Review will cost BGF
An Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing (OLGR) investigation into the Bobby Goldsmith Foundation that failed to find a cent missing may end up costing the organisation thousands.
BGF president Martin Walsh told Sydney Star Observer that having to suspend fundraising and community uncertainty during the review had left a mark.
“The OLGR review did have an impact,” Walsh said. “We have lost some regular donors, our last direct mail appeal ended up under budget because we were unable to conduct any follow-up activity after the review was announced and we had to defer a major fundraising event which usually raises a substantial amount for us.”
Walsh said he was pleased the OLGR found that BGF’s internal controls and records complied with legislative requirements and recommended best practice. He said BGF had been able to publish the additional disclosure statements the OLGR requested because it kept details of what it spent on direct services, recurrent costs of administration and aggregate gross income and aggregate direct expenditure incurred in fundraising appeals as required by law.
Walsh said BGF CEO Bev Lange had twice offered to meet with Andrew Brougham before he complained to the OLGR but neither offer had been taken up. The offer remains open.
Brougham told Sydney Star Observer he was pleased the investigation had resulted in BGF providing greater detail in its public accounts, but he did not rule out further complaints.
Asked if he was concerned his complaint could impact on BGF and its ability to assist people with HIV, Brougham, who has never been a BGF client or member, wrote, “BGF’s income was already down last year”, and that it was “impossible” for BGF to provide less assistance than it already did.
Brougham later acknowledged BGF’s ten-bed long-stay accommodation centre for people with HIV as a good it provided but said this did not count as it “exists already”, received Government grants, and residents did not stay there for free.
Asked if he’d considered starting a charity of his own to provide people with HIV with the services he believed BGF should supply, Brougham claimed to have set up a number of charitable organisations assisting people with HIV in the past and that “all remain in healthy operation”.
However, when pressed for details, Brougham refused to name the organisations or outline assistance they had provided to people with HIV, claiming it was irrelevant to ask about these.
Asked if he would meet with BGF to discuss the investigation, Brougham told SSO, “I see no purpose in meeting with BGF about anything”.
Despite the financial hit to the organisation BGF has not planned service cuts.
NOTE TO READERS:
Andrew Brougham has published on his website sections of email correspondence between himself and one of our journalists, claiming that these show he was misrepresented in the article above.
On his website he describes what he has posted as “the true (and only ever) interview I gave to the Star Observer”.
Unfortunately the truth is that Mr Brougham has left out questions, and answers he gave to us (IN RED BELOW), in what he has posted to his website – particularly questions and answers in relation to his claim to have set up charitable organisations assisting people with HIV that continue to operate.
SSO TO BROUGHAM
Hi Andrew,
I’m writing an article on the financial impact of your complaint to OLGR on BGF and wanted to give you right of reply.
Could you provide me with a statement to the following questions? Please try to be as brief and to the point in your answers as possible as that will save me from having to paraphrase.
-What is your occupation and professional background?
-Can you confirm that Andrew Brougham is your real name and not an alias?
-Are you content with the result of the OLGR investigation or do you intend to make further complaints about BGF
-Do you have any concerns that BGF will be damaged financially as a result of your campaigning and will be able to provide less assistance to HIV positive persons than it does currently?
-Do you believe BGF currently provides anything to HIV positive persons that is of any value?
-Have you ever been a client of BGF?
-There is a poll on the KOAIA website asking people to vote on whether people at BGF should be imprisoned- is that what you personally believe?
-Will you be meeting with BGF to discuss the results of the OLGR investigation?
-Have you considered setting up a charitable organisation of your own to assist HIV positive people if you feel they are poorly served by those that currently exist?
Thanks,
Andrew M. Potts
PS- if I could get a statement by Monday, that would be great.
BROUGHAM TO SSO
Dear Andrew,
Thank you for your questions, answers provided below – however, a ‘right of reply’ would seem a more appropriate term applied to whatever you prove to have said about me in your article – i.e. I do not know what I am ‘replying’ to at this premature stage. (Please bear in mind, also, that I am currently supporting a complaint to the Australian Press Council about your newspaper’s previous biased and inaccurate coverage of the BGF investigation, and shall not hesitate to extend that business to including any such future SSO article on the subject which may cause me similar objection).
