Members response to Triathlon Australia’s Open letter to Triathlon Members and the Triathlon Community dated 6 October 2021.

Paragraph 1 of TA Open Letter

The Triathlon Australia (TA) Board of Directors is issuing this open letter to triathlon members and to the triathlon community in response to serious allegations raised publicly by a former elite triathlete (who is also a current member and accredited coach) as part of a concerted campaign to destabilise Triathlon Australia, initially via social media and, more recently, through direct correspondence to TA’s Board of Directors, to the Boards of Directors of our State and Territory Triathlon Associations (STTAs), to numerous TA and STTA staff members, to clubs, to Sport Integrity Australia, to Sport Australia, the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS) and the Federal Minister for Sport. 

Members Response – 

Members would like Triathlon Australia to note that Members were also invited to sign a petition calling for a full independent review of Triathlon Australia.  Members have taken this up, and over 1200 signatures have been added.  Members were then invited to submit member concerns to Sport integrity Australia.  This process is ongoing.  There is no campaign to ‘destabilise’ Triathlon Australia.  Triathlon Australia should concern itself with the number, volume and nature of complaints and also the repeated call for a full independent review of Triathlon Australia.

The reference to current member is unclear.  Refer correspondence comments below. Apparently this member is a ‘Suspended Member’, with whom TA, its Board, staff, STTA Boards, and staff will not be entering into any further correspondence on any matters.  

The obvious need for a full independent review of TA is proven with this one ‘suspension’ - governance, integrity and transparency and ethics in the leaders at TA swallowed up by bullying and intimidation.  In an open letter to Triathlon members and the Triathlon Community why did the Board not simply state they have endorsed suspending a member who has simply asked, on behalf of all members that TA be subject to independent review?

The legal threats and personal defamatory attacks on Emma Carney, from TA are purely there to send a message to any athlete, any coach and any staff member to demonstrate that if they speak up about the wrongdoings at TA, then they will be bullied into silence.  The fact that TA has claimed to be complaining to Sport integrity of Emma Carney’s behaviour, then using the exact same mediums of social media to distribute its message is sheer hypocrisy.  The truth is, Triathlon Australia is rotten to the core.

Paragraph 2 of TA Open Letter

Since this concerted campaign of destabilisation began, Triathlon Australia has repeatedly offered to meet with the former elite triathlete to provide an opportunity to discuss their concerns directly, but all of these offers have been rejected. In addition, we have respected the independent processes that have been undertaken as a result of these serious allegations, and we have undertaken our own internal reviews, choosing to remain respectfully silent whilst these processes were undertaken. We have complied in full with all requests for information and cooperation made by Sport Integrity Australia, Sport Australia and the AIS, and we have remained in close contact with the Federal Minister for Sport throughout the protracted campaign. 

Members Response – 

Triathlon Australia have emailed Emma Carney on 2 occasions.  The first on 6 August.  Michelle Cooper, president wanted to meet to discuss the issues raised, because it was quite clear Emma Carney was inundated with members sharing their stories and concerns.  Emma Carney is in no place to share member stories of concern and declined.  On 9 August Emma Carney was sent a Cease and Desist letter from TA CEO and President Michelle Cooper.  On 2 September another email, again from Triathlon Australia President Michelle Cooper was sent to Emma Carney.  Emma Carney had requested TA AGM dates and the responding email was questioning her intent and a mediated discussion.  Emma declined, because she just wanted the AGM details for members.

The remaining correspondence from Triathlon Australia to date are 3 threatening legal letters.  Two ‘Cease and Desist’ letters, the first from the TA CEO and President, the second from a Law firm.  A third legal letter informed Emma Carney she had been reported to Sport integrity by Triathlon Australia for asking so many public questions and as a result her TA membership was suspended. Emma Carney has received no correspondence from Sport integrity to say she is being investigated.  TA in doing this have not followed their Member Protection Policy. TA is also doing this to avoid Emma Carneys request to use the TA member Protection policy to look into the privacy breaches and bullying at Triathlon Australia regarding the meme created, prevent Emma Carney from nomination to the TA Board of Directors by members and to bully athletes she coaches.

