenidng It? What if both the exes are right. One says the dead person wants it spent on bats, one says for anything wires needs. But what wires needs is the money spent on bats for feeding or whatever. So the vote meant both parts could be met. Where’s the problem? To me this seems personal against the executors who were not chosen by committee but by the dead person.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-27 17:44
If the committee voted to spend the money from the will to build new cages or vet fees or whatever for bats isn’t that meeting both the exact will and the meaning? General purposes and for bats? Sounds as if they made a really good decision to satisfy everybody.
More and more it seems people get angry then look for excuses to stay angry instead of looking at what is realy happeningin front of them. From what turtlebub first said the executors didn’t use the money at all. The committee used it for what itneeded to care for animals being bats. What IS the problem? I don’t get it.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-27 19:26
Promise I’ll let go after this but I still can’t see what the problem is.
money was left to the branch
2 exes are the executors of the will
ex husband said it was for gneral purposes
The ex wife said the person liked bats and would of wanted it spent on that
committee voted to spend some of the money on care of bats which is both bats and general purposes
somene else didn’t like the way the vote went
Is this about the money or getting back at the ex wife. Is the exes new girlfriend on committee or in the branch as well.
dID the ex husband want the money spent on different things or someone else and resented the vote.
What is the problem? Why is this supposed to be a big deal? Or is it personal and nothing to do with wires ?
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureBlogbandit 2011-10-27 21:06
Sounds like you have a problem there Turtle, no member can appoint them selves as an Executive to any will or bequest, the person making the will should be appointing their own Executive.
All wills must go through Probate and it is via this process that any beneficiary via the Executor will have money given to them.
If the Benefactor stated that the branch itself was to get the money then the branch by law must get it but it would be up to HO to administer the funds to the branch as requested in the will, eg cages and stock or vet allowances.
white ant
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurewhite ant 2011-10-20 08:28
I refer to Stans Wood ’s comments about democracy.
Democracy would be if all members had the opportunity to run for the Board. Currently this is not what happens the Board is voted from the Council by the Council. Sadly the Standard teams are now just a political vehicle in getting people back on the Council and onto the Board. It’s a shame as Standard teams were set up to provide the best standard of care to animals. The Board also vets all candiates running for the Standard Teams, so they choose. The Board will have you believe it’s a council vote, but with 9 members of the Board also voting at a meeting with 23 - 25 people you do the math.
please explain
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureplease explain 2011-10-20 08:19
Can anyone explain how the secretary of Wires has the right to advertise her child’s business using the wires contact email list?
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurebustard 2012-07-01 16:34
She can do what she likes. No one has any authority to stop her. This is a blatant use of her position for her own benefit.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureDispassionate 2011-10-19 14:44
I am a volunteer with another group, which coincided with a move to a new area where WIRES doesn’t operate. I have been lucky enough to work with wildlife carers right across Australia, and for the most part, it is an honour to work with such people.
It is my observation that most groups have “political” issues, which covers a multitude of sins. These range from overzealous committees to unethical carers and everything in between. And each person is certain that they are in the right.
The group I volunteer with is not immune, but on the whole, is pretty good. However, my partner and I made a decision several years ago. We simply don’t participate in the politics, we don’t take sides, and we put all our energies into looking after wildlife. We have been subject to bullying in the past, so I won’t pretend it is not an issue, or that it is not hurtful.
But as others have stated above, it does end up being about ego mostly, so if we focus more on OUR efforts to heal wildlife, and less on ego, It is a start. I read a book many years ago, and it said something to the effect that you can’t change others, so focus on changing the things you can. Generally that means starting with yourself and asking - “what could I have done differently?”.
Like “seeking change” sometimes the answer lies is finding another path to the same end. It worked for me.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurestarfish 2011-10-21 10:05