Kind regards,
Andrew.
What is your occupation and professional background?
I am an archivist with a background in social welfare.
-Can you confirm that Andrew Brougham is your real name and not an alias?
Yes I can.
Are you content with the result of the OLGR investigation or do you intend to make further complaints about BGF
I am pleased the OLGR acknowledged BGF’s breach of conditions and forced the charity to adopt legally required levels of accountability, which the community paying for BGF has the right to. But there are further outstanding matters relating to compliance with the Charities and Fundraising Act 1991, which exists partly to prevent deception of members of the public who desire to support worthy causes. BGFs fundraising advertising is grossly misleading. Whether this will result in further formal complaints by myself to the OLGR (which is limited in what it can address) or to other, higher persons or entities of authority, depends entirely upon BGF’s show of willingness to amend its false advertising – I note that, in the few days after the OLGR report being released, BGF’s website was abruptly cleared of some of this deception, but there is more to be cleared until its fundraising rhetoric becomes appropriately honest.
Do you have any concerns that BGF will be damaged financially as a result of your campaigning?
BGF’s income was already down last year, as the community has long been wising up to donations seldom reaching clients but instead being absorbed by BGF’s mushrooming payroll and corporate costs. I hope more people will become aware that our most vulnerable and needy are being short changed and that donators are being deceived. (Rather than them stopping giving, I’d rather hope the community – both donors and clients – demanded the due improvements to these shortcomings). Otherwise, the payroll needs significantly downsizing and service levels need reverting to the original purpose: helping out PLWHIV living in poverty, rather than coercing sick people back into the workforce while keeping a handful of unqualified executives wealthy.
…and will be able to provide less assistance to HIV positive persons than it does currently?
It would be impossible to provide even less client financial assistance than is currently provided. BGF is not providing financial assistance to most of its 1450 clients living in poverty – the ongoing financial assistance it was set up to offer and still advertises as offering – e.g. bills – has been abolished, along with the Ratten Fund. Donations are not used toward the tiny handful of electricity bills BGF still contributes towards under its new ‘one-off emergency-only rule’– this is done with government-issued EPA vouchers and is of no expense to BGF.
-Do you believe BGF currently provides anything to HIV positive persons that is of any value?
A small elite handful of in-crowders, (AKA ‘BGF poster boys’) benefit enormously, from cosmetic body and facial sculpting costs to having trendy clothes and party tickets paid for….this inner-circle includes those working and volunteering at BGF who soak up resources as perks – at the expense of the majority of clients who get nothing at all. The workshops offered are useless to people medically certified too sick to work, which is most Disability Pensioners, a key BGF eligibility criteria for financial help (90% of BGF’s clients live in poverty yet see no support from the charity). Interest Free Loans are useful but cost BGF nothing, reclaimed automatically via Centrelink, and are available via numerous charities. Luncheon Club costs are covered by government grants, shared with the wealthy ACON and further subsidised by food donations. BGF House exists already and is financially maintained by standard resident pension forfeiture and government grants.
-Have you ever been a client of BGF?
No, I became involved and concerned, my help being often needed when several of my partners and many friends had to battle through that awful experience. Clients are bullied, intimidated, disrespected and sent on unnecessary bureaucratic goose chases that they aren’t physically or mentally well enough for.
-There is a poll on the KOAIA website asking people to vote on whether people at BGF should be imprisoned- is that what you personally believe?
It doesn’t ask people to vote on that particular question, it offers them five choices. What the poll actually asks is: “Would you Donate to a charity receiving $2,521.612 and spending $1,453,312 on Employee Benefits, $1,334,966 on ‘Other Expenses’ but only $469.333 on clients? There are 5 multiple choice answers. 73.5% of over 600 votes have, to date, opted for the “throw them in jail for charity fraud’ answer, compared with 0.3% for “yes that sounds like good value” 1.49% for “I’d need more information”, 24% for “they should cut staff costs not client services” and 0.93% for “no, there should be an independent kitty for the clients”.
-Will you be meeting with BGF to discuss the results of the OLGR investigation?
