CAA State and National Board Directors failed to disclose project for philosophical, non-university based, private college

Recently, elections took place in the Chiropractic Association of Australia.  This organisation does not represent me, but it regularly embarrases me by the actions its board members take. Regarding their plotting and scheming, it seems discussions outside of the public arena have been taking place in a clandestine setting for a few years now, with the aim to set up a favorable national board which will allow the establishment of a private chiropractic school in Australia using the CAA National’s funds.  An agenda to push through a new, non-university based program, with retrograde standards and a vitalistic dogma has secretly been developed in South Australia.  These State and National board members – with inside information- went on to enter the election in collusion with candidates who would seemingly benefit from the development of this private college.  No transparency whatsoever, no mention of this in the national campaign.  This was intentional.  They stacked the board.  A private educational institution outside of a public University is a big money issue, with external parties benefitting (Blue Egg), and high costs associated.  It will require funds, which the CAA aims to raid from the CAA National’s member’s bank account.  It’s also a retrograde step for our current University recognized degree system here in Australia.  It’s opposed by a large proportion of the profession, which is why it is very likely the issue was not campaigned on in the most recent election.  And, as a question… is a state board even allowed to float the idea of a new chiropractic school?  Or is this a mandate of the national association?

Two board members in particular, Billy Chow and Patrick Sim, have, in my opinion, breached the CAA constitution.

8.11(b) The Directors shall have specific fiduciary duties including, but not limited to:
(i) the duty to act honestly;
(ii) the duty to exercise due care and diligence;
(iii) the duty to avoid all conflicts of interest; and
(iv) the duty not to gain personally nor cause detriment to the National Association by improper use of their position or inside information.

On September 19, prior to the election, Patrick Sim from the CAASA was discussing within a small faction on an exclusive forum.

This is pre election.

A discussion ensued, and CAA national board member Billy Chow comments:

 

Several people were in favor of Billy’s scheme, including the soon to be elected National Board member DJ Malone, who thought it wise to like this comment.  I will point out that DJ Malone is now also a National Board Member of CAA.  So that’s Billy Chow, Patrick Sim, DJ Malone, all who were elected National Board Members in the recent campaign, all commenting on the importance of voting in a board receptive to a private college.  A commercial college worth many millions of dollars to establish.  This set up will delve into your CAA treasury, and they are about to ask the profession to fund this.

Furthermore, the college working party consists of CAASA members, as well as ASRF members.  Many comment here.

There were clear communications between interested 3rd parties, National Board members, and State Board members of CAASA, as well as private chiropractors and consultancy firms and the ASRF.  I wonder who might be employed to run the private college, or would the CAASA also like to try their hand at education given that they are already overstepping their current roles?

But you would think an issue like this might be mentioned in a National Campaign.  Why wasn’t it?  Especially in an important campaign, with the National Convention being hosted in South Australia.  Surely they would bring such a controversial issue to the table…unless they had something to hide.  Clearly, this breaches several components of the constitution 8.11 (b).  Depending on who will benefit from the investment, too, I wonder what the rule of law says about such an act?

Following the election, Patrick Sim posted the following:

This is the discussion which took place, where Pat Sim explains how all the pieces have come together, who all the players are, and how many hidden conflicts of interest there are for a project which might cost over $2,500,000 USD…

 

Gees, sounds like Simon Floreani realizes this is a National issue, huh.  Is that him pointing out a board member acting outside his role in the state, or the national levels (i’m not sure which)?  Pat Sim certainly “liked” the comment.

How does the Chiropractic profession feel about this new development which it was not informed about?

Here are two posts, the first from a group with 1300 members; the second from a group with 1400 members.

 

So there you go.  The profession has many who are against the idea.  But, with a little collusion, plotting, scheming, figuring out the sums…then getting the right, like-minded people on board to campaign for the CAA National Board…a few organized zealots can push a fringe agenda.

This campaign has many questions hanging over it, as Helen Alevaki was given support by some of the very members now benefitting from this agenda for the private college.  At least 3 of the now national CAA board members had this information, Billy Chow, Pat Sim and DJ Malone.  Why was it not campaigned upon?  Especially with the timing of the EGM in Adelaide coming up.

I think at least Billy Chow and Patrick Sim have clearly broken the CAA constitution.8.11(b) The Directors shall have specific fiduciary duties including, but not limited to:
(i) the duty to act honestly;
(ii) the duty to exercise due care and diligence;
(iii) the duty to avoid all conflicts of interest; and
(iv) the duty not to gain personally nor cause detriment to the National Association by improper use of their position or inside information.

Disillusioned by such underhanded politics, fewer and fewer members are joining the CAA.  It claims both 2600 and 2700 on the website (but it does not say how many are students).  There are 4845 registered chiros in Australia.  While those in the CAA would have you believe that being a member is important, it’s my opinion that being a CAA member condones unethical behavior such as this demonstrated in the most recent CAA elections.  It also gives this group more finances to corrupt as they think it sees fit.  In anycase, I suggest members consider a vote of “no-confidence” in the current CAA National board.

For me, our profession needs more evidence based research, more Phds working in university settings, developing cultural authority.  We need more to back up what we do well so that 3rd party stakeholders and government bodies can trust what we do is best, and safest, for the patients we all care so much about.  We need more research, not a philosophical college which will dilute our professional accreditation and education.

What we don’t need in our profession is anything headed by the following group:

One alternative organization which has a research fund, and which represents our profession well, is COCA.  They regularly demonstrate ethical, responsible behavior.  Joining this organization, and contributing to its research fund, bolsters our position in University settings.  They also offer scholarships to Phd candidates, and accademica awards to the brightest students at Universities throughout Australia.