Like everything its about finding a balance. Last July DECC/OEH changed the wildlife rehab licence rules limiting who can apply for a willidfe rehabilitation licence. It is now impossible to either start a new group where an existing one already is, or apply for a general licence. This would be a good arrangement for government as there will be less organisations to monitor, but not so good for carers who are having problems within their group if there is no alternative group. To make it worst if your group has an internal dispute the government department responsible will NOT get involved. Currently WIRES does not have a complete grievance policy relating to management and the one we have is not followed either are other polices or constitution. Which makes the governing body of your group not accountable to its members or its donors. Whatever is decided here there either needs to be stronger checks and balances with existing groups or they allow general licence and new wildlife groups to continue. I would suggest everybody read the new OEH Code of practice for injured sick and orphaned protected fauna and their groups constitution. Boring I know but essential.
seeking change
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureseeking change 2011-10-18 21:21
I resigned from WIRES as a volunteer. I asked a question about a wonderful workshop I attended... that is when my trouble began.
I was hurt and very disappointed at the way my question was answered and handled. Meetings resulted to try and solve this issue but sadly it grew much larger. I tried to turn it into a positive and asked for help from Head Office as the people I had the complaint against were the members of the Branch Management Committee and they were the ones to whom I had to report the complaint. It was made very clear to me that the committee did not want other members to be made aware, as there was no mention of any correspondence noted IN or OUT at any meeting until I brought it to their attention, and they would not allow the matter to be discussed at a General Meeting. Everything was put under the banner of confidential. I was only given the option to meet them at a committee meeting, which I attended. I went higher thinking I may find support. I thought I had found support and was very pleased that WIRES Inc agreed there were problems and a “Special Meeting” was organised, to hear both sides. But, unknown to me, I was already being labelled a “problem that needed to be dealt with”. They are not my words they are the words of the powers that be... At the end of this heated meeting to my relief a member put up her hand to be voted in at the next meeting as Grievance Officer... I cried from relief that I and the other members of this Organisation would have someone we could go.
To my dismay and surprise, 5 days before this member could be voted in, I received a letter threatening my termination with 10 unfounded complaints listed against my name. I joined WIRES as a volunteer to give my time and experience to rescue my beloved wildlife and for the rehabilitation of our wildlife and also to enjoy friendships and share knowledge. As mama possum mentions, yet this is how I was treated.
I have to say that this caused me huge grief, and I still find it very hard to talk about it today. WIRES is no longer an organisation I wish to be associated with. I cannot see a solution to this problem, but I give my full support to those trying so hard to achieve change, as my problem appears to be just the tip of a very large iceberg. Normally I would continue on in the fight, but this brought so much hurt and anger into my life, I did not wish to continue and gave them what they wanted, I resigned. Sadly I am still not able to care for our Australian Native Wildlife, but I cannot and will not be bullied into submission. That is not why I volunteered. I have put this behind me now, which has taken quite a bit of strength, as I was so hurt by their treatment of me! I have finally turned it into a positive for myself as I have grown stronger, in myself. I have learnt , that I can not change how others choose to treat people or behave and I can’t control those who choose to stay quite and stand behind those being the bullies doing nothing about the bully behaviour, therefore being bullies themselves. Maybe they too are scared to speak up in fear of being bullied and targeted also. FEar that they too will be targeted and have to stop doing what they love. We are all replaceable , they just run another RIC course to get new members. Something needs to change. So glad the discussion has finally started, each comment weather we totally agree with it or not is a step closer to a solution.
Do not seek to change others ....Become the change you seek. Oprah
I am not sure yet of how I will continue to do what I love, but I will find the right path for me, and it will be for the welfare of our Australian wildlife. Thank you for your time.
Time for a change
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureTime for a change 2011-10-19 15:29
Hi Seeking Change I had simliar problems as you it seems the bullies have it all right now hope that all will change soon,I thought I was the only one who had troubles with animal officers that put the animals last I was forced out I could not stand the cruel way some of the reptiles & possums were kept in care in my branch "sourer grapes" is what I was told by the" boss lady" I am still very angry about it all
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureguest 2013-12-01 18:15
Hi “seeking change”,

