85 The Ombudsman Denies It Acted Corruptly (1): 7 November 2024

When I was in England after scattering Margaret’s ashes on the top of Croagh Patrick, I sent an email to Mr Iain Anderson,. 

Mr Anderson was appointed as the Commonwealth Ombudsman after the events that I have been describing in my blogs. 

Mr Anderson was not involved in the refusal of the Ombudsman to carry out the duties imposed on it by Parliament.  It is possible that Mr Anderson has been attempting to clean up the load of shit that he found at The Ombudsman Office when he started his duties as Ombudsman.  If so, I can only wish him good luck.  I think it is unlikely that he will be successful if he is attempting this.

****

I finally received a reply to my October email at 10.41 am Adelaide time today, Thursday 7 November 2024.

I will publish shortly in full, the reply I received today from Ombudsman Mr Iain Anderson.

This is the email I sent to Iain Anderson on 11 October this year.

Dear Mr Anderson, I thought I should let you know that I have told the world in my latest blog posted on 10 October 2024 about the refusal of the Ombudsman to do its job and enforce the law that it is supposedly required to enforce under its legislation. I still have your letter in which you express doubt that the Ombudsman acted corruptly as defined in Commonwealth legislation.  I will continue to disagree with you on that claim.  I believe the relevant staff at the Ombudsman were obviously corrupt and that incompetence even on a massive scale cannot account for their refusal to do their statutory duty. My beautiful wife Margaret died on 22 August 2023 and I still mourn deeply. Margaret might now be dead, but I have certainly NOT forgotten the behaviour of HCF or the other health insurers or the Ombudsman. I want you to know that I am completely exposing the heartless conduct of HCF in relation to Lift Cancer Care Services – and undoubtedly other health service providers - over the period of 3 years that HCF and the other insurers refused to obey the law. My blogs can be read on my website hankinredden.au They should make HCF, NIB, Teachers Health and the Ombudsman squirm at their own appalling conduct, but I have no illusions that this will ever happen. I have not and will not forget the appalling behaviour of the Ombudsman.   John Hankin Widower of Margaret Redden

In his letter received today (5 November 2024), Mr Anderson asserts that the Ombudsman did not act corruptly in its handling of my numerous complaints about the refusal of the health insurers to obey the law.

Specifically, Mr Anderson says this.

I recognise you do not agree with my views. You have the right to express your disagreement, including by making public statements on your blog and publishing correspondence to you from this Office. You also have the right to refer your views to the National Anti-Corruption Commission, if you wish to allege corrupt behaviour.

****

On 6 January 2023 when Margaret was still alive but hovering near death and in dreadful pain, I wrote to Mr Anderson.  By this stage, I had forced the health insurers to start obeying the law, but I hoped the newly appointed Ombudsman might be interested in performing the difficult job of trying to ensure that his government agency at least tried to obey the law.  Amongst other things, I said this to Mr Anderson.

In my correspondence, I made clear that a criminal scam is being perpetuated by the health insurers in relation to Type C certificates.  I made clear that the Health Department has known (at least) that something “amiss” was occurring for some years now and has done nothing to bring the scam to an end and that there was a clear whiff of corruption. In my correspondence, I also complained about the blurring incompetence of the Ombudsman.  I also pointed out that there is clear evidence that crimes have been committed by the health insurers and that these crimes must be reported to the relevant law enforcement authority.  I believe that the circumstances I have uncovered certainly amount to serious breaches of the law and that the duty of the Ombudsman (and the Department of Health for that matter) is to report those breaches to the proper authorities. The appropriate law enforcement authority should also be asked to examine the possibility of corruption within the Health Department and the Ombudsman.

I also asked Iain Anderson to “self report” The Ombudsman – the government agency, not Mr Anderson personally – to relevant law enforcement authorities and to the then recently established National Anti Corruption Commission.  I am quietly confident that the Australian Federal Police were NOT asked to investigate what had happened and that no report was ever made to the NACC on behalf of the Ombudsman.

I said this to Iain Anderson on 6 January 2023.

