Home Online Community Info


RomlaRomla AdelaideMember Posts: 2,091
Disappointed to see BCNA taking a political stance supporting Josh Frydenberg in Kooyong. I don’t believe BCNA speaks for all members .




  • StorkStork Member Posts: 118
    I have read the ACNC website which states 
    Any advocacy or campaigning charities conduct MUST NOT have a purpose to
    promote or oppose a political party or candidate for political office

    All charities and CEOs Should be apolitical 

    The Guide Dogs has had repercussions some donations cancelled and their board is doing a internal investigation into the CEO 
  • NoShrinkingVioletNoShrinkingViolet Member Posts: 27
    edited April 21

    The Age's (and the Sydney Morning Herald website) 'Election 2022 LIVE Updates' at12.26pm today, 'Second charity accused of backing Frydenberg':



    'Under Australian law, charities risk losing their not-for-profit registration if one of their stated purposes is to “promote or oppose a political party or a candidate for political office”.

    Yesterday, the board of Guide Dogs Victoria launched an investigation into why CEO Karen Hayes appeared in the Liberal pamphlets. The board said it had no knowledge of the material before it was circulated.

    In response to questions about the appropriateness of the TV appearance, a spokeswoman for the Breast Cancer Network Australia told this masthead that the charity “does not endorse individual politicians or political parties”.

    “We have been very fortunate to have the support of many political leaders and our focus is to ensure we can be part of policy decisions, no matter who is government.”

  • shs14shs14 Member Posts: 141
    I'm incredibly disappointed to read this this morning. I would never push my political views in a health forum or as part of an apolitical platform and having an organisation I'm a member of do so is most upsetting.
  • RomlaRomla AdelaideMember Posts: 2,091
    There is a lot of  commentary on Twitter about this today.
  • Keeping_positive1Keeping_positive1 Member Posts: 397
    Yes, we all have to be quiet, but still allow our government funded broadcasting stations to present biased information!  :)

  • Keeping_positive1Keeping_positive1 Member Posts: 397
    edited April 21
    @Romla my above comment was a bit of sarcasm.  I don't think her comments are representative of all members, but rather how she finds communications with JF to be clear.  
  • June1952June1952 Regional VictoriaMember Posts: 1,444
    It would be interesting to know the full story i.e. what the question was and why Kirsten answered that way.
    As @Keeping_positive1 says, Kirsten may have simply been saying that she's had good communication with Josh over time.  Note that she was working at the time, it was not a sit-down interview.
    Funny how some stories are shown and sometimes taken the wrong way.
    I am sure Kirsten is aware of the implications which supporting political parties may have on BCNA funding.
    @Kirsten_BCNA, perhaps you would like to give a brief response to concerned members.
  • arpiearpie Mid North Coast, NSWMember Posts: 6,122
    Hmmm, A very interesting point indeed, @June1952 - the need for the whole context of the reporting should be addressed  ...  

    It would definitely seem inappropriate for any Charity CEOs to openly back a specific political party ...  with possible consequences of loss of donations & even loss of Tax Free Charity status ...... 
  • Keeping_positive1Keeping_positive1 Member Posts: 397
    @June1952 so true we need to get the full picture.  People being human sometimes jump to conclusions, and there you go, you get slandered on Twitter.  You basically can't open your mouth without someone accusing you of something, which may not be true.  

    I steer clear of Twitter for that very reason.  
  • Cath62Cath62 Brisbane Member Posts: 787
    edited April 21
    Thanks @Romla

    Wow Josh this and Josh that. It isn't a good look at all. Omg it actually makes it look like wheeling and dealing on a very personal level. No reference to 'The treasurer' for example but first name basis.  Definitely interested in the context and an explanation because if the is a personal relationship I am concerned about independence, transparency, being a political and corruption. What the?
  • Keeping_positive1Keeping_positive1 Member Posts: 397
    edited April 21
    @Cath62 he is not the Treasurer of Kooyong though, so from that standpoint it makes sense to just use his first name.  Remember also, we don't know who the journalists were?  Nothing is black and white!
  • Keeping_positive1Keeping_positive1 Member Posts: 397
    edited April 21
    Hopefully we will get the full picture from BCNA to put the rumours to rest.
  • AfraserAfraser MelbourneMember Posts: 3,889
    The issue isn’t about any individual, it’s about the connnection of an organisation with a political party. The organisation needs to be clear what its spokesperson is speaking for and on whose behalf. If it’s not crystal clear, then best to avoid. 
Sign In or Register to comment.