I see your dilemma with leaving WIRES and finding an alternative way for continuing to care for our native wildlife. An excellent tool to help in making a choice of which organisation you might like to belong to (or change to) can be found on;

It is an interactive map using OEH data and when you enter your address, it drops a pin-drop on the map which will bring up the various organisations that cover that location. When WIRES left the NSW Wildlife Council, they requested all reference to WIRES be removed from the website, so they are no longer mentioned as an option.

The once great organisation we knew as WIRES has reached its peak and is now descending into becoming irrelevant as a wildlife carer organisation and the turning point came when the Fascist Board of bully-boys took control. Just look around, WIRES used to either sponsor or present at the various major state and national conferences and send a delegate or two. Because they know it all and increasingly regard themselves as the font of all knowledge and custodian of all learning, such information is only passed on to the chosen few and if you are an outsider, you’ll pay top dollar to attend and have to whistle for a manual if you are lucky. What does the “E” in WIRES stand for?
# seeking changeJennifer 2013-12-03 08:24
I agree with Guest that the once organisation of Wires is in decline. I joined Wires many years ago and was proud to say I was member of a group that really cared for our native animals and also the carers themselves. That has all changed now, sadly it is all about money and power. This all started when the Board was introduced and we got a group of "bully boys" who wanted to "rule the Empire with an iron fist". They are like the Gestapo and will stop at nothing to denigrate and bully anyone who dares to have an opinion different to theirs. They see this as a threat, not as someone who might have a fresh approach to some internal problems. Is it any wonder so many members are leaving, it is a case of do as I say and not as I do. One rule for the workers and one for the Executive. I am embarrassed to tell anyone I am with Wires now, because I usually get told a horror story of how they hate Wires. Animals are being left for days without rescue. The board wanted total control, now they have it and it is a shambles. As for donation money, what a joke, it goes to paying all the expenses of many people with their hand in the trough. It is definitely jobs for the boys and sometimes the wives.
Nothing will get better while Wires is controlled by this group of people. I just hope it will not be too late.

What is interesting is that when members leave Wires their names are not taken of the total Wires membership list. This is so the authorities still think they are the biggest group in town.
# RE: seeking changeEmu 2013-12-04 21:34
members who have left and staff and ex staff are all left on the membership list to mislead their numbers. If they had the members they claim there would be plenty to do the rescues and animals wouldn't be left at vets for days.
Ann Brown
# RE: seeking changeAnn Brown 2013-12-28 12:05
I know of two cases in Bellingen where orphaned and injured wildlife were not picked up by Wires, despite phone calls. Another caller was treated rudely and the general consensus by the people was what Wires was unprofessional, uncaring and downright rude. The people with the animals will not be ringing Wires again.
So sad
# RE: seeking changeSo sad 2014-01-02 08:28
Hope WIRES takes note Ann Brown. WIRES needs a good name in animal rescues. It is the very reason for its existence. The problem is there are not enough members to rescue and everyone knows the why.
White Ant
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureWhite Ant 2011-10-18 20:37
If we really want to look after wildlife, the grass roots rescuers and carers need to be happy and looked after. WIRES is in this predictament because people join to look after animals and don’t want to get involved with the other stuff.
We need people to stand up, we need new blood on the Council, Board and Wildlife Council, we need every branch to have a say and turn up to meetings and new ideas with an action goals to make it happen. WIRES is owned by the membership.
# Mamapossum 2011-10-18 20:32
We are all members of WIRES because we want to help our native animal population. As carers we should put aside any personal disagreements and do what our organisation has been designed for, help the animals.
# Joeypossum 2011-10-18 22:24
I agree with you to a certain point Mamapossum but what do you suggest carers do when they believe that the organisation is not being run with the prime aim to support them but instead to keep a group of people in control?
Blinky Bill
# Blinky Bill 2011-10-19 21:09
Are you suggesting that WIRES members should not be concerned when a Species Coordinator shoots a viable animal, against the prognosis if a qualified vet?
I once had a car that was DESIGNED to do what cars are supposed to do.
Unfortunately, it didn’t. I had to change it for a better one.
# Guest 2011-10-24 18:09
Name me one experienced carer that hasn’t quietly taken an animal from a vet who said to give it a go and taken it to another vet or home to euthanase. Vets are used to dogs and cats who get food put in front of them and brought into shelter for the rest of their lives if they have a disapbility. We have to decide if the animal can go it alone without starving or getting beaten up. And shooting is an allowed and very humane method even if it looks messy and upsetting. Members should be concerned but if the coordinator could give reasons for making the choice you can’t save everything and you shouldn’t if the end result is going to be more cruelty than the death even if you don’t have to watch it die like you do when you have the guts to make a decision and carry it out with a gune or injection. I’ve got no time for carers who keep trying long after they should give up while the animal goes on suffering so they can feel good about themselves.
# Nutsy 2011-12-01 14:36
This comment has been edited.
In reply to Blinky Bill and Guest, I am one of the two carers who rescued that possum and took it to the vet.
The possum in question here, that the co-ordinator picked up from the vet, wasn’t even given the chance to prove if it could recover, even though the vet had stated "with good care this possum should do well". The co-ordinator took it from the vet’s premises, and it is alleged took it home and shot it. It is also alleged he did not consult the vet, he did not ask that the possum be humanely euthanased by injection. His reason, he said, was because it was geriatric. It was definitely and obviously a juvenile.
Given your statement that you condone unauthorised euthanasia of WIRES animals, can it be assumed that this practice is widespread among WIRES carers and co-ordinators?

# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureDispassionate 2011-10-18 17:53
There is an inherent problem with forums such as this - no matter how worthy and lofty the ideals. We all have the tendency to see the world through our own filters. The comments above are a good example.
The person was not universally loved. He has some very admirable qualities, but like all of us, some that were not so admirable. There is also the potential that events may have taken place which many people may not be aware. So it is quite understandable that friends and admirers will feel he has been hounded, while detractors will feel that he should have been forcibly removed years ago.
In the end, it tends to be the anonymous moderators who have the final say, and who are capable of putting a “Spin” on the discussions. And if that happens, you become just as non-representative as you accuse the board of being.
In short, this forum may be cathartic, or it may be the unfortunate dogs-breakfast that the old “Wildlife Whistleblower” site was many years ago, which would be unfortunate. I wish you luck, as your ideas are fine. But these forums often tend to bring out the worst, rather than achieve the best.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureSpartacus 2011-10-18 19:26
Let me stick out our glass jaw early in the piece.

This site is not about one particular person - I know to whom you refer. It is for everyone and about everyone - and about no one.

It is about what is really happening and about ideas suppressed. In answer to another post today (this is the SPIN and its announced): too many times in WIRES “politics” is equated with back-stabbing, undermining, character assassination and other unsavoury activity. This leads people to say “lets forget about politics”. Politics is there like it or not, and it need not be a bad thing - its how people convince each other and come to agreement - how they regulate power (that is the definition). That can be done without abuse of power or imbalance of power. To say “lets get rid of politics” in an organisation depending as it does on its people is like saying “lets make all the wheels on the car spin in different directions” - you go nowhere fast (except maybe to hospital). Another analogy: “lets forget about the nurses’ problems and get on with running a hospital”.

Will there be editing of comments on this site? Yes - that is outlined in the commenting rules. We will remove specific words/phrases that might be illegal. We will always tell you we are doing it. We will take down an edited comment if the author is unhappy and we welcome revised submissions. We will not reject something because of the views it expresses - we welcome all points of view. We are not here to stop the debate - we are here to start it.

