Critics of the the decision to shut down and sell a vital Auckland facility for the disabled want to know why there’s been so much cloak and dagger from the Trust responsible
COMMENT: Straight answers haven’t been forthcoming from the board of the Laura Fergusson Trust.
The charity, whose decision to close the doors of its Epsom facility has sparked protests and petitions, has kept property evaluations secretive and made it difficult - if not impossible - for new voices to become members.
On top of this, it is planning to sell the property off-market – despite real estate advice suggesting a greater profit from an open market sale.
This has raised questions from disability advocates about the trust’s motivation: if it isn't dedicated to serving the disabled and this isn’t about profit, then what are its true intentions?
It seems the Trust is unwilling to make them public.
In a recent newsletter to board members, the trust said it had employed the services of its own chairman of 21 years, Chris O’Brien, to secretly assess the value of the site - an appointment that was “against his wishes”.
According to the newsletter, “the chairman reluctantly accepted the role as he recognised he was uniquely qualified to conduct the analysis, given his expertise and the need to maintain confidentiality”.
The Laura Fergusson Trust has not responded to questions from Newsroom about this need for confidentiality.
An attendant of the trust’s last AGM said the answers to most questions to the board was the same.
“We can’t answer that, it’s commercially sensitive.”
Reports from those protesting the decision claim the board has been resistant to fresh blood, preventing or stalling more than 20 new members.
Disability advocate and tetraplegic Sophia Malthus, who lived in the Epsom facility for a year after a life-changing horse riding accident left her paralysed, attempted to join the board in order to have her say.
She previously told Newsroom that the board had paid her application no heed for months despite her attempts to make contact. It then quietly accepted the invitation, making her a member - but didn’t include her in any communication to board members.
“They just put me to the side,” she said. “It’s like they were entertaining me but not giving me anything.”
As a former resident, Malthus has spoken at length about the importance of the facility to Auckland’s disabled community.
The breadth of facilities such as accessible gym equipment, a heated pool and accommodation made the centre a one-stop shop for disabled people. “I never needed to leave the facility for any of the therapies I needed,” said Malthus. “That’s a bonus for somebody learning how to work a wheelchair - everything was in one place.”
The disabled community had also lost a gathering place and focal point.
“The other bonus was community, there were other people like me who had just had a life-changing experience,” said Malthus. “I made friends and my family were able to chat to other parents and partners who were also adjusting to this new situation. That sense of community can’t be underestimated.”
Yann Roux is the CEO of Parafed Auckland - New Zealand’s oldest and largest disability sport organisation.
He’s been receiving daily calls from physiotherapists and members of the public asking where they can get help in the absence of a dedicated central Auckland facility for the disabled.
He said the board’s decision to remove service was sudden and came with no consultation.
“What concerns me is very few people have any information,” he said. “It seems very blurry.”
He said Parafed reached out to Laura Fergusson to no response.
“We haven’t been contacted to explain anything."
Roux said the board’s decision had affected the treatment of disabled people who previously used the facility as a place to go on with rehab before or after a stay in the spinal unit.
“Sometimes the spinal unit is full and people have to stay somewhere else - at the moment it's rest homes.”
The problem is that in these rest homes they often can’t embark on their rehab - and Roux said the sooner people started rehab after a disabling accident, the better the outcome.
“It’s affecting people's treatment."
The decision to get rid of the property on the open market goes against advice from Auckland realtors such as Kiri Barfoot, director of Barfoot & Thompson.
Barfoot said Barfoot & Thompson strongly recommended sellers took their properties to the open market in order to get the most out of their assets.
“Some owners don’t want the hassle of open homes, decluttering, and maintenance,” she said. “But seriously, it is a huge risk with potentially more negative implications than positive.”
By selling the property without competitive bids, the trust seems to be restricting the size of its own windfall - and therefore the amount of funds available to serve the disabled community.