The truth is, discussions have been ongoing for years. No one at Triathlon cares to improve. With regard to attempts from Emma Carney to communicate her concerns with Triathlon Australia, Emma Carney was invited to be a TA Board Member in 2015, specifically to assist with the HP Program problems.  All issues identified and raised were ignored, so Emma Carney departed as soon as she could.  Emma Carney continued coaching and is working with some very talented young Australian Triathletes.  Emma Carney as a coach is completely unsupported by Triathlon Australia and her athletes are also completely unsupported.  Emma Carney has seen firsthand the neglect of athletes, coaches and the failures of the HP Program at TA.  Issues were raised and ignored.  Emma approached the AIS and Peter Conde CEO told Emma Carney she needed to ‘fit in’ and learn to work in a system.  There was no concern of regard that the system is failing and athletes will never perform when abused.  Emma has agreed for years that Athletes need 2 things opportunity and support and TA provides neither.  Following Tokyo Emma contacted athletes to see how they were.  Comments she received were ‘we are powerless Emma, there is nothing we can do’ and ‘the program is so shit the world is laughing at us’ and ‘if you can do something please do, but the problem is so large’. Emma Carney promised the athletes she would help.  Emma Carney is the only person who can help and also put her name in the public arena.  No one else can.  Triathlon Australia is proving the bullying claims by the reaction to Emma Carney.

Members would like to point out that Sport Integrity CEO David Sharp has specifically stated in a press release that Sports should not conduct their own reviews.  There is no transparency in this.  What reviews are TA conducting and on what?

With regard to information required by Sport integrity, the AIS and Sport Australia members look forward to the transparent reporting on this.  

Paragraph 3 of TA Open Letter

Triathlon brings together people with varying experiences, skills and opinions to form the dynamic community that we all enjoy. Triathlon Australia welcomes direct, respectful, honest and robust dialogue, however many of the public allegations and criticisms made are inaccurate, unfounded, inflammatory, damaging and of a bullying nature. They have impacted on the mental health and morale of our hard-working, dedicated staff and volunteers, and they have provided unnecessary distraction from the good and important work being done. 

Members Response – Could Triathlon Australia please provide details on what is incorrect.  All questions have been constructed from Triathlon Australia documents – Annual Reports, Financial Accounts and Website. 

Paragraph 4 of TA Open Letter

This cannot be allowed to continue and so, to uphold triathlon’s values, protect triathlon’s reputation and protect our staff and office bearers from this relentless campaign of harassment, we are now taking this opportunity to set the record straight on the serious allegations raised, and to advise that Triathlon Australia has formally written to Sport Integrity Australia and requested they undertake assessments into a number of issues under TA’s Member Protection Policy in relation the behaviour of the member including complaints received directly from members.

Members Response – Sport Integrity have all questions, letters and requests for information put to triathlon Australia.  It seems Sport Integrity are well advised by both parties.  Sport Integrity is for member protection.  Is Triathlon Australia honestly complaining to sport integrity that its members are complaining too much?

Paragraph 5 of TA Open Letter

In relation to the specific allegations of bullying and harassment, governance failings, high performance failings and financial misappropriations, we provide the following update to the triathlon community to address any member concerns. 

Section 1 of TA Letter

Response to allegations of bullying and harassment

Triathlon Australia takes all member protection matters extremely seriously. TA is well advanced in its adoption of the National Integrity Framework and works closely with Sport Integrity Australia to ensure the safety and wellbeing of athletes and members.

Member Statement – It would appear this is not correct, given the submissions to Sport integrity.  Your sentence below also admits there have been several complaints of Triathlon Australia breaching their own Member Protection Policy.

Paragraph 6 of TA Open Letter

Triathlon Australia has committed to providing any relevant information to Sport Integrity Australia in relation to possible breaches of member protection policies.
Triathlon Australia takes all matters relating to the safety and wellbeing of our athletes and members extremely seriously. Triathlon Australia is well advanced in its adoption of the National Integrity Framework developed by Sport Integrity Australia and we will continue to work closely with Sport Integrity Australia to ensure that Triathlon Australia continues to be a leading sport in the country, in this important area. 

Member Statement – Members look forward to that day.

