Jim Wallace
By Jim Wallace, ACL Managing Director
I am back in Canberra after time on the trail from Melbourne to Wellington (NSW ) and Perth over the last week and with a computer down! However I now plan to blog this page at least once a day in the lead up to the election.
I feel it is necessary to reaffirm the purpose of ACL in this election and something of how we seek to go about that – a purpose consistent with our vision and mission.
We see our mission at ACL as to bring Christ’s influence into Government and work at both federal and state level to do that and even sometimes into councils.
Wanting to influence government we are non-party partisan, because a consistent Christian influence cannot be achieved if we, or the church, allows itself to be captured by one side or the other, or worse still decides that God is a card carrying member of any particular party.
You might be thinking that we have been very outspoken on the Greens of late, but our non-party partisanship does not extend to denying truth, we reserve the right to be critical of any policies with which we disagree from any party and of any deception in the political process.
The Greens failure to declare their known anti-Christian policies in responses to the ACL Questionnaire, while only answering questions they thought appealed to Christians was deception, it was a failure of truth in the political process and could not be let go unchallenged.
But our main business as a Lobby is to secure those policies from all parties that will make government after the election more Godly, more Christian.
The political process is responsive to the Christian constituency because it realises that it is a large one and its political effect can be felt throughout Australia to varying degrees. Despite the claims of some commentators, politics is wise enough to recognise that there is more that unites this constituency than divides it and at election time we are not voting about theological differences – that’s for bishops’ crooks at twenty paces at other times!
At elections ACL conducts Make it Count events, inviting both the Leader and the Opposition Leader to put their case and to answer questions from denominational and other para-church leaders to both ensure the Christian constituency knows who it is choosing between, and also to impress on the political system that this is a very large, committed and engaged electorate. The level of Christian leadership involvement and church participation in either the physical or webcast audience, has invariably proved this, and in a way that few others can.
At the same time elections provide a heightened sensitivity to constituent demands or concerns. We shouldn’t be cynical about this, it is the reality of the democratic process and provides an opportunity to secure undertakings from politics.
As a Lobby we do this, first through direct approaches to parties between and before elections, but also through the ACL election questionnaires – the responses to which are now physically available in booklet form in over 5000 churches around Australia and of course on this website.
However in the ebb and flow of the election campaign, opportunities arise to either extract or strengthen undertakings from the parties.
This opportunity presented itself last week, in two areas where we felt Labor’s commitments fell short of what Christians would want and we saw scope to improve them– marriage and chaplaincy.
We had had a longstanding invitation to the PM to provide an interview with me, to replace the now irrelevant address given by Kevin Rudd at the Make it Count event with Mr Abbott only days before he was deposed. There is little doubt that the discussion about the PM’s atheism that occurred during and before that week, made her keen to engage the constituency and particularly to strengthen their appeal to Christians – again, you can be cynical, but for me, democracy in action.
I flew to Melbourne and conducted the interview, which I hope you have all watched. We had proposed and honoured the protocol that we would give her an opportunity to introduce herself to the constituency, ask the same questions we did of Tony Abbott on the night, but reserve the right to ask follow on questions. We also made it clear we were particularly concerned to strengthen their commitments on marriage, chaplaincy and the sexualisation of society.
In the event this interview elicited commitments on all three, but I am particularly pleased that it not only achieved a commitment to chaplaincy, but to retