Sassters R doin' it 4 ourselves
Welcome to SASSters.
This site last updated Thursday April 3 2003
We publish below the complete, uncensored version of the article 'SASSters responds', printed in Talkabout #126 (the censored parts have been put into bold below). This response was submitted to that magazine last year but its publication was suppressed for three months, while the Talkabout publications committee considered the likely reprisals from 'the AIDS industry' (apparently, one can be sued for libel, even if you have proof that what you are saying is true). We did request a footnote to the published article explaining the delay but the promised explanation failed to appear. We feel it is idiosyncratic of our battles that organisations like ACON, for example, who are paid over six million dollars a year - four and a half million of which goes towards wages - continue to suppress the voices of hiv pozzie people.
SASSters Responds:
Several things spring to mind on reading James Peterson's criticism of SASSters in the last issue of Talkabout. First, one cannot help but wonder what this person's true agenda may be in attacking the very group who fought for (and succeeded in saving) his right to remain in his established home. It would seem that this is someone with an axe to grind against us and yet he has never once made any direct contact with SASSters or had any dealings with us (unless it was under another nom de plume). So what could his real problem be? That he is actually writing in spite on behalf of a certain 'community organisation' which the SASSters campaign exposed as self interested, apathetic to our plight and incompetent? Or is it simply that, as he has spent so much time and energy following the SASSter's campaign (without actually having lent it any support) he needs to get out more?
We assume that Mr. Peterson's "The ball is now in your court" is a challenge to respond to his interpretation of history. We don't see that Mr. Peterson actually has a ball, but nevertheless, here we go (again).
You haven't heard from SASSters because we have attained our goal of being unimpeded in our choice to remain in private rental. That was our sole raison detre. We all fought night and day for six months, forced eight ministerials and a prolonged (and biased) media campaign to achieve this end. As Mr. Peterson opines with such expertise on our performance, we could have used his help in that campaign.
The DOH 'backdown' on the original SASS review strategy was as a direct result of SASSters' campaign. We had questions tabled in Canberra by the Democrats. We offered an alternate plan which satisfied both parties. Yet, on July 26th the president of a certain AIDS organisation (who referred to SASSters as "a bunch of lunatics") discussed with his cohorts the idea of calling the policy advisor to a state government minister, to say "they [the minister's office] owe us one" and that "if they are announcing a backdown, they should refer to our representations. I'd say that it wouldn't be in any of our interests to look like the reason for the backdown was ...disaffected SASS recipients." The following issue of the SSO announced a great victory for ACON. We really have no interest in who got the kudos, all we wanted was to be left in peace in our established homes of choice, leaving the grab for credit to the power brokers.
This information came to us as documented official evidence from one of many SASSter supporters. We chose not to use it at the time as we felt uncomfortable with the ethics. Other evidence received was that the CEO of the same organisation discussed sending friends to internet cafes to post letters of slander about us under false names. The same CEO looked into the legalities of shutting down our web site and their media officer discussed ways of gagging us in the paper media.
When we called the 'lobbyists' housing officer about an announcement from Carol Mills of the DoH, he told us in a very pissed off voice that he hadn't even read it and that we all should never have believed that we had the right to remain where we had chosen to live in the first place. When we contacted a local MP for support, that office told us they had been asked to "go softly" on the issue by the HIV/AIDS 'community alliance'. A community newspaper planned to run a feature on our grass roots struggle but backed out at the last minute.
There were many such incidents which is why we made an announcement (published in Talkabout magazine) that we would not be involved in any negotiations with the ironically named 'community alliance'. So, no, we did not attend the SASS forum, Mr. Peterson, we know what was said, and some of it was even true.
Amid all the shit that Mr. Peterson has chucked on SASSters' best frock, there are two points that we take seriously.
The first is that PLWHA deserve no different consideration than any other disabled person: the primary difference is that other disabled people generally receive greater support and understanding from the mainstream community. They do not face the HIVphobia that PLWHA NSW Inc.'s latest ad campaign raises. In the extreme, we have documentation of a case where a PLWHA in public housing faced horrendous persecution, not the least of which was having "AIDS FAGGOT" painted on his door, which was eventually smashed in by a fridge rolled down the stairs. This is the difference that ACON's Scott Berry failed to recognise when questioned on Channel 7's Sunrise programme. He was asked why HIV people should be considered any differently to other disabled people. His answer was, "I really can't answer that." It is the difference that Antony Nicholas fails to accept when he says that SASS recipients cannot argue for any special consideration from the DoH. People don't get "DIABETIC" or "LEUKAEMIAC" graffitied across their front door.
