Friday, June 4, 2010

FUNDRAISING CONCERT THIS SUNDAY / Part 209 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

The following is an important notice regarding the Bayne Campaign for Justice. The conclusion of their case to recover their three children is scheduled for August 9-12, 2010. While they hold evening jobs to provide a home for themselves and eventually their children, legal expenses are imposing. So many of their friends are helping. I am inviting you to the fund raising classical music concert this coming Sunday evening.
“For Love & for Justice” The Second Fundraising Concert for the Bayne Family legal expenses ~

Musicians are Violinist Mark Ferris, and Pianist Zabeth Bayne
Mark Ferris is a composer, concertmaster of the Vancouver Opera Orchestra and the Sinfonia of the Northshore, and has been in the first violin section of the CBC Orchestra since 1989. Zabeth is a talented concert pianist and music instructor whose music has been on hold for the past 2 1/2 years as she has struggled to regain her family.

This Sunday, June 6, 2010 @ 7:30pm to 9:00pm at Vancouver Chinese Baptist Church, 7474 Culloden Street, Vancouver, BC

Admission is Free - Gifts will be received for the Bayne legal fund

Some Suggested Action Steps

1. Make a donation at the concert or right now by making the cheque payable to
Lau, Chiu, Hunt Legal Trust Fund for Bayne
9406 Pauleshin Cres, Richmond, BC V7E 6P2
Donations will be accepted by deposit to this trust account at any branch of TD Canada Trust. TD Canada Trust [bank # 004] Continental Centre Branch [branch # 9713]
Account Number [6415554]

2. Pray. Pray for the Baynes, for their children, for Lawyer Doug Christie, for Judge Thomas Crabtree, for employees of the Minister of Children & Family Development. Pray that the children will be home soon.

3. Share this invitation with your friends. Point them to the GPS blog.


  1. Yesterday I promised to respond to the person who asked how to fix the MCFD. I will start at the other end and describe how a well run child protection agency should function. To start with one needs to attract and retain quality personnel. Protection social workers need to have intelligence, integrity, compassion and courage. They need the courage to make difficult decisions and to admit mistakes and provide remedies. The employer needs to have clear concepts of the knowledge and skills needed for protection work and to make sure that staff are thoroughly trained and given three to five years of good mentoring, before being considered at fully fledged professionals. The knowledge and skills of the profession are all definable and trainable and they are all in my book. One needs a good knowledge of human development, child development, all the related statutes of the work, evidentiary skills, court skills, social resources and caseload management. Interviewing and assessment skills are vital. One needs to know what other professionals can do and equally important, what they cannot do. One needs to learn the skills of working with foster parents as valued partners. One needs to practice within a strict ethical framework, such as that required of registered social workers. Competent social workers are proud of their work and are happy to be accountable to both client and employer. No need for a culture of secrecy. In case you think this seems to much to ask, I assure readers that I have known a number of fine social workers who practiced this way. What I describe is a professional model, where there is mutual respect between staff and administration.
    Of course readers know that the MCDF falls far short of this standard. What we have is a bureaucratic model, where directions come down from the top and everything is driven by rigid rules and procedures. Ther is a form and a format for everything Procedures are cumbersome, wasteful, expensive and ineffective. Repeated failure leads to a culture of secrecy and staff turnover is very high. Probably it is the brightest and the best who leave. All the systems and formats are useless without quality staff. When the risk assessment is completed by an oaf, it is of no value.
    Why does every reform make things worse. Simple. They do not learn by experience. Most of the problems are not administrative or legal. The problems are because they simply do not know how to achieve the professional model that I describe. Nonetheless, every time a new scandal (Gove, Hughes) erupts, the ony solutions proposed are adiministrative, or legal changes. All that happens is that there are more rules and regulations and more tertiary employment in tertiary positions.
    Obviously, fixing things is like untying the Gordian knot, or cutting it like Alexander the great. Our Legislative members have no stomach for such a task. Mail me at
    I will send you my full position paper.

  2. Sounds like a night of beautiful music! My two favourite instruments. Any chance there can be a recording?

  3. I will forward the query to the committee in charge. Don't hold you breath. They may not have the facilities and since Mark is a professional musician, who knows what legal requirements there may be.

  4. Fundraiser DVD's would be a great idea.

  5. Just a word of caution. Assume that this concert will be under surveillance by their after-hour agent. Don't say or distribute anything that could be used against the Baynes in court. They are getting desperate.

    Learn from your enemy, implement a "no recording" policy. This time, parents call the shot.

    "Neither give place to the devil." (Ephesians 4:27)

  6. How could such a concert at all be used against the Baynes? I can't possibly imagine the context in which that would be the case.

  7. To Anonymous (June 5, 2010 7:54 AM):

    Assuming that you are not from MCFD fishing for information, I ask your question in good faith.

    A trial is a legal battle. At war, both sides seek every possible means to defeat each other. If the Baynes say anything derogatory against the law, the process or individuals involved, bingo the ministry counsel will certainly use this to his advantage in the trial or file another lawsuit as further financial punishment. If they publish or discuss any information that MCFD finds new and relevant to child protection, they can further lengthen the process by calling more new witnesses or introducing more new evidence. Of course, if they say anything that can be construed (or misconstrued) as admission of guilt. This is exotic to SW. This is just a few examples.

    You can read how shrewdly SW manoeuvre, misconstrue and mislead in this blog. This gives you a preview of what they are capable of doing in court.

    I guarantee that this blog is under severe monitoring by special interests. I pray that all bloggers in support of the Baynes be very careful with what they write. Information inadvertently disclosed could be used against them. This is not to say that the Baynes have anything to hide. Absolutely not. Give MCFD nothing to further harm this family.


I encourage your comments using this filter.
1. Write politely with a sincere statement, valid question, justifiable comment.
2. Engage with the blog post or a previous comment whether you agree or disagree.
3. Avoid hate, profanity, name calling, character attack, slander and threats, particularly when using specific names.
4. Do not advertise