I see no purpose in meeting with BGF about anything. They are on record as lying to the media about me and have cost me a lot of time and energy with their intransigence, game playing and time wasting.
-Have you considered setting up a charitable organisation of your own to assist HIV positive people if you feel they are poorly served by those that currently exist?
Yes, I have (I have done this in the past and all remain in healthy operation), but ultimately, rather seeing this as necessary this time, I chose to put my energies into raising community awareness about the ineffectiveness, corruption and abuse of this memory of a great man, operating unethically with our donations and pulling the wool over this community’s eyes.
ENDS
PS
Please also note that my OLGR complaint was not the only one and involved various different grievances to those made by other complainants.
SSO TO BROUGHAM
Hi Andrew,
Just a couple of supplementaries-
-what are the charitable organisations you have set up in the past to assist people with HIV and in what ways do they assist people with HIV?
-do you intend to make further complaints about BGF to the OLGR or other agencies or authorities?
BROUGHAM TO SSO
-what are the charitable organisations you have set up in the past to assist people with HIV and in what ways do they assist people with HIV?
It would seem more relevant, IMO, that you should be asking this question to those running BGF – all are under-qualified and under-experienced and have proven incapable of doing their jobs without running the company into annual deficit while disenfranchising clients – their raison d’etre. Decline to answer further, on grounds of inability to see the relevance of the question, bearing in mind that I am not considering setting one up in the foreseeable future, but instead aiming to see BGF revert to its intended purpose – to help out PLWHIV living in poverty.
-do you intend to make further complaints about BGF to the OLGR or other agencies or authorities?
There are further outstanding matters relating to compliance with the Charities and Fundraising Act 1991, which exists partly to prevent deception of members of the public who desire to support worthy causes. BGFs fundraising advertising is grossly misleading. Whether this will result in further formal complaints by myself to the OLGR (which is limited in what it can address) or to other, higher persons or entities of authority, depends entirely upon BGF’s show of willingness to amend its false advertising – I note that, in the few days after the OLGR report being released, BGF’s website was abruptly cleared of some of this deception, but there is more to be cleared until its fundraising rhetoric becomes appropriately honest.
Who really give a rats about Andrew Brougham? He raised the discussion to where some queens simply want to attack rather than using their intelligence? Wake up to some history before realsing many pawns lost their lives in this political farce. BGF & ACON could’nt give a shit about any life other than their own political life!
ai’nt that right Stevie Clayton, who remains covered in blood over this one!
Been in Sydney for 30 years.
Who is Andrew Brougham ?
Anyone shed some light ?
And further Anthony, I am of the opinion that one should apply the same demands to oneself that one asks of other. Therefore I have no interest in these personal pogroms to discredit individuals. The issue is the lot of BGF clients.
But if I was interested in the bona fides of those who run HIV charities, maybe we’d have to consider BGF CEO Bev Lange’s history: from her controversial time as President of the Sydney Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras, which went into receivership to Sydney’s 2002 Gay Games which left hundreds of creditors out of pocket…and ask how she was qualified to fill the position she now holds.
I think its best we leave it there, mate.
Anthony, I hope I shall not offend you if I state quite frankly and openly that I am quite efascinated by your entire hypocrisy of which you seem to me to be in every way the very personification of absolute perfection.
I assume the “disgusting personal attacks on” samesame to which you refer, would include the correspondent (who sounds an awful lot like you) that ‘knew for a fact’ that I deliberately infect my clients with HIV. It is one reason I do not bother with that sorry portal anymore. I seriously doubt anyone heeds a forum of the same half dozen web worms who infect the www from morning til night 7 days a week with their deranged world views.
Oh my
I just read the red questions/answers.
I have my doubts if Andrew Brougham is a real person. He talks exactly like someone else as I have read similar in other forums.
Come on Andrew Brougham reveal who these other Charities are so we can compare to the likes of BGF and to see if you know what you are talking about ?
Oh and Shayne was over on SameSame claiming the same deflection.
Seems “they” the majority are happy to make outrageous claims against ACON and now BGF – remember the chicken farm and suitcases in a BGF rant,the mis-construed interview. The disgusting personal attacks on people.