Paragraph 7 of TA Open Letter

We continue to encourage anyone who has a specific member protection concern to raise it through the appropriate channels which can be found on our website Member Protection (triathlon.org.au). 

Member Statement – Would it be possible for Triathlon Australia to provide members with a direct link to the document. It seems to be hidden.

Paragraph 8 of TA Open Letter

Abuse, harassment and bullying have no place in our sport. We urge all our members to continue to participate in our great sport in a spirit of mutual respect.

Member Statement – why is Triathlon Australia suspending a member who raises issues and calls for an independent review of TA, then sending legal threatening letters to those who raise concerns?

Section 2 of TA Letter

Allegations of inflated staff expenditure and misuse of AIS funding

Funding for Triathlon Australia's high performance program is subject to reviews, annual formal acquittal processes, independent audits by the AIS and is strictly used for agreed purposes, which include supporting athletes through coaching, travel, and a sustainably resourced high performance support network.

Paragraph 9 of TA Open Letter

TA is proud of its athletes and programs, but we acknowledge some recent international results have not met expectations. We embrace regular reviews in the interests of continuous improvement. A comprehensive review of triathlon’s high performance program with the AIS has jointly commenced, and will continue through to the end of the year. Further information on the Refresh review will be shared through TA digital channels in due course. 

Member Statement – Triathlon Australia keep mentioning the AIS review.  What is the purpose of the review, what is the review remit, what date did it commence, what date is it to be completed and when will the results be published?  Who is to be reviewed and who is reviewing? Has TA overlooked the fact that the AIS is the major financial contributor to TA, therefore the AIS is the most inappropriate organisation to conduct an independent review. 

Members are very proud of its athletes but members also know Athletes cannot perform in an environment of abuse, neglect and poor athlete safeguarding. 

Paragraph 10 of TA Open Letter

The AIS funds Triathlon Australia to deliver high performance programs. Funds are invested to provide maximum benefit against the agreed projects and are diligently acquitted. Detailed proposals are presented to the AIS and, once approved, interim checkpoints and audits confirm compliance with government funding terms. 

Some important facts that should be noted: 

·       High performance funding is linked to good governance and Sport Australia’s governance standards require that TA has sufficient reserves. TA has built reserves over the last 10 years and now meets those Sport Australia governance requirements.

Member Question – Members have asked about the $500k reserve built up in a period when the Triathlon Community struggled.  Race Organisers, athletes all suffered income loss at a time when Triathlon Australia put reserves aside.  What is the purpose of this?  Good governance – in what way, make everyone suffer more than Triathlon Australia to show who is boss??

·       TA has not used high performance grant funding to build reserves but has accumulated these reserves through non-government grant funding sources and prudent financial management.

Member Question – Members are confused as to the requirement to reserve money when the key sport members are struggling.  Triathlon Australia is there to support the sport, not grab the cash and tighten the purse strings. What is TA’s other source of income that is used to build reserves?  Membership fees?  Sponsorship income – other than AIS, is there a substantial income from any other source than members annual fees.  The TA Financial Statements do not explain the source, nor does this open letter.  Why not?

·       High performance grant funding is strictly ring-fenced and applied only for the purposes for which it was granted.

Member Question – could Triathlon Australia elaborate on this ‘purpose’ – is it for staff or athletes? Why does TA not just simply advise members the reason for and purpose of the reserve, how it will be utilised for each purpose and what level of reserve is required for each purpose.  In other words how about TA justifies building reserves whilst Athletes, coaches, race directors and members continue to be ignored. 

·       The AIS approves detailed high performance budgets and receives regular reporting on spending against grants provided. In addition, all grants are subject to an annual, formal acquittal process whereby TA acquits expenditure against each specific grant. The acquittal documents are independently audited by an auditor and approved by the AIS. 

Member Question – this is precisely why members are requesting a full independent review.  A review by the AIS is not appropriate, given the AIS is the approval process. As David Sharp, CEO of Sport Integrity said, Sports cannot review themselves. 

·       Travel costs are a significant part of any high performance budget and the figures quoted of $1m relate to the pre-COVID-19 year of 2019-2020 where only activities from March onwards were affected. This therefore represents an appropriate spend for that period. 