It seems certain to me that neither the Health Department nor the Ombudsman have ever bothered to test the claims by the health insurers that the Type Ce certificates were legally inadequate.  This could have been done very easily by asking to see the certificates.  Compounding this appalling failure (was it really simple incompetence?) is the complete failure of the Ombudsman to even ask me for further information when it was clear I could have provided further information.  In my correspondence I pointed out the impossibility of “investigating” whether anyone has breached the law if the precise requirements of the law are not examined.  I am convinced that no one in the Ombudsman has ever bothered to examine the relevant legislation in relation to Type C certificates. The National Anti Corruption Commission has now been established by legislation but has not yet commenced operation.  As already said in my correspondence, I certainly intend to ask the NACC to conduct an in depth investigation of this whole dismal affair.  I will ask the NACC to carefully examine the relationship between the Department of Health, the Ombudsman and the health insurers. I recommend that if the Ombudsman wishes to minimise its own reputational damage, it should “self report” what has happened to the NACC at the earliest opportunity.  Self reporting might perhaps indicate some good faith by the Ombudsman despite everything that has happened. I presume that like all previous correspondence to the Ombudsman, this letter will be ignored, but I live in hope.  Sometimes miracles happen.

****

My letter to Iain Anderson on 6 January 2023 was the last piece of correspondence I was able to write about the unlawful behaviour of the health insurers.  From then onwards until I watched Margaret die in Intensive Care at 3.16 am on Tuesday 22 August 2023, all of my waking hours were devoted to trying to do the impossible - keep Margaret alive. 

 84 Bastardry in Hoscar Moss - Part 2: 6 November 2024

December 1775/ January 1776

These facts are derived from the Orders. 

Catherine’s child was born on 8 January 1776 – two years and twelve weeks before the Court hearing on 2 April 1778.  When her daughter was born, Catherine was in the institutional welfare care of the Township of Lathom at the Ormskirk Workhouse.

Her parents had thrown Catherine out of her home because she was unmarried and pregnant.  Other close relatives refused to help Catherine.  Catherine was alone, friendless, desperate and without a safe place where she could give birth.

Catherine must have asked James Hankin for help, but James either did not help her.  I suspect James refused to help because he denied to the Court that he was the father of the child.  When her parents, close family members and the father of her unborn child refused to give her any help, Catherine had to seek help from the Ormskirk Workhouse.

Seeking help from the Workhouse signalled how desperate Catherine was in the period up to the birth of her child on 2 January 1776.

The Ormskirk Workhouse was established in 1732 and officially it could accommodate 114 inmates.  The philosophy of the Workhouse system was to make Workhouse conditions as grim as possible to drive people away to minimise the amount the local community had to pay to provide welfare to those in need.  People only sought help from the Workhouse if they were desperate and had no other options.

If Catherine gave birth in the Ormskirk Workhouse, she did so because there were no other alternatives available to her.

****

Apart from being friendless and homeless in the weeks before her baby was born, Catherine had other reasons to feel desperate as the birth of her baby neared.  December 1775 through January 1776 was bitterly cold - much colder than usual.  The winter of 1775-1776 was one of the ten coldest winters in recorded English history.  The website Pascal Bonenfant has collated historical data about British weather.  Pascal Bonenfant says this about the winter in which Catherine gave birth to her baby.

“1775/76: Severe winter; Severe cold weather much of Europe 9th Jan to 2nd Feb: Thames frozen for some time; intensely stormy cyclonic February followed. January: A widespread and often severe frost for a large part of the month. Also snow. (The 'Great Frost' from accounts by Gilbert White). The month overall almost as cold as the record cold January of 1963. A severe/ prolonged cold spell. There were interludes of mild/ melting, but snowfall was often considerable, with frequent drifting. Considerably low temperatures over the snow-cover during the second half of the month. Minima recorded at South Lambeth were reported as 11, 7, 6 and 6 degrees Fahrenheit on the nights of 28th to the 31st. (in degrees Celsius down to about -14 degrees C). At Selborne (NE Hampshire), the figures for the same nights were: 7, 6, 10 and 0 degrees F, the 0 degrees F converts to -18 degrees C. These low values were often accompanied by fog, and some reports suggest temperatures as low as -4 degrees Fahrenheit at Chatham and -11degrees Fahrenheit at Maidstone, both Kent. Obviously daytime temperatures were very low, with sub-zero values persistent. By the CET [Central English Temperature] series, this January is in the 'top 10' of cold such-named months in that dataset, which runs from 1659. (A sudden thaw/milder weather evening 1st February.)