That is the only way to get truly honest progress.
John Paul
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureJohn Paul 2011-10-19 20:39
Thanks for the compliment. Apparently expressing my feelings is bringing out the worst in me.
I’m afraid your apologies do not wash ... you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
I suggest that WIRES is under the control of members suffering from the “volunteer association syndrome”, people who use the organisation to boost their own egos and whose interest in helping wildlife is secondary.
Let’s hope that the majority of WIRES carers, who have a genuine interest in their animals, will regain control of WIRES.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructurePossums 2011-10-18 15:48
The first priority of an org like this should be the care of wildlife. Carers should not be out of pocket one red cent.
Magnum P.I.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureMagnum P.I. 2011-10-21 15:13
I think you are a bit off there possums. The priority of an org like WIRES should be to support its carers first. We are the ones doing the work. WIRES always drags out the “animals will suffer” line to keep us quiet and compliant. THINK ABOUT IT > Like any of us will actually let that happen. With or without WIRES, even if the law says we can’t, we will look after sick animals, we can’t help ourselves. WIRES is supposed to be there to help US do OUR job. What have they done for you lately? It costs carers 1000s of dollars every year and I the animals I look after don’t get of the donated money. I could look after animals and do just as good a job and it would cost me just as much if I wasn’t in WIRES but I would probably have less stress!
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structuretruecarer 2011-10-18 15:21
Most unhappiness and dissatisfaction in any voluntary organization is the result of any one member/group of members becoming too full of their own importance and wanting excessive ’power’, therefore not contributing in a productive manner towards the organization’s original goals. Hence the need for costly ’conflict resolution’, where whatever the outcome, the complainant ALWAYS wins - i.e. they get the attention they crave and their narcissism
is fed.
The hard working general member’s efforts to raise funds is wasted on these members.
One would hope that, in Wires, most are concerned about the welfare of animals entrusted to their care- more than their personal EGOS!
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureT.McPhil 2011-10-18 10:22
[This post was slightly edited - S.]
30 out of 100 members quit WIRES Central West at the beginning of the year. They were the active members, sick of the bullying [EDIT] and poisonous dysfunction of the group. Yet even now, WIRES CW denigrates members of other animal rescue groups to vets and NPWS [EDIT]
Care and oversight of native wildlife is non-existent, and members are being advised to carry out the most inappropriate methods of ’care’ and rescue. WIRES’ reputation is mud with the community, with the vets, with the police.
Joey Eastern Greys are being euthanised automatically - as has been happening for years - because the committee is dead against any active pursuit of release sites.
Trying to reform and help the branch, stepping the fine line to not ’offend’ the bullies, is impossible and only ends up in despair.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureImbroken6 2011-10-19 21:44
I was in WIRES around 5 yrs ago I was doing most of the rescues And a lot of caring I had a nervous breakdown due to what they did to me they burnt me out When I asked for a break I was told I’d be killing all the wildlife in my area as there was not enough members I could do up to 300 rescues a year and in one month I did 755kms.
What up
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureWhat up 2011-10-18 09:09
What about the fact that head office and the board continue to persecute specific members on others say so and it is completely unjustified and not warranted...
bring on reform
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurebring on reform 2011-10-18 06:51
What about the spending of $20,000 or more of donated money to pursue a highly skilled and much loved member who had been suggesting reforms and pointing out problems. You could call him any time for advice on a bird and he was a great trainer.
Good on you Spartacus.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGuest 2011-10-19 09:37
Or what about the member and public reaction if the headlines had read “Having received allegations of member involvement in animal cruelty, WIRES made NO investigation” ?
Magnum P.I.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureMagnum P.I. 2011-10-19 11:22
Or what about the member and public reaction if the headlines had read "Having received allegations of god-knows-what, WIRES went on a secretive witch hunt and gave NO information to anyone involved"? There you go, that’s what we’ve decided, now go get stuffed.
When will WIRES management get it through its skull that its not what they do that’s the problem, it is the way that you do it. I know of numerous cases where WIRES has looked into an allegation behind closed doors, apparently to protect "confidentiality" and "privacy". They then spit out a finding without showing anyone else, especially not the poor sod copping the complaint, just what evidence they have or what specifically is in the the complaint. No accountability. Have they read Kafka? Then when someone points out the inherent injustice they hide behind the first available device that will make them look reasonable, avoiding the real issue - justice. Its not that they investigate: Its that they do it in such a way that no one else can check their work. A law unto themselves.
an eagle
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurean eagle 2011-10-19 15:34

What I can say Guest from information I received, which is not confidential, is that the then Chair received notice of the alleged act of cruelty within 2 months of the date and should have then immediately referred it to the RSPCA to be considered as the RSPCA has the jurisdiction and a fair and proper legal process to investigate. This would have been the correct procedure and have given the person concerned, as well as other members accused of wrongdoing, (who were never told what that were alleged to have done!) a fair and independent and open hearing. Instead, these volunteer members were all dealt with behind closed doors without any opportunity to hear what was alleged and to find out whether anyone in fact had said anything against them. They were not allowed to question what was said nor given the opportunity to defend themselves. To this day a report which deals with named members has never been released to those members to read to find out what was said against them.
There was obviously no wrongdoing found as no notification was given to the appropriate legal body eg DECCW or RSPCA as required under Clause 2.16 (f) of the WIRES Constitution..
an eagle
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurean eagle 2011-10-19 15:35