So c’mon Andrew show us your Creds ?
And remember people they refused to meet with BGF.
Peter Brennan – despite what has been claimed, at no time was any offer to view BGF’s financial statements made. (If such an offer was made, we’d certainly like to see a copy of that correspondence, to compare it with our own, which are a series of refusals.) That is the reason we lobbied for half a year, and were forced to go to the OLGR as a last resort. That inquiry served the purpose of finally forcing BGF to reveal the true figures.
Nor were BGF “attacked without foundation” – the lobby arose as a result of a newsletter to all clients last year informing them that financial assistance was to end. That being the case, we wondered where our charity dollars had gone. And now we know.
In advertising for donations, BGF likes to cry that 90% of its clients live in poverty and many are on the DSP, which is a rigorous assessment by Centrelink that they are unable to work, subject to random updates of the client’s health status. Therefore, the staff-perpetuating workshops for ‘reskilling’ and etc. at BGF which consume valuable funds are redundant to most of their client’s needs. They simply need a hand with bills they can’t pay.
The answer for BGF is quite simple, they should publicly declare what percentage of our dollar is going to assist with this very practical need. And in future, we need to see the books so we can check their statements, because tricks like adding staff benefits to ‘client support’ because those staff answered a phone call or an email, are a bit shabby.
I think 90% is a good point to begin the negotiation. 90 cents in the dollar going to pay for power bills, or wherever the real need is. I suppose once the snouts in the trough have are finished, it’ll end up more like 60 cents but still, that is better than the NOTHING clients are getting now.
the attack on BGF is a disgrace given there were seemingly many opportunities to deal with legitimate concerns that were ignored in favor of the damaging public route.
We have an Organisation that has served our community very well, over nearly 25 years, attacked without foundation by people who have not contributed anything to it through it processes, but have just made the whole job harder for the very people that need it’s support.
It’s good people ask questions, it’s good things are transparent, it’s good things can get better, but what a useless, damaging way of doing it.
As for the demonstrations, they are used to rat bags.
There is no question BGF faces challenges on various fronts, the changing nature of it’s clients needs, Fundraising and it’s various forms, costs in all it’s forms but if it’s the case that they invested in a very worry time to try a few different things, tough. It’s there, it’s still there and will be .
To the guys who have caused this almighty distraction to it’s mission, bugger off and do something worthwhile and keep your personal politics out of BGF. It’s got work to do.
Peter
How Bizzare? With the shit this one has I would have expected the likes of several notables to realise the serious matter which sits just below the mantle of this conversatioon…Ten years on & the truth is now so easily seen and able to be expressed!
Congrats ACON,
you simply killed!
Personally, I have no interest in your attempt to deflect from the very important issue of BGF charity, NI. I doubt many others will have either, but good luck
Shayne Chester, what has Brougham possibly got to lose in revealing the names of the HIV charities he claims to have started and what they provide if he is telling the truth?
Surely they could only boost his credibility in criticising the running of a HIV charity if they were all “in healthy operation”?
‘“The OLGR does not have the authority to adjudicate on whether our charity dollar is being used for the purpose that it was donated…”
So who does have the authority? ‘
THAT is ultimately up to the donors in this community, Baz, without whom BGF cannot survive. It is THEY that must be convinced by BGF.
‘Not Impressed,’ the innuendo and smear is a rather obvious and desperate 11th hour device to distract from the truth of the BGF story.
A wiser editor would stop digging his own grave, you’d think, because the shabby display of less-than-droll trollery hardly helps the credibility of a journal once again dragged before the APC for incorrect reporting.
Hopefully, most intelligent readers will ignore such antics, the REAL questions they’ll be asking are:
The OLGR finally forced BGF to disclose the financial statements which the complainants requested to view early this year. If, as BGF claimed, they WERE offered to ‘see the books,’ why would they have lobbied them for six months, ending in the complaint to OLGR as a last resort?
And IF BGF IS using our charity dollar where it is intended by donors – as suggested rather obliquely by Mr. Walsh and the BGF site, (to pay bills, not exec. perks) why does BGF not take the challenge to publicly declare how much they will be spending on their clients bills in future?