 

Pascal Bonenfant concentrates on the weather in London, pointing out that the River Thames froze, but Catherine lived in Lancashire not London.  Lancashire is north of London and colder than London.  Lancashire is renowned for the quantity of its rainfall. 

The website www.foreignstudents.com refers understatedly to the weather patterns in Lancashire (which it calls north west England).  It says “Generally, the further North in England you go, the colder the average temperatures get and the windier it gets. However, in terms of rainfall, it depends on where in the north you are. Whilst the North East has relatively little rain, the North West experiences quite a bit.”

However bad the weather was in London when the River Thames froze over in December 1775 to February 1776, it was much colder and wetter in Lancashire.  Anyone without shelter in that winter was likely to die very quickly.  A woman in the final weeks of pregnancy with nowhere to shelter was likely to die very quickly.  When Catherine begged for help at the Ormskirk Workhouse on or near Christmas Day in 1775, she was probably one of the many desperate and destitute needing shelter to stay alive another day.  Her situation was so bad that even the Ormskirk Workhouse was better than all of the alternatives.

The Orders tell us how long Catherine stayed in the Workhouse.

Payment at the rate of sixteen pence per week was payable to the Township of Lathom if the Workhouse was ever again burdened by having to look after Catherine’s baby – eight pence had to be paid by James and another eight pence by Catherine.  Sixteen pence per week was the equivalent of £0/1/4 (one shilling and four pence per week). 

The Orders required payment of £0/6/0 (six shillings or seventy two pence) to reimburse the Workhouse for the cost of helping Catherine from before the birth on 8 January 1776 to the time when she was evicted from the Workhouse.  At a rate of £0/1/4 per week, reimbursement of £0/6/- meant help was given to Catherine for a maximum of 4 ½ weeks.   It may have been less because the £0/6/- may have included reimbursement for the cost of a midwife to deliver the baby.

By inference, Catherine was admitted to Ormskirk Workhouse just before her baby was born, and she left after a maximum period of 4 ½ weeks.  At a maximum, Catherine entered the Workhouse for about 2 weeks before the birth and left it about 2 ½ weeks after the birth.  The approximate timeline for Catherine’s Workhouse residence was:

·         Admission on Monday 25 December 1775 (Christmas Day);

·         Birth of the baby on Monday 8 January 1776; and

·         Departure from the Workhouse with her 2 ½ week old baby on about Wednesday 24 January 1776.

After leaving the Workhouse on about 24 January 1776, Catherine was cast out into a local area that was still in the grip of one of the coldest winters in recorded English history.

As will be revealed shortly, it seems that some of Catherine’s relatives took pity on her and gave her and her baby shelter.  Those relatives did not include Catherine’s parents or my great uncle James Hankin.

 83 Bastardry in Hoscar Moss - Part 1: 6 November 2024

Thomas and James Hankin

My great, great, great, great, great grandfather was Thomas Hankin; Thomas Hankin was baptised on 3 March 1722 and he was nine when his father James died in 1731.  By that stage Thomas was living at Hoscar Moss with his surviving sibling and the majority of his immediate family members were already dead.  James Hankin, older brother of Thomas did not die young.

Thomas married Elizabeth Culshaw on 15 November 1741.  This means Elizabeth Culshaw was my great grandmother five times removed.

James Hankin should have been able to have a prosperous, hard working life but he threw away the opportunities available to him.  James created pain and disaster for those around him. 

****

James Hankin Fathers an Illegitimate Child in 1778

On 28 January 1778, the Court of Quarter Sessions at Ormskirk issued a Summons requiring James Hankin to appear in Court on 2 April 1778.  The Summons was issued after an application of “the churchwardens and overseers of the Poor of the … Township of Lathom” An Affidavit sworn by Catherine Culshaw was attached to the Summons; the Summons claimed that Catherine Culshaw, a single woman, had given birth to a “female bastard child” in the Township of Lathom.