Thiird part of response to Guest.
Is this the way to treat volunteer members with respect and give them support?Good on you Reform WIRES for providing members with the opportunity to discuss these issues on an independent forum. I hope that members wanting reform will come up with suggestions as to how this can be achieved
an eagle
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurean eagle 2011-10-19 15:31
Unfortunately Guest there is a lot of information that has not become public and members that know would be frightened to say anything in case disciplinary action such as a breach of WIRES conduct policy or a breach of a confidence or the like is taken against them.
Gary Pattinson
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGary Pattinson 2011-10-23 21:40
Guest is bang on the money, if you power tripping halfwits want to shield those guilty of cruelty then I suggest that there is no place in the animal welfare world for you. WIRES is a wonderful organisation that does amazing work with the tight resources it has. The people that wish to thwart the efforts of those that work quietly and tirelessly by wasting time with worthless websites such as this one really ought not to see themselves as animal lovers but trouble makers.
an eagle
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structurean eagle 2011-10-24 11:41
What are you talking about? Members accused were never contacted by the RSPCA or National Parks so obviously were not found “guilty” by any legal process, not even the Board’s secret inquiry outside any proper legal process. Do you have that “hidden report”? If so, please post it as many would love to see what was said about them. Don’t mind name calling but slander is another matter.
seeking change
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureseeking change 2011-10-27 09:51
and let me guess you would like to get rid of all such “Trouble makers” out of WIRES... hence the problem we have had and are still having within your beloved WIRES, read these!!!! Read them all again Gary all the comments with an open mind , and with respect can I please request that you and others don’t continue to live in Denial ... the treatment we discribe has happened to wonderful carers that are very much animal lovers hence why we tried to stand up to bullying and wrong within an org that should care for the carers as well as the animals ...we saw and experienced all these things... they are not made up to waste time.... how can you dismiss it..... there are members in power that DO NOT WORK QUIETLY, it is only QUITE because it is kept from others... behind closed doors and mark confidential, while others HAVE to work quietly keeping their heads down as to not be the next ones targeted. instead of being able to be fully supported and being able to share animal caring together as a team of people all heading towards the same positive direction.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureBlogbandit 2011-10-24 09:19
It was the way in which they did it Guest, they took over 12 months to do anything, they let the time frame laps which did not allow RSPCA to follow up.
At the end of the day it WAS a witch hunt, they wanted the accused gone rain hail or shine and used publically donated money to do so, money that could have gone towards training or helping branches purchase equipment.
And as to animal cruelty you prove there has not been any one in the organization that at some time has not performed the same proceedure, granted the attempt may have been timed badly but the proceedure is performed all the time and thats a fact and not always done by a vet.
Graham Mitchell
# RE: Democracy and WIRES StructureGraham Mitchell 2011-10-23 21:25
This was an entirely disgraceful witchunt which made me ashamed to be a member of WIRES
# Keep diggingFactman 2012-06-29 11:01
Wires do not have trouble makers. The Board create trouble makers to get themselves out of trouble. All they end up doing is exposing how much trouble they are really in. Quote:
Friends come and go. Enemies compound.
meal worm
# RE: Keep diggingmeal worm 2012-06-30 09:23
I think you mean the Board are the trouble makers
# RE: Keep diggingwallaby 2012-06-30 10:58
The method is that when members start to speak out at Council meetings on breaches of policies and the constitution and the need for change they are branded troublemakers so that other council members then fear supporting them as they will also be branded. They then say they have to rid council of these branded troublemakers so that there is no discussion and everyone feels obliged to agree with the board. It is a lonely place on council if you want to speak out for what you belive is best for WIRES and the members and the public which fund it.
# RE: Democracy and WIRES Structureguest 2012-06-30 21:05
Are you still a member Graham Mitchell or have you been hounded out like the rest. Very brave of you to have put your name to this comment.

Add comment


SUBSCRIBE TO UPDATES - This option has been deleted due to abuse. You now have no reason to leave an email address so that option is gone too.

Security code

Write the minister

NSW Environment Minister - Paul SpeakmansGive The Minister the message


Put them behind bars!

Got Something to Say?

FREE SPEECH says it allDon't Like Us?
FREE SPEECH says it all

WIRES won't let their members speak about what really goes on. FREE SPEECH is where you can say what you want anonymously without fear of reprisal.

Additional information