The ball well and truly is in their court, and moaning about how much the inquiry cost them is totes disingenuous when all the grief is of their own making.
BGF faces two choices, restore assistance with bills, according to the needs of the individual, or face a complete shunning by this community which will inevitably lead to their demise. ‘Supporters of BGF’ like myself, certainly hope they can make a wise choice for once.
p.s. please don’t mention samesame, it gives me a rash. My cred. has probably already been established by my long history of community lobbying, including interviews published in rival newspapers, an invitation to debate on the SBS Insight programme, an invitation to write a full page article to commemorate World AIDS Day in Queensland Pride newspaper, a regular discussion on 2SER fm’s Queernoise programme, etc. etc. Indeed, I’m on air again tonight. Love me or loathe me, I feel little threat from those who spend their days trawling forums under cover of anonymity taking pot shots at those who seriously hope to make a difference.
Congratulations SSO for printing the entire interview
Shows just how full of shit Broughman et al are …
Now, can you please not ever quote them or any of their claims in the paper.
As far as I and many of the people I talk to are concerned they have no integrity on these matters anymore.
If Andrew Brougham wants to be taken seriously then he needs to explain exactly what the HIV charity organisations he claims to have founded are.
I too saw what he said was the full interview he had done with SSO on his website and I find it very questionable that he left off the questions where he was asked about these organisations.
If he can’t come clean on that, why should I trust anything else he says?
I see Shayne Chester is involved in this too- why is it every time someone is ranting and raving about having a silent majority behind them in this community it turns out to be just the same two or three people every time?
How many times has he been banned from Samesame this year?
“The OLGR does not have the authority to adjudicate on whether our charity dollar is being used for the purpose that it was donated…”
So who does have the authority? No one? You can shoot yourself in the other foot now. Use both hands if you like since you don’t need one to point anymore. :)
Anthony, if we look at the meails sent to clients asking for help with their winter bills from their case managers, they have been told, the ONLY OPTION for a FEW in EXTREME cases, will be the EAPA vouchers that the govt. gives BGF. That being so, we can assume the charity collected in their name will be used elsewhere.
I wonder how you define, ‘misappropriation of funds.’
In its advertising to donors, BGF claims 90% of its clients live in poverty. Many are on the DSP, which is a rigorous assessment by Centrelink that they are unable to work, subject to random updates of the client’s health status. Therefore, the staff-perpetuating workshops for ‘reskilling’ and etc. at BGF which consume valuable funds are redundant to most of their client’s needs.
If BGF is to have a future, it is clear that they can only restore community confidence by revoking the plans announced at the end of last year, and restoring an equitable share of income to practical assistance to those in real need.
Anthony, when you say “A lot of companies when having an audit get picked up on things that were not done correctly – not illegal – just report incorrectly,” you are missing some vital details which make this different.
Companies being audited are usually done so routinely or randomly by the taxation department.
BGF was not ‘audited’ it was investigated – not randomly or routinely, but following complaints after seeing breaches of legal disclosure requirements – this was confirmed to be the case by the investigation and BGF was forced to disclose after repeatedly refusing to disclose to the community where its donation were spent.
Most companies would not seek to withhold their public accounts, refusing public requests for over half a year.
This whole business need not have been necessary if BGF had been more cooperative and accountable to begin with.
Ed’s note: A quick check has shown this person is posting under multiple names and email addresses on this site. Other names being used include Ben N, Mark, Ray, AW, Marcus, B Savage, Andrew W and Brian S It is a breach of the forum’s code of use to do so. Continued breaches will result in the author being denied further access to the forum.
No Antony, no one wants to bring BGF down nor were there accusaations of illegally syphoning money to individuals. The focus was the disproportion of “administration costs” compared to what is actually spent on clients brought around by the current management. This investigation has been reported with a slanted view by some media.
They sure have Baz. They were claiming misappropriation of funds and all sorts of theories and all wrong. A lot of companies when having an audit get picked up on things that were not done correctly – not illegal – just report incorrectly.
Yes BGF is spending too much on staff so some will have to go so can increase money to those that need it.