There was a hearing on 2 April 1778 before Justices of the Peace called Robert Master and Thomas Baldwin.  The Court declared Catherine Culshaw had given birth to a female child on 8 January 1776 within the Parish of Ormskirk and that James Hankin “husbandman” of Lathom was the child’s father and that the child was likely to be “chargeable” to the Township of Lathom.

The Court made orders against James Hankin and Catherine Culshaw “for the better relief of the … Township of Lathom” and for the “sustentation and relief of the … bastard child”.  This is a copy of the Court Orders

 

COUNTY OF             } LANCASTER        )                                       } (To wit.)                      } The order of Robert Master Doctor of Divinity and Thomas Baldwin Clerk, two of his Majesty’s justices of the peace in and for the said County, one whereof being of the quorum, and both residing next unto the limits of the parish church within the parish of Ormskirk in the said County, made the Second day of April in the Eighteenth of the reign of his said majesty King George the Third, concerning a female bastard child, lately born in the Township of Lathom and parish aforesaid of the body of Catherine Culshaw single woman.   WHEREAS it hath appeared unto us the said justices, as well upon the complaint of the churchwardens and overseers of the Poor of the said Township of Lathom as upon the oath of the said Catherine Culshaw that the said Catherine Culshaw on the Twenty eighth day of January 1776 now last past, was delivered of a female bastard child at Lathom in the said parish of Ormskirk in the said County, and that the said bastard child is likely to be chargeable to the said Township of Lathom and further, James Hankin in the said County Husbandman did beget the said bastard child on the body of the said Catherine Culshaw. And whereas the said James Hankin hath appeared before us in pursuance of our Summons for that purpose but hath not shown any sufficient cause why he the said James Hankin shall not be the reputed father of the said bastard child. We therefore, upon examination of the cause and circumstances of the premises as well upon the oath of the said Catherine Culshaw as otherwise, do hereby adjudge him the said James Hankin to be the reputed father of the said bastard child.  And thereupon we do order, as well for the better relief of the  said Township of Lathom as for the sustentation and relief of the said bastard child, that the said James Hankin shall and do forthwith, upon notice of this order, pay or cause to be paid to the said churchwardens and overseers of the poor of the said Township of Lathom, or to some or one of them, the sum of six shillings for and towards the lying in of the said Catherine Culshaw and the maintenance of the said bastard child, to the time of making this our Order. And we do also hereby further order, that the said James Hankin shall likewise pay or cause to be paid, to the churchwardens and overseers of the poor of the said Township of Lathom for the time being, or to some or one of them, the sum of eight pence weekly and every week from the present time, for and towards the keeping, sustentation, and maintenance of the said bastard child, for and during so long time as the said bastard child shall be chargeable to the said Township of Lathom. And we do further order that the said Catherine Culshaw shall also pay or cause to be paid to the said churchwardens and overseers of the poor of the said Township of Lathom for the time being, or to some or one of them, the sum of eightpence weekly and every week, so long as the said bastard child shall be chargeable to the said Township of Lathom in case she shall not nurse and take care of the said child herself.  Given under our hands and seals the day and year first above written.

This is a plain English translation of the Orders.

·         James Hankin had to pay £0/6/0 (six shillings) to the “the churchwardens and overseers of the Poor of the … Township of Lathom” to cover the cost of “the lying in of … Catherine Culshaw” and the maintenance of her child to the date of the Orders.

·         As well as the £0/6/-, James Hankin was ordered to pay £0/0/8 (eight pence) per week from 2 April 1778 to cover the costs of maintenance for the child during any period when the Township of Lathom had to provide welfare to the child..

·         Catherine Culshaw had to pay £0/0/8 (eight pence) per week from 2 April 1778 for every week that the child was a liability to the Township of Lathom.

****

My five times removed great uncle di not simply father a child who was born outside of marriage.  He had then abandoned both the mother of the child and the child to fend for themselves in a society where both unmarried mothers and their children were routinely punished by more “upright” members of that society.

