Queensland government $25m HIV and STI funding receives mixed responses

Queensland government $25m HIV and STI funding receives mixed responses

THE Queensland government will provide $25.1 million over three years to community groups within the health sector that are dedicated to combating HIV, other blood borne diseases and sexually transmitted infections.

The funding will be distributed via four grants after a group of 15 applicants from community-based health groups were considered and assessed.

However, the decision to deny some applicants any funding has drawn the ire of the opposition, and has a health expert claiming that only organisations contractually prevented from publicly opposing the government were funded.

In a press statement last week, Health Minister Lawrence Springborg said support for non-government organisations within the community was a vital key in his approach to combating HIV in Queensland.

“The NGO sector plays a significant role in the delivery of community-based care for populations at risk,” he said.

“This process is about cementing their funding and coordinating their activities for the next three years. Each of the successful applicants has expertise and strong links to the at-risk populations.

“They work with government agencies, but with added capacity to respond and adapt to specific community needs.”

A consortium of four community groups that was successful – Queensland Positive People, the Ethnic Communities Council of Queensland (ECCQ), the University of Queensland, and Hepatitis Queensland – was formed in effort to submit a unified proposal.

The minister said that the funding arrangements were designed to support programs that aim to reduce transmission of HIV, other blood borne diseases and STIs, and promote access to testing, removing barriers for treatment and provide better education.

“These successful organisations will contribute on the frontline of Queensland’s response to sexually transmissible infections and blood-borne viruses,” Springborg said.

“Better co-ordination and communication between government and non-government agencies and between providers and the general community will strengthen our capacity to deliver effective, outcome-focussed programs.”

Opposition MPs have criticised the funding arrangements for the exclusion of Queensland AIDS Council (QuAC) from any funding.

“QuAC services see more at risk clients seeking advice and rapid HIV testing than any other community service provider. They are the biggest,” Shadow Health Minister Jo-Ann Miller told the Star Observer.

“My impression is that when a community group speaks out about funding cuts, they are threatened and intimidated by Campbell Newman’s government.”

South Brisbane state Labor MP Jackie Trad echoed her colleague’s sentiments, saying the decision not to provide the organisation any funds was an “outrage”.

Miller also said that she understands that some organisations have been told not to cooperate with QuAC.

“I also understand that some agencies have been told to not work with QuAC as their funding may also be threatened,” Miller said.

“This is a disgraceful situation and Campbell Newman should order his health minister to immediately investigate this situation.”

QuAC executive director Michael Scott supported Miller’s comments.

“QuAC was part of initial discussions around the formation of a consortium on May 20 held at QPP,” he told the Star Observer.

“This meeting included Anglicare Positive Directions, ECCQ, Hepatitis Queensland, QuAC, QPP, Respect and University of Queensland. By the end of the week, many of these organisations had removed themselves from discussions to form a consortium.

“Within days an alternate consortium was formed between QPP, Hepatitis Queensland, ECCQ and University of Queensland to submit an application. This is the application that was successful.”

A spokesperson for the state Health Minister told the Star Observer that a panel – consisting of representatives from the Queensland Health Department – was responsible for the assessment of the $25 million, and that the decision to not fund QuAC was based on its publicly-available evaluation criteria.

HIV specialist Dr Wendell Rosevear echoed the comments above regarding organisations being barred from speaking out.

“I am glad the government wants to give $25 million to help prevent HIV over the next three years,” he told the Star Observer.

“I am sad that they only fund the organisations that sign their ‘gagging contracts’ to not speak out on issues or lobby for law change at a state or federal level or have links on their websites to organisations that do.”

Rosevear added that campaigning for law and policy change still has a vital role for the LGBTI community.

“At the beginning of the [HIV and AIDS] epidemic we had to lobby for decriminalisation of homosexuality, otherwise men were too afraid to even test,” he said.

“Now we lobby for relationship recognition as trusting relationships are actually a HIV and sexually transmitted disease prevention strategy that people have forgotten to talk about.

“True prevention comes when we value people, rather than silence them.”

Rosevear was also critical of the government’s decision not to provide funding to Anglicare’s submission for their HIV care and treatment program, Positive Directions.

The Health Minister spokesperson said that the change in funding to Positive Directions reflected on the changing nature of the disease.

“Ten years ago, effective treatments were not readily available. A large number of people infected with HIV were very sick and the nature of funding and activity reflected those circumstances,” the spokesperson said.

“Today, there are effective treatments and the focus of funding has moved to reflect current circumstances. This is set out in the published criteria… stressing treatment, prevention and workforce development.”

