Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Matters of Interest AIDS Council AIDS COUNCIL The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD Legislative Council The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:58): My contribution today will focus on a letter I received from a constituent in May last year, which I forwarded to SA Health for comment by the Chief Executive, Dr Tony Sherbon. I received a response from him dated 1 July last year. The letter that I received last year was from a whistleblower within the AIDS Council outlining a series of very serious concerns about the running of the organisation (this is a person from apparently within the council itself). The initial letter I received dealt with serious allegations of inexperience and a lack of qualifications on the executive team in dealing with HIV/AIDS; inappropriate hiring practices, resulting in several unsuitable people, including a person with a background of fraud, finding themselves in positions of influence within the organisation; a failure to connect with the HIV community, with little of the funds donated to the organisation finding their way to the people who required them; and the concealment of funds and high levels of frustration within the HIV/AIDS community as a result of that. I forwarded the allegations to the department before taking any further action. The response from the department dated 1 July 2008 acknowledged that the former AIDS Council executive director had, indeed, engaged in (and I quote from Dr Tony Sherbon) 'inappropriate behaviour'. The exact nature of the 'inappropriate behaviour' by the director was not described, but the whistleblower's letter made allegations that this person was regularly drunk and had no experience at all in dealing with HIV/AIDS and that, upon this person's appointment, had hired friends and acquaintances, rather than those with experience in dealing with this insidious disease. I am unable to confirm or deny those allegations. The whistleblower's letter also made mention of the appointment of a fundraising manager for the AIDS Council, a person who had been sacked from his previous employment for the misappropriation of funds. The response from Dr Tony Sherbon seemed to concur with the whistleblower's allegations, not denying the allegations and responding that the individual's 'employment contract presented a risk to the organisation', noting that the department intervened to negotiate a termination of this individual's employment. I wonder how much taxpayers' money was wasted in providing a termination payment for this individual. Another serious allegation was that one particular counsellor within the organisation was dismissed following allegations of inappropriate behaviour with vulnerable clients. That person was apparently rehired in 2005 and has now partnered with one of his former clients. Without denying the allegations, the letter from Dr Sherbon calls them 'rumour' but confirms that the counsellor departed from the AIDS Council, subject to a confidentiality clause, to which the department does not have access. The letter declares that the allegation that he is now the partner of a former client is unsubstantiated. A person claiming to be an eyewitness has made allegations that there has been regular illicit drug use on SAVIVE premises. I remain frustrated with this situation and the fact that taxpayers continue to fund the AIDS Council of South Australia, even when it is abundantly clear that it is not appropriately using the funds provided to it to deal with the effects of the AIDS epidemic but instead seems more interested in promoting its particular world view through the SAVIVE and SIN magazines and promoting its sexual education viewpoint to South Australian schoolchildren, through its links with SHine SA. Family First's view is that this organisation needs to be thoroughly audited by the department before it is allowed to waste any more taxpayers' money. The reality is that AIDS is a very serious and terrible disease, which demands a serious response from a professional organisation in order to combat the disease. I have raised these concerns before, and I will continue to do so because what we are seeing from the AIDS Council, despite very extensive taxpayer funding, are largely ineffective results in fighting HIV/AIDS. In fact, we have unfortunately seen a dramatic upswing in HIV infection in this state. Some 61 new HIV cases were diagnosed in 2006, up from just 23 in 2000. Frankly, taxpayers deserve better. Time expired.