I never knew him, but I think my five times removed great uncle was an unpleasant human being.  Although his daughter was stuck with the label of being a “bastard”, the actual bastard was my five times removed real uncle James Hankin..

****

James Hankin abandoned Catherine Culshaw and his daughter to their fate in the coldest winter England had to endure in more than 1,000 years.  The weather in 1778 was colder than the hard, hard heart of my great uncle James.

 82 The Ombudsman and the Battle to Make the Health Insurers Obey the Law Part 18, Section 5: 5 November 2024

Unpicking The Ombudsman Email of 5 April 2022 (4)

 

The Ombudsman Lies About Its “Mission”

It is important to note that the primary function of the Office is to assist consumers with their private health insurance problems.  When administrative disputes between health funds and hospitals are brought to our attention, our main role is to assess the reasonableness of the response from both parties.

Translation ↓

Here, the Ombudsman lies about its own job description.  Section 20G(1)(a) of the Ombudsman Act is relevant.  It says a complaint can be made about “any matter arising out of or connected with a private health insurance arrangement”.  If a complaint is made, Ombudsman MUST deal with it under the Act.  In this part of the email, the Ombudsman asserts that it has no obligation to try and resolve what it calls “administrative disputes between health funds and hospitals”.  Instead of following the Act, The Ombudsman creates an exception to the Act.  If complaints concern something the Ombudsman labels “administrative disputes”, the Ombudsman refuses to follow the Act and refuses to obey the law.  Here, the Ombudsman lies about the task given to it by Parliament.  The Ombudsman Act does NOT permit the Ombudsman to act like this.  The Ombudsman ignored the rights given to health providers under the Act.  As do patients, health providers have the right to complain to the Ombudsman about health insurers.  The Ombudsman is not given the power to declare a complaint concerns an “administrative dispute” and to then dismiss it.  The Ombudsman Act does not mention anything called an “administrative dispute”.  How can a refusal to pay health insurance benefits which the law says must be paid, ever be classified as an “administrative dispute”?  Surely the only issue in this a case is simple – does the law require the payment to be made or not? Here the Ombudsman says it – and not Parliament – will decide what complaints the Ombudsman will investigate.  This behaviour of the official regulator is unlawful and shameful.

****

 

The Ombudsman Knows HCF Lied – But Doesn’t Care

In this case, we are of the view that HCF’s request for additional information to support individual [Lift] claims is reasonable under the current framework.

Translation ↓

Until this point in the email, the Ombudsman has made no reference to any supposed claim by HCF that it has requested “additional information to support individual claims”.  I had already given the Ombudsman copies of every piece of paper in existence for all of Margaret’s Lift treatments up to 21 February 2022.  The paperwork left np doubt that HCF had NEVER sought any identifiable paperwork and that most claims had been made to disappear.. How could the Ombudsman accept the reasonableness of requests for additional information which had never been made?  Only one logical possibility occurred to me.  HCF had somehow corrupted the Ombudsman?  Was corruption the reason the Ombudsman refused to do its job even when I had already done most of the work for it?  I am still unable to come up with a convincing alternative explanation for the behaviour of the Ombudsman.  I suppose an alternative is possible.

 

The Ombudsman Blows a Kiss at Lift

We are also of the view that [Lift] have demonstrated they have made every effort to convince HCF to pay benefits for their services.  Despite this effort HCF remain unconvinced [Lift] is eligible to claim.

Translation ↓

Here, the Ombudsman casually waves at its obligation to impartially enforce the law.  It showed “impartiality” by pretending to say something positive about Lift.  Lift had gone to great lengths to persuade HCF to obey the law because the welfare of its patients depended on them receiving their treatments..  Every business tries to persuade its debtors to promptly pay their accounts.  They must if they are to survive. Of course, HCF remained “unconvinced” that Lift was “eligible to claim”.  HCF knew the law required it to pay, but it refused to obey the law because the regulator ignored the law. Criminals keep committing crimes when they know the police will do nothing to stop them.

 

The Ombudsman Washes Its Hands of the Complaint

In these sort of circumstances, we expect that both parties work together to come to an agreement without the patient suffering any financial detriment.