Member Question – simply brushing over a travel spend of over $1.1m in a year of limited travel is not acceptable.  That spend amount is absurd.  Who is travelling?  How much of the $1m was spend directly on Athlete travel?

·       The percentage of high performance government grant funding spent on high performance salaries has consistently remained at approximately 30-35% for the last 10 years. 

Member Statement – if Triathlon Australia cares to take a look at its own financial statements, it will see that statement is totally incorrect.  TA, in presenting financial ratios and calculations, members have usually always made reference to the exact numbers used, which can be reconciled back to the TA’s financial statements for any given year.  You make references to ratios that differ, yet you have never referenced precise numbers that can be verified.  Why is that?  It’s all good to make a statement that TA’s spending has always been 30-35% for 10 years, but please provide exact numbers used in these ratios to allow members to verify these ratios for themselves, as members have.

Members ask TA to again have a look at the Triathlon Australia Audited accounts – 

In 2012, total revenue for Triathlon Australia was $ 3,812,852 with total salaries at $ 636,668 so 17% of Triathlon Australia total revenue was allocated to salaries. Therefore 83% of total revenue could be used to develop and support athletes, members and the sport as a whole. 

In 2020 Triathlon Australia total revenue was $6,481,101 with total salaries at $3,386,116, so 52% of Triathlon Australia total revenue was allocated to salaries. Therefore less than half of total revenue is available to develop and support athletes, members and the sport as a whole.

Alternatively, we can look at – 

In 2012, Triathlon Australia received $1,850,000 from Sport Australia for High performance, and 34% of this amount was spent on Triathlon Australia salaries.

In 2020 (last year) Triathlon Australia received $3,647,286 from Sport Australia for High performance, and 93% of this amount was spent on Triathlon Australia salaries. So, if any is left for athletes there would be less than 10% available.

In 2021 Triathlon Australia received $5,157,954 and all members are waiting to see what % of this is spent on wages, given Able athletes, both U23 Athletes and many elites are not being fully funded to travel in 2021 while most Para athletes cannot travel at all due to costs in 2021.

Members are honestly appalled that despite Sport Australia finding to Triathlon Australia increasing by approximately $1.5m from 2020, Triathlon Australia still couldn't find enough in the budget this year to allow Para athletes travel and race for Tokyo and TA couldn’t find money to properly fund junior and U23 Athletes to compete for Australia.

The simple solution is for the members of the Board of TA to provide open, transparent and actual figures of the expenditure.  What is there to hide?  Athletes are hardly racing, athletes cannot perform to their levels of ability, the funding of TA salaries and wages is ever increasing and the level of funding for athletes and athlete numbers is ever decreasing – so Board Directors, please provide the actual figures for all to see. 

·       As government grant funding has increased, so too have employment related costs - a requirement of that grant funding. This has occurred for the following important reasons:

Members Comment – as funding increases, employment costs have increase – agreed, but unfortunately results have declined, memberships have decreased.  That is precisely why members have been calculating the cost of employees against funding amount allocation as a %.  This has been steadily increasing.  Therefore, as funding goes up, a greater portion of available funding has gone to staff not athletes.

·       Triathlon’s Paralympic program is new and significant, and since its launch the grant funding for the program has grown dramatically, in large part due to the incredible success of our athletes supported through the program.

Members Comment- Triathlon Australia above made the point that government funding is ‘ring-fenced’ with regard to its purpose.  The Triathlon Australia Para Athlete program has its own separate funding allocation.  Members have asked why so few Para Athletes classified and supported in this program?.  Particularly the development athletes.  Triathlon Australia would be very aware of the number of member concerns sent to Sport integrity from Para athletes. Members request Triathlon Australia care for Para athletes better.

Also, TA claim the increased funding for Para athletes has led to’…the incredible success of our athletes supported through the program…’.  Why hasn’t the increased funding for able athletes who have also received significant increases in funding - elite, U23, Junior and age groupers achieved the same success?

·       Over the last 10 years, costs for employees previously paid for directly by the AIS have been moved on to the financial accounts of TA (and other national sporting organisations) along with corresponding grant funding. This is effectively just a shift in who pays for the employment, not an increase.