These guys want to bring BGF down not reform it. Its been reported many times none of them will speak with BGF. All they can do is finger point and accuse what was it now ?
chicken farms ? suitcases full of money ? all wrong and proven so in the report.
Now we wait on what steps BGF are going to take to fix things.
LOLZ Baz, nice mixed metaphor. And how do u shoot your foot while pointing fingers? Oh, never mind.
The problem, actually, has been with the way this story has been reported. The OLGR does not have the authority to adjudicate on whether our charity dollar is being used for the purpose that it was donated, it was only able to sort out the books, and force BGF to make them public, which we were asking for all year.
If YOU feel it is fine that your charity dollar be used exclusively to pay ’employee benefits’, instead of the bills of those poz guys doing it tough, then you should certainly continue to support BGF.
I suspect the rest of this community may have other ideas about the meaning of charity and of scam.
So the OLGR had no problem with BGF’s figures, just the way they were reported. And if BGF continue to comply with the reporting obligations then they will have the approval of the government regulator… Is that all after months of accusations? Seems to me the the finger-pointers have shot themselves in the foot!
I think the latest goals of the new local ACTUP are relevant here
1. The reinstatement of all basic services provided by BGF pre 1999.
2. The resignation of the BGF Board & CEO
3. The resignation of anyone at BGF who serves the old regime & their cronies
4. The resignation of the Positive Life Board & it’s CEO & Manager
5. The resignation of all staff who agree with the old regime
6. If these events do not come to pass a demonstration in front of the Premier’s office with the slogan BGF BOARD & CEO MUST GO, POSITIVE LIFE/POSITIVE LIE,
7. All the Gay Press that have participated in lying to the community be targeted for special consideration
8. Representations to the National Press Council to delist all newspapers who have lied in their reporting of these matters
9. Use the complaints mechanism of the National Press Council to complain about the reporting of these newspapers
10. Inform the Gay & Lesbian community of the truth by producing our own publication & distributing it in the bars or outside if they won’t let us in
In a response to my complaint against BGF back in March, the OLGR informed me that “the Charitable Fundraising Act does NOT provide jurisdiction to this office to make a determination on how fundraising income is applied…”) While the numbers of HIV+ in need has risen dramatically, the dollars spent on helping them with their bills has remained the same and, this year, will drop sharply. The top five BGF executives shared more in employee benefits than was spent paying the bills of all 1500 of their clients. And THAT is what this community will take into consideration when deciding where to put their charity, unless this a recalcitrant BGF administration cuts staff costs, restores client support and adopts a more frank admission of its errors. BGF’s future is entirely in their hands.
I think the yardstick whereby greater than 90 cents in the dollar raised should be spent on the clients is where BGF fell down. By their own account, it was less than 65 cents in the dollar. The costs of running the show got way out of hand.
If BGF had been more upfront to begin with, and treated complaints as a valid community concern, then this could’ve all been prevented.
When people donate to charities they expect their donation to go directly to the people the charities help – not towards admin costs.
That is surely a joke. If bgf are worried about costs they should start by cutting their wages bill. The investigation has cost nobody but the taxpayer. Only publicity over why the investigation was needed can affect donations – that was avoidable if bgf had been honest to begin with. Futile trying to martyrise the guilty while aiming to demonise those seeking the truth.
It’s a hard lesson that BGF should treat the community that supports it with more respect. Frankly more damage was done by BGF refusing to answer questions, and behaving defensively which could have been handled before this snowballed.
The community have lost their faith and trust in BGF.
It could be that BGF has lost some regular donors because they now know that money spent on client services and care only rose from $407,649 in 2006 to $469,333 in 2009, whilst money spent on employees rose disproportionately from $767,532 to $1,453,312 in the same period. So, although not one cent was found to have gone missing, it just didn’t go where it was expected to.
Cheers Andrew, would like a glass of water to swallow your foot?
Sure it seems BGF may need some staff cutting so more $’s can be spent on clients.
But isnt it obvious these people just want to bury BGF ?
What Charities have you set up / helped Andrew ? or can someone please do a search and inform us so we can see if he has the Cred’s to run one ?
How can someone complain about an Org but refuse to meet with them ? this does not make any sense just as the others who are behind this campaign have refused to meet with BGF.