The other point we would like to address is that in advocating our plan that existing SASS clients be exempted from any review, we are being elitist and creating "have and have-not" classes of SASS clients (these words, and "inequitable" were used earlier in the year by Antony Nicholas in an email to SASSters in which he told us that his organisation could not possibly support our proposal): and we accept that criticism. However we point out that without compromise in our negotiations, NO PLWHA would be entitled to choose to live in private rental, we would ALL be eventually forced to shift to culturally inappropriate public housing estates. We wish we could fight for the rights of those yet to be infected by the virus. Perhaps if more "Mr. Petersons" had joined our fight instead of sitting back to see what happened, or if we had seen more support from our paid lobbyists (who felt that public housing provided a "secure housing" option), we could have done more.
There are a number of precedents for existing clients being exempt from changes to policy. Insurance policy holders were unaffected by changes to insurance criteria when this virus first hit, for example.
To respond briefly to Mr. Peterson's other points, yes, some of our correspondents were a little hysterical, losing your home can do that to you. Taking salacious snippets from their letters, out of context, does not impress us as a strong argument.
Mr. Peterson also fails to understand our winning argument with Ms. Carol Mills of the DoH that existing SASS clients have a 'finite' lifespan. We do not suggest that we will die any more quickly than anyone else, but that existing clients will eventually shuffle off the mortal coil and as new clients are only on the SASS scheme temporarily, the DoH will eventually achieve its goal of phasing out a scheme that, at its inception, had no statute of time limiting it. (We're just asking that they show the courtesy of waiting for us to die first.)
It is unfortunate that Mr. Peterson raises the issue of AIDS funding because we weren't going to say anything about ACON throwing fifty thousand AIDS dollars at Mardi Gras while the Albion Street Centre has no funds left for PEP drugs, that ACON continues to cut services (vale Northern Rivers ACON), while syphoning off funds to the New Mardi Gras, that there is an obvious conflict of interest in ACON's CEO also Co-Chairing NMG, etc. So we won't.
Before I close I will respond to a couple more of James' quotes:
"Don't desert your supporters, as you have appeared to do, judging from your lack of updates." James, you are mistaken to try to differentiate between SASSters and our 'supporters' - we have not deserted ourselves! Where was your support? As for the update, you might have noted, as you have been so glued to the screen, that SASSters' website was updated almost daily and seldom less than weekly for most of the campaign. Did you check how many times the 'community organisations' sites were updated about the SASS review? About four times all year I seem to recall. We stopped updating the site when the battle was won, but we haven't gone away and we won't. This whole campaign deserves to remain permanently documented and so it is. There is nothing to update James, move on, sweetie.
And as for "One has to question if this is the sort of argument that SASSters want to be remembered for, especially if they want to be taken seriously." Our agenda was not to "be remembered" for anything, but to achieve what we did. And we were taken very seriously - by the government and the DoH if not by the AIDS industry.
And finally, there is this gripe that Adrian Lovney used and which Mr. Peterson repeats: that we hide behind "false names and emails". Our name is legion, for we are many. My name is Peter Burghley. It's as real a name as James Peterson. I am one of the co-convenors of Sassters, along with Michael Beecham and Peter Townsend. Some of us assumed anonymity as the DoH was checking our names against their databases. It was at the DoH's suggestion that we use Christian names only to curb our anxiety. And I don't even know what a "false email" is. The address works, what point would there be to having one that didn't? I'd even let you have my 'phone number but the last time I put it on a media release to a 'community newspaper', their editor forwarded it to one of the 'community alliance' and I got people calling and then hanging up all that night. If you'd like to communicate with us in a more direct medium than a bi-monthly mag., our email link is at the bottom of this page: sasstersassters@lycos.com.
Now, stop your bloody whingeing, SASSters is taking a well earned rest, until the next time we need to fight for our (and your) home.
And finally, just to end on a positive (no pun) note, we thought we'd share one of the letters of support that we've received.
Good on you for your gutsie article in Talkabout - I just luv
it.........too many GUNNA discussions, meetings, summits, conferences,
brunches, lunches, dinners and cocktail parties in this town - organised and
attended by paid staff - no wonder people living with HIV/AIDS are
struggling to survive and worried about a roof over their heads.......
Job well done, at a huge personal cost to you and others involved - enjoy
your break/ rest, because there will be lots more for you to fight for in
the future
Again, my sincere CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!
Carole Ann
Archive...
archive I
archive II how you can help (petition, etc)
archive III FAQ (some of your questions answered)
archive IV carbon copies (lobbying letters we have sent)
archive V SASSpeaking (your letters)
archive VI the DoH mailout
Email: sasstersasster@lycos.com
