No action taken against BGF
An investigation by the NSW Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing (OLGR) has found the Bobby Goldsmith Foundation (BGF) was in compliance with legislative requirements and recommended practice regarding its internal records and controls.
But its published audited accounts failed to meet the requirements of the Charitable Fundraising Act 1991.
In a letter to the complainant, Andrew Brougham, the OLGR’s charities compliance manager John Hollis wrote, “The inquiry revealed that the internal controls and records maintained by the Foundation comply with legislative requirements and recommended best practice.
“However, the audited accounts published on its website did not meet the disclosure requirements set out in the authority conditions issued to the Foundation under the provisions of the Charitable Fundraising Act, 1991.
“During the course of the inquiry the Foundation arranged for its auditors to prepare a revised income statement and the supplementary notes required by fundraising conditions.
The revised information was progressively released on the Foundation’s website with the final notes published on 3 September 2010. This information is now readily available to the public.”
The OLGR found the ‘Other Expenses’ listed in the original accounts included payments for housie prizes and the direct salaries of case workers and counsellors, which it recognised were an expense of the BGF meeting its objectives.
“The Office proposes taking no further action against the Foundation at this time as they have taken remedial action to provide the necessary disclosure in the accounts and have made them public online.”
In a statement BGF president Martin Walsh and CEO Bev Lange said the foundation’s financial reporting was now fully compliant with the requirements of the Charitable Fundraising Act.
“We will … be sending out a letter directly to our clients, donors, volunteers and supporters to report back to them in more detail on the findings of the review.”
In a statement, Brougham asked why BGF could not have taken action to remedy the situation without an investigation and expressed continued concern at the organisation’s staff salary to client spending ratio.
Why is it that every organisation associated with aids/hiv seem to operate in such murky areas?
Both these organisations appear to exist to serve their own boards & staff with little interest in the medical condition itself to the point where maybe it should be asked “is hiv a potitical illness given that most sufferers now have old age to now add to the list of grieveances associated with their health”?
These organisations carry on as though the epidemic is still in full swing as they advertise for donations and support while not having opened their eyes to the changes that have occured during the last 15 to 20 years.
Perhaps an independant inquiry into this epidemic would be a far more suitable suggestion as to where the reality of the condition now rests?
Why, despite the millions spent in research in Australia over the decades does the industry still refer to third world countries hiv studies to reinforce it’s own fear message.
The whole industry needs a clean out!
And before you start on me, think of those who lost their lives in this murky campaign of toxic drugs & shame.
Maybe you’d care to describe ‘right way’ then, Tony.
BGF was investigated – fairly and openly and professionally – under complaints demonstrating clear breaches of the Charitable Fundraising Act
Whatever way this had been approached, BGF’s little clique would still have argued that that was the ‘wrong way’ and resorted to namecalling.
The complaints prompting the OLGR investigation came as a last resort after over six months of failed community attempts to extract BGF’s spending details for over 50% of its revenue which WE SUPPLY.
The complainants made it quite clear they HAD tried to do this the friendly way, but BGF weren’t having any.
The investigation was easily preventable, so BGF has only itself to blame.
The OLGR complaint about BGF was based not only its breaches of accountability, but also the financial impact of its service cuts on its clients while the payroll mushrooms out of control.
1500 BGF clients mainly living in poverty are still sitting in the dark at nights after a very cold winter, unable to pay their bills – while BGF’s top 5 execs are laughing all the way to the bank, collectively in cosy receipt of more than BGF’s entire client base received last financial year.
Client financial assistance – BGF’s supposed original purpose – was all but stopped completely in 2010 after BGF told them in a letter to “start taking more responsibility for yourselves!”
Whereas wages for 28 staff and their corporate costs still amount to $2.7 million uncurbed – more than the annual income.
And THAT, Tony, is the “wrong way” to run anything calling itself a charity.
If it had been done any other way, BGF’s cheerleaders would still have argued that that was the ‘wrong way’ and resorted to namecalling (“you trolls”).
You can’t get more fair and open than using the proper channels, as was done here.
And the complaints reportedly came as a last resort after over six months of failed attempts to extract BGF’s spending details.
The complainants made it quite clear they HAD tried to do this the friendly way, but BGF weren’t having any. The investigation was easily preventable, so BGF has only itself to blame.
The OLGR complaint about BGF was based not only its breaches of accountability, but also the financial impact of its service cuts on its clients while the payroll mushrooms out of control.
1500 BGF clients mainly living in poverty are still sitting in the dark at nights, unable to pay their bills – while BGF’s top 5 execs are laughing all the way to the bank, collectively in cosy receipt of more than BGF’s entire client base received last financial year.
Client financial assistance – BGF’s supposed original purpose – has all but stopped completely in 2010, permanently – whereas wages for 28 staff and their corporate costs still amounts to 2.7 million uncurbed – more than the annual income.
THAT is the “wrong way” to run anything calling itself a charity.
Sure it seems the Org needs some trimming but you trolls want to bring it down. Who will you turn to then ?
Your whole way of approaching this has been wrong from the start. Just like your failed campaign against ACON.
At least if BGF folds and nothing is their ti immediately pick up the slack you will all know who to thank.
Oh and dont forget the ones who are happy with BGF they will also know who to thank.
Far too much is paid out in salaries to greedy sycophants at the expense of desparate hiv/aids clients, when the spirit of charity and compassion should prevail!!!
To Martin Walsh
I wound not pat yourself on the back.
You don’t do anything for me or any client I now have to pay all my bills on lest than $350.00 a week.
And you send me a f…ing E-mail patting yourself on the back well dun .
I have for would this to the SSO and all my frends the one’s that Donate a $100 a week to you well they did .
You will have lost 50.000 a week thanks for nothing
Ray Prasad vere poor man
AGL Bill was $213.00 I paid it
Hopefully those trolls will now shut up.
I see on other forums they say BGF is guilty but they are just grasping at straws because if there was anything illegal it has to be reported to the Police.
Most companies having an audit get told to change the way things are itemised/reported etc.