Member Comment – can triathlon Australia please be more specific.  The blow out in wages has rapidly increased over the past 5 years, why is this if the AIS has been lumping staff cost.  If we look at the funding Triathlon Australia has received in this time there is over $28m.  

This is new information to members.  Where has any change in the accounting of Government Grants been explained to members, or anyone else for that matter? What else has changed in the TA Financial Statements that has not been transparent.  What was the purpose of the change and when did it actually take place.  Are you really saying the TA staff numbers today are the same as they were 5 years ago?  Then dismissing the reasons for increased costs as ‘…just a shift in who pays for the employment…’  What else is there that is “just a shift”. Where is the transparency, integrity, trust, governance, in this?.  Ta has stated that their Financial Statements are audited, they comply with all Corporations Law requirements.   Well, TA since when has it been an acceptable practice to have costs removed from Financial Statements and not disclose the facts.  Was the Auditor aware of the holding of TA costs elsewhere.  What other costs or transactions have been excluded from Audited Financial Statements.   All the more reason for an independent review of TA.   

Section 3 of TA Letter 

Triathlon Australia is committed to ensuring best practice governance 

Triathlon Australia is fully compliant with the Corporations Act and relevant accounting standards. TA’s governance structures are consistent with many national sporting organisations and its governance practices are reviewed by Sport Australia on an annual basis and have been recognised as exceeding the national standard among national sporting organisations. 

Member Comment – full compliance is an overreaching statement.  The Sport Australia governance procedures are lacking, and the reason Sport Integrity was setup.  It would be useful if members could see this report where Triathlon Australia was shown to exceed the national standards amongst sporting organisations.

The fact is, until TA’s claims of good governance are substantiated by independent review findings these assertions have no substance nor credibility.  

The STTAs established TA in 1988 to manage and govern the sport nationally and, as the members of TA, retain responsibility for electing the TA board. 
Triathlon has operated this federated model of governance for more than three decades, and this is a governance structure that is common to sporting organisations around the country. With the support of Sport Australia, TA and STTAs are currently undertaking a review of its operational structures to drive improvements in our model, but the federated governance model will remain. 

Member Comment – members have several concerns regarding the manipulation of the Triathlon Australia constitution over time.  What may have been appropriate in 1988 does not justify it’s validity in 2021 and beyond.  TA is failing, and failing fast.  Members are declining annually, Australia is no longer the World’s leading triathlon nation, there is no national Race Series, Juniors are not entering the sport, nor are they being developed, there are problems and issues and a disconnect between TA, it’s membership base (which are individuals, not clubs, unless you hadn’t noticed), its athletes, the general public, the media.  Sponsors are virtually non-existent.   

There is no doubt there is a future in this type of national governance of sports (and has been done successfully in a very small number of other sports), but in order for this to benefit the Sport as a whole nationally, the sport must be governed at a national level in a transparent manner. 

This means at this crucial stage of transferring to a One Management Model, TA MUST be fully responsible and accountable for the overall management, direction, control, regulation, promotion, development and sponsorship of Triathlon in a manner of utmost transparency in order to maintain a level of integrity and ethical governance of our sport – Triathlon.  If this high level of integrity and ethical governance is not met, then STAA’s will simply hand over the governance and control of the sport of Triathlon to the detriment of growth in every state, for agendas and direction which no one can be certain other than the individuals of the current TA executive and the current TA board members.

Those small number of sports who have made the transition successfully to this type of model have done so with a full transparent process in their governance, management, direction and control.  Triathlon Australia is not showing this level of Transparency.  This suggest Triathlon is not ready for One Management.

It is common knowledge only a small number of STTA’s are in complete agreement with the One Management Model, some are partially in agreement and some are not in agreement.  What is crucial, at this time when TA is subject to federal review and federal processes investigating the integrity, ethics, governance, member concerns and future funding models, is that the STTA’s remain in control and slightly independent of anything that may be uncovered through this investigation process.