Translation ↓

The Ombudsman had learned its lines from Pontius Pilate.  Although saying “I can find no fault with this man”, Pontius Pilate told the High Priests to “Do what you want” with Jesus – thus, initiating the judicial murder of Jesus.  Although claiming it could find no fault with Lift, the Ombudsman also refused to do its duty. In a measure that any lawyer immediately recognisable by all lawyers, the Ombudsman dished out blame to one of the victims of the HCF scam – Lift Cancer Care Services.  According to the Ombudsman, Lift should not to cause financial pain to its patients just because HCF refused to obey the law.  If HCF refused to pay, Lift should swallow the loss – and of course, cease stop trading when it ran out of money! According to the Ombudsman, Lift and not HCF, was at fault in this matter.  Lift had not persuaded HCF to obey the law and no one had complained to the Ombudsman until Lift asked its patients to pay the treatment cost that the health insurers should have paid.  According to the Ombudsman, this was an “administrative dispute” and the Ombudsman was lawfully entitled to ignore “administrative disputes”.  The Ombudsman would never tell health insurers to obey the law.  According to the Ombudsman, HCF should be permitted to do whatever it wanted.  The Ombudsman refused to do the job Parliament had instructed it to do..

****

Margaret was gravely ill when she had her 70^th birthday on 29 March 2023.  Somehow, she came to a restaurant to celebrate her continued life.

****

Prior to Margaret’s birthday, on Thursday 5 January 2023 David McGregor, Director, Industry Investigations Team, Investigations Branch at the Ombudsman had claimed in a phone call to me that the Ombudsman had been responsible for the health insurers eventually obeying the law.  David McGregor is a liar but he probably told the truth when he claimed he had been a senior communication channel for many years between the Ombudsman and the Health Department and the health insurers. I do not know if David McGregor (David.McGregor@ombudsman.gov.au) was corrupt, but the possibility of this seems real given his phone call and the lies he peddled to me during it.

****

On 29 March, Margaret had another 4 months and 23 days to live.  Cheryl Scopazzi was the only “friend” who would come with us and Cheryl cancelled me after we had coffee on Friday 12 January 2024.  Like the other cancellation team members, she has never bothered to tell me why – but she did borrow a lot of money from me on 18 September 2023, just 26 days after Margaret died.  Cheryl is on the right in this photo.

 81 It’s a Long Way from Lancashire to Here - Part 5: 4 November 2024

Fisherman’s Bend Migrant Hostel housed a diverse group of people.  The biggest thing they had in common, was poverty.  They lived on the Hostel because they didn’t have the money to get out.  The Australian Government created a self-perpetuating poverty cycle.  Poor migrants had no alternative to life in the Hostel.  The charges for living in the Hostel kept them poor., making it much harder to leave the Hostel.

Fisherman’s Bend contained a large number of “Displaced People”.  Australia provided refuge for hundreds of thousands of people whose previous lives had been destroyed by World War II.  Mrs Morris, a friend of Josey’s, was one of them.  Mrs Morris had a son about my age, whose name may have been Daniel.  After leaving the Hostel, we visited Mrs Morris in Altona and I noticed Mrs Morris had the tattoo on her arm.  Mum refused to tell me why Mrs Morris had the tattoos.  In 2013, I visited Auschwitz (it is in Poland) and the guide through this place of horror said tattooing only took place in Auschwitz and tattoos were given only to those deemed useful by the death camp authorities.  If Mrs Morris had numbers tattooed on her arm, she had been in Auschwitz.

We never visited Mrs Morris again.

Bless you Mrs Morris.  I hope life in Australia treated you well.

****

I also remember a man called Seeto.  He was a kindly soul, and even at then, I knew that something terrible had happened to him.  I have no idea what Seeto went through.  He was a boiler attendant on the Hostel.

****

The River Yarra docks were on the northern side of Lorimer Street - immediately opposite the Hostel.  During school holidays, we Hostel children would cross Lorimer Street and wander through the docks.  No one tried to stop us.  The stevedores often gave us money so we could buy lollies.

There were many factories within easy walking distance of the Hostel.