You May Also Like

14 responses to “Queensland government $25m HIV and STI funding receives mixed responses”

  1. 24 million is chicken feed. Springboard has not followed any normal process. Normally, the Health Department secretary would be asked to come up with options to spend the money. But Springboard has gone to extrodinary lengths to make the decision about politics, putting his own person on the committee, indicating he did not want the money spent on a needs basis, but wanted to meddle. In short, Springboard acted contrary to the way such a small amount is normally spent.

    The question is why did Springboard not trust the highly regarded clinicians in the Department of Health, and why interfere with a clinical decision? Springboard is not a clinician, but a politician from a party, who, in the nineties, advocated for special desert camps for GLBTI people as a solution to the HIV/AIDS response. Apparently if all of us where locked up, that would stop the virus spreading, according to many in the LNP.

    Our community has overcome bigotry before, when no politician wanted to fund GLBTI organisations. We will overcome the bigotry of Springboard again. Our rights depend on our vigilance, and we cannot afford to be complacent.

    Springboard has made decision that heterosexual people deserve a safe space, but not GLBTI people. It is unfortunate, as history shows such bigotry will lead to serious illness and death. Make no mistake, we are fighting for existence when we fight Springboard.

  2. Springboard had direct involvement with his representative on the selection committee. Labor should be establishing a Royal Commission into this within the first 100 days of office. Public money is being used as a slush fund, so Springboard can carry out a vendetta. What is happening is a hate crime, with the justification heterosexual people feel uncomfortable around us at clinics.

    This is not just economic vandalism, as it denies funding to a group well represented in the data, but the personal dislike Springboard has about GLBTI people.

  3. The terrorist Russian President is getting more money spent on him attending the G20 Summit, so I find it difficult to understand why Springboard would strip funding from GLBTI health services. We have a Civil Right to receive health services by non judgemental health workers. The result not to, is significant as it diminishes our health outcomes.

    The LNP in Queensland should not be starting from scratch, but should be engaging GLBTI organisations with 30 years of experience. They are turning back the clock to the eighties and if there is money to support terrorist like Putin, then surely there is money for good GLBTI people.

  4. Despite whatever the largest number of HIV infections is still with men who have sex with men, right? Check out the consortium group and see how often they mention MSM and how they intend to target them !
    Maybe Farmer Springborg can explain precisely what he means by “the changing nature of the disease”
    Here is an organisation with 30 years experience & history that was defunded without notice and advised publicly in a media announcement in the Sunday Mail and to date nobody from the LNP Government as to their reasoning has had even the courtesy to advise or speak directly with QaHC either then or now.
    The Minister and his government has an obvious homophobic attitude towards the GLBTI community that speaks volumes and seriously brings into question their commitment as to how they intend to target those most at risk in Queensland?
    How can “gagging contracts” possibly be democratic ?
    Hopefully the Opposition will pursue this further.

  5. Sadly, not one of the organisations that received money (including the consortium), is a dedicated LGBT organisation. With HIV transmission occurring mainly in gay men, wouldn’t it be appropriate to fund organisations who service that community? Springborg is not only putting gay men at risk, he is pitting organisations against each other and driving a wedge within the community. Its shameful and dangerous. And it will take tax payers money to clean up this mess that will effect generations to come once the LNP are thrown out of office in 4 years time. It costs 1.5 million dollars to treat someone living with HIV over their life time. It costs a fraction of that to provide a relevant community driven response to the HIV epidemic. And not to mention the emotional and other personal non-monetary costs of contracting HIV. Totally inept, mean and shameful policy!

  6. So Jerome…do you really think that QuAC wouldn’t have put forward a quality application considering the extent of the experience they have had in fighting HIV/AIDS? Do you not think if it wasn’t for QuAC that the rates of HIV would be nowhere near as low as they are now? Nobody else was doing it. QuAC have always had and will always have the best link with gay men because their work is peer based. Also, don’t you think it could be remotely possible that the Qld Health representatives could have been briefed to not even consider the QuAC application? Have you not seen how this disgraceful govt has worked since 2012? Also QuAC doesn’t accuse the other organisations of anything in the way I read the story. However if those orgs have been threatened then they should grow some balls and stand up against this govt.

  7. There’s a whole lot of assumptions in this article. Honestly, why would anyone want to partner with QuAC if they continually spread lies about other organisations. Maybe their funding application was just no good.

    • Jerome, the Qld government and that uneducated twit of a minister Springborg are exacting revenge on QuAC for daring to criticise the Tories and their backward, destructive policies. It is plain to see that this is a vindictive and dangerous campaign by a norrow minded and arrogant to silence dissent.