Under this model, STTAs are the “members” of TA and represent the interests of triathlon clubs, who are the “members” of their respective STTAs (except for WA, where individual members, not clubs, vote). In turn, triathlon clubs across the country (excepting WA) represent the interests of individual members. This governance model ensures our individual members are appropriately represented in a manner consistent with many national sporting organisations. 
More than 60 experienced and qualified directors across the STTA network are responsible for the organisation of the sport at a State and Territory level, and for ensuring that TA adheres to best practice governance requirements through appropriate constitutional changes and through the election of TA Directors.

Some important facts that should be noted: 

·       Any changes to the TA Constitution are prepared by qualified lawyers and approved by the STTAs, not TA staff or directors.

Member Comment – The fact that a document is prepared by Lawyers does not mean it is has integrity and is ethical.  The Athlete Agreements Triathlon Australia forces athletes to sign as constructed by a lawyer (or athletes are told).  These are appalling.  Members understand that TA forces athletes to sign athlete agreements, they have no choice. These agreements are written in such a way that to qualify to represent Australia every athlete must sign away all basic human rights and if, for one moment an athlete challenges any decision of TA or the HP Program an athlete can be forced to refund all past TA financial support AND endure punitive punishment such as being forced to engage in community service work. These agreements also allow the NPD to allocate funding as he (and the CEO) feels, with no reason to justify any decision of support. 

·       At no stage have individual members elected the TA Board of Directors directly as this is a role performed by STTAs. 

Member Comment – Members are asking for a change.  Why cannot members vote?  Just because something has been done in the past doesn’t mean it is correct.

·       The appointment of the CEO is the sole remit of the TA Board as is standard practice in all organisations across Australia (not just sports organisations). 

Member Comment – Members know this.  Members only concern is who is reviewing the CEO?  The Board should be – are they?

·       Triathlon Australia is subject to multiple compliance checks from government (through Sport Australia) and is fully compliant with the Corporations Act and relevant accounting standards.

Member Comment – members have already noted the problems identified with Sport Australia compliance and reviews.

·       TA’s independent auditors and Finance, Audit and Financial Risk Committee have confirmed that TA delivers compliant financial reporting with a greater degree of disclosure than is required for an organisation of TA’s type and size.

Member Comment – Members do not agree.  Who makes up the Finance, Audit and Financial Risk Committee – the same individuals making the decisions on the finances anyway?  The details of financial statements have been disappearing almost as quickly as member numbers at triathlon Australia.  The Auditor is supposed to be renewed regularly too. This is an absurd statement from triathlon Australia.

Sport Australia reviews Triathlon Australia governance practices on an annual basis and has confirmed that TA exceeds the national average for national sporting organisations in all areas of governance. Internationally TA is one of only five national bodies to hold the highest ranking awarded by World Triathlon since it commenced its annual reporting system in 2019. 

Member Comment – Sport Australia.  For the third time members note the problems with the Sport Australia reviews and the reason Sport integrity was setup.

With regard to World Triathlon.  Triathlon Australia is ranked a top 5 nation due to its established history..  Triathlon Australia used to be ranked 1.  Members do not know why triathlon Australia now thinks 5 is acceptable.

An extensive review of the allegations made has occurred, internally and by several external experts in their fields, and they have been found to be completely without merit. The allegations made demonstrate a lack of understanding of the principles of good governance and are offensive to the experienced individuals who serve on the boards of the nine State, Territory and National Boards of our sport on a completely voluntary (unpaid) basis. 

Member Comment – could triathlon Australia please advise where the errors lie with Member questions regarding governance.  If Triathlon Australia has reviewed itself and taken offence to members requesting the TA CEO, President and Board Directors to take their roles seriously, member ask again that they leave.  Members appreciate the time volunteering, but when decisions made while volunteering are ruining athletes careers, again members ask can they please resign.

Please advise the names, fields of expertise of those “several external experts in their fields”.  Also advise their independence from TA and TA Board members, executives and SA/AIS in forming those views and publish those reviews together with the individual names.  Let’s keep everything transparent.

Concluding remarks

Whilst we are extremely disappointed by this relentless, unfounded, concerted campaign of destabilisation, we are proud that our robust systems and processes, along with our qualified, passionate and dedicated people, continue to lead the way in best practice sports governance and administration. 