****

Lorimer Street intersected with Salmon Street just after it passed Hall Street.  It ended there.  General Motors Holden car factory was on Salmon Street at the Lorimer Street intersection.  Further south on Salmon Street was the Kraft Foods Factory.  One of the streets in that area is Vegemite Way; Kraft make vegemite.

Behind the General Motors Holden factory were the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation and the Government Aircraft Factory (GAF).  Dad worked at all three factories.  CAC and GAF built Sabre jets for the Australian Government, so there was an airport for the planes to take off and land.  The airport had 2 runways running north to south and east to west.  The planes used to swoop very low over the Hostel. 

South of what is now Turner Street, there were swamps littered with abandoned 20 and 40 gallon fuel drums from the airport.  We children formed gangs and often played in the swamps.  We nailed planks across the abandoned fuel drums and used poles to raft across the swamps, although none of us could swim.  The swamps contained the usual array of deadly Australian snakes.  We survived the snakes.

Parts of the swamps still exist.  Westgate Park is the Melbourne side of the West Gate Bridge.  where the CAC and GAF and some of the airfield once existed.  This is from the West Gate Park website.

Westgate Park offers a range of attractions and activities within close proximity to the city. It is located along the eastern banks of the Yarra River under the Westgate Bridge and offers spectacular views to the mouth of the Yarra and the city skyline… The area was originally part of the saltmarsh that extended north from the Yarra River up the Maribyrnong River to the present site of Flemington Racecourse. Sand mining commenced in the 1930s and continued for at least a decade. Part of the excavated land was filled with water to form the southern saltwater lake. The remainder of the park was used as a rubbish tip, which operated for 23 years. During World War 2 an aircraft factory and airfield occupied the site.

 

The Vauxhall Factory - Australian Motor Industries - was south east of the Hostel on Graham Street.  We called it the Vauxhall Factory.  Vauxhall cars were imported in wooden crates and assembled at the factory.  The wooden crates were often left lying on the factory grounds.  In November each year, we children walked to the factory, climbed the fence and threw the crates over the fence to cart back to the Hostel.  Where it became fuel for our Guy Fawkes bonfires.  There were no crates at GMH because GMH made its cars rather than assembled them.

Because of the acute danger of fires in the Australian heat – November can often see temperatures in the 30s – bonfires have been banned for many decades.  It is also many decades since it has been legally possible to purchase the fireworks that we used to light on bonfire night.

The Fisherman’s Bend area has changed beyond recognition in the decades since the 1950s. 

****

We went to the movies on Saturday afternoons at he the Eclipse Cinema on the corner of Crockford and Pickles Streets Port Melbourne.  Crockford Street is a continuation of Bay Street. The Eclipse disappeared many decades ago, but before the start of television, it was a regular haunt for children of all ages.  One of my favourite movies was The Desert Hawk - a swashbuckling piece of nonsense.

The Hostel inmates staged a costume ball in Port Melbourne Town Hall in 1954 or 1955.  Cliff and Josey wrapped a white sheet around me, stuffed a cushion down my front and painted the sheet with black dots.  They wrote “Hostel Plum Pudding” across my front. 

Bill’s costume was more dignified.  He was clad in swashbuckling Desert Hawk clothes and hung with a sign proclaiming “Desert Fox – Ladies Beware”.  The Desert Fox was the nickname of German General Rommel but I had no idea why ladies had to “beware” of the Desert Fox.

In the years before television, the many migrant hostels created opportunities for entertainment.  Hostel concerts travelled from one concert to another.  I was in the Ragamuffin Boys’ Choir.  Just before one of the concerts, I complained to dad that one of my baby teeth would not come out.  Cliff pulled a pair of pliers from his toolkit and pulled the tooth out.  I sang in the Ragamuffin Boys’ Choir immediately after the tooth was pulled.

****

This photo is of the Hostel kindergarten.  I spent 1953 in the Hostel kindergarten.  The hostel toilets had no toilet paper.  If I need to do a poo, I had to ask for toilet paper from one of the kindergarten staff members.

This is the menu for Christmas dinner on 25 December 1955.  Hostel food was dreadful - much worse than Josey's coking and Josey's cooking was truly abysmal.  I was thin and emaciated when we finally left the Hostel.