Three months later, (early June 1996) a member of staff came to Brother Barclay with a list of fourteen matters of concern with respect to the appellant. The concerns were wide ranging and included allegations of drinking whilst on an outdoor activities excursion, unauthorised absences, use of the school computer to access pornography off the Internet in the staff room, a lack of interest in the students and a failure to become involved in co-curricular activities. At about the same time as these concerns were made known, Brother Barclay became aware that Mrs Allardice and another female member of staff had complained about the appellant accessing pornography off the Internet from a school computer in the staff room. In result, there was a meeting between the appellant and Brother Barclay. It appears from a letter written by the latter to the former, to record what was discussed at the meeting, that the only issue debated was the access to pornography. The issue of alleged failure to become involved in co-curricular activities was resolved by the teacher with the concerns speaking to the appellant and the latter agreeing to take students who wished to play golf. Brother Barclay's letter written after the meeting, records that the appellant admitted that he had accessed pornography on one occasion whilst in the staff room but claimed that this access was accidental. The letter went on to note that at the meeting the appellant raised a concern he had that students had ready access to pornography off the Internet. Very shortly after the meeting between the appellant and Brother Barclay, the appellant addressed a staff meeting. He told the staff that he had been working on ways and means of preventing students from accessing inappropriate material off the Internet, but as from that moment, he was abandoning that project.