Member comment – there is no ‘relentless, unfounded, concerted campaign of destabilisation’.  Triathlon Australia needs a full and independent review.  The legal threats and personal defamatory attacks on those daring to speak out calling for a review from TA are purely there to send a message to any athlete, any coach and any staff member to demonstrate that if they speak up about the wrongdoings at TA, then they will be bullied into silence.  The fact that TA has claimed to be complaining to Sport integrity of Emma Carney’s behaviour, then using the exact same mediums of social media distribute its message is sheer hypocrisy.  The truth is, Triathlon Australia is rotten to the core.

Hundreds of thousands of participants across our sport have shown their resilience and innovation since we first hit the starting line in Australia more than 40 years ago. We are well positioned to deliver continued opportunities to enjoy triathlon for the next 40 years and beyond, not only through our robust governance and management structures, but by continually living our values of unity, accountability, courage, enjoyment and inclusivity. 

Member Comment – TA members numbers are consistently falling.  When is Triathlon Australia going to take this seriously?  Without members there is no triathlon.  Can you please outline the ‘opportunities’ TA provide its members?  

We look forward to continuing to focus our strategic priorities on helping our sport and community rebound from the devastation of the COVID-19 pandemic and look forward to seeing you on the start line as soon as possible. 

Member Comment – If TA maintains the same focus on its strategic priorities of – ‘A sport for Everyone’, ‘Winning when it Matters’ and ‘Working in Harmony’ – the future of triathlon is lost.  Never has a strategic plan been so misaligned with reality than the current one.  The Board Directors, President and CEO really need to understand and recognise the problems before anything can be improved.  Internal review will achieve nothing.  A full independent review will provide the transparency necessary to force change.

Members have looked at the 38 open questions asked and find the Open Letter above ignores or simply brushes over member concerns.  The full list of questions can be fund here - https://www.emmacarney.com/ta-questions

1.     Asked 30 August – Why does the TA constitution (rule 25) and 12.1(c ) omit member input? 

2.     Asked 31 August – Why is TA ignoring developing athletes, despite increased funding to HP development?

3.     Asked 2 September – Why is TA financial statements showing a $2m cost on Performance Pathways, when there are none?

4.     Asked 4 September – Why when comparing with strong triathlon nations, does TA spend so much money on staff over athletes?

5.     Part 1 – Asked 5 September.  How is ignoring the development of Para athletes even acceptable to the TA CEO, President, Board Members and National Performance Director?  Part 2 – CEO indicated no money is wasted on staff for Para Athletes, then members asked where is the finding spent then?

6.     Asked 6 September – Why has the cost of staff per member quadrupled since 2012?. How is this in line with TA strategic pillar of ‘A Sport for everyone’?

7.     Asked 7 September – Selection documents – what is the reason for not allowing athletes to race, why are selection documents filled will clauses where athletes have no ability to appeal?. Why is there no transparency on selection?

8.     Asked 8 September – When is the AGM date and where can members find the meeting minutes?  Triathlon Australia released only the AGM date as a response.

9.     Asked 9 September – Why is 97% of Sport Australia funding spent on TA staff?

10.   Asked 10 September - Why Triathlon Australia has such an obsession with employing more staff over developing and supporting athletes, members and the sport as a whole? How does spending more money on staff at Triathlon Australia, meet the strategic pillars of ‘A sport for everyone’ and ‘Winning when it matters - Performance driven, athlete focused.’

11.   Asked 11 September – How exactly did TA spend over $1.1m on travel in a lockdown period?

12.   Asked 12 September – Why were the multisport world championships cancelled over a year out? Athletes need events.

13.   Asked 13 September – TA President conflict of interest concerns.

14.   Asked 14 September – Why does TA not support U23 and Junior athletes?

15.   Asked 15 September – Member enquiry regarding the ‘Move it Australia’ funding failure

16.   Asked 16 September – TA CEO tells members they are free to collect AGM minutes by turning up to TA offices.  TA CEO claims only 8 employees at TA, despite 18 listed on the HP page of TA website.  Members ask how TA President counts her 1500 volunteer hours?

17.   Asked 17 September – Comparing national federations why all the spending on staff at TA?

18.   Asked 18 September – Why did TA omit Lauren Parker from pre race press release? Why does TA ignore Para Athletes? (TA did later as a reaction to this question)

19.   Asked 19 September – Why was highest ranked and the most race prepared athlete  - Natalie VanCoevorden not selected for Tokyo?

20.   Asked 20 September – Why have the TA Board Directors been so quiet?

21.   Open letter 21 September - To TA Board Director Natalie Edwards – Triathlon Australia Members request that all TA Executives take their professional, legal and moral obligations seriously

22.   Open letter 22 September – To TA Vice President Stuart Corbishley – Triathlon Australia Members request that all TA Executives take their professional, legal and moral obligations seriously

23.   Open Letter 23 September - To TA Board Director Marlene Elliott  – Triathlon Australia Members request that all TA Executives take their professional, legal and moral obligations seriously

24.   Open letter 2, 23 September – With regard to other sports investigating equipment fails in Tokyo, members would like to know if the platform shoes will be marked ‘never to return’. How much did these shoes cost the TA HP program? Will the National Performance Director be removed?

25.   Open Letter 24 September – Open Letter to TA Board Director Alex Gosman Members request that all TA Executives take their professional, legal and moral obligations seriously

26.   Question 2, 24 September – Tokyo failings of the National Performance Director, equipment failings, athlete agreement bullying and non-selection of athletes.  Will the National Performance director please resign along with his useless entourage.

27.   Open Letter 25 September – Open Letter to TA Board Director David Tucker Members request that all TA Executives take their professional, legal and moral obligations seriously

28.   Question 2, 25 September – Members question TA using the promotion of women as a potential vote and further reward for support for TA One Management.

29.   Asked 26 September – Why does the National Performance Director need so much power over athletes?

30.   Asked 27 September – Why did TA not acknowledge the retirement of Gillian Backhouse?  (TA did later as a reaction to this question)

31.   Update – 27 September - TA Elite Athlete Commission members told TA will do a review and athletes have no input other than filling in a survey.  

32.   Open letter 28 September - Open letter to TA President Michelle Cooper.  This was over 3 pages listing her failings.  Members request that all TA Executives take their professional, legal and moral obligations seriously.

33.   Semi Update – 28 September Meme created to bully Emma Carney, with leaked privacy information from TA

34.   Open letter 29 September – Open letter to TA CEO, Miles Stewart.  What have you achieved?

35.   Letter requesting Member Protection following Meme 30 September.  Triathlon Australia suspended Emma Carneys TA membership a few days later in an attempt to avoid addressing this.

36.   Open Letter 1 October – TA Board Director Nicole Donegan. Members request that all TA Executives take their professional, legal and moral obligations seriously.

37.   Update 1 October – TA having internal review claiming Emma Carney has mental health issues.  Simple gaslighting.

38.   Question asked 2 October – TA President social media account littered with listing her volunteer hours tally and over work.  Members ask how she calculates this? Does it include TA funded trips to race and compete? Perhaps she has no passion for the sport with constant posting of overwork?

39.   Question 3 October – TA National Performance Director and his sloppy program.  Members asked when athlete categorisation will be updated.  This was done secretly on 6 October by TA. No announcement, just a page update on their website.  All out of date dates removed, retired athletes noted but new athletes not added.  Still out of date.  

40.   Asked 4 October – Members ask about the covid impact on TA, the support payments received and why the collection of reserves at TA when so many members are struggling?

41.   Asked 5 October – Members again ask about the out of date classification process and particularly the neglect of Para athletes. (Triathlon Australia cleaned up the TA website page on this, no substantial change and dates removed and added to make the impression it is up to date).

42.   Asked 6 October – Members ask did the CEO make wonderful statements to attain his role, because they seem to have been forgotten.

43.   Asked 7 October – Members are constantly confused by the statements made by the TA President, because they appear to be in complete contrast to what she is actually achieving.

Yours faithfully, 
Triathlon Australia Board of Directors

Member Comment - Members request that all TA Executives take their professional, legal and moral obligations seriously.  Members have repeatedly asked this, so now the members ask you to please resign.

·       Michelle Cooper, President

·       Stuart Corbishley, Vice-President

·       Nicole Donegan

·       Natalie Edwards

·       Alex Gosman

·       David Tucker

·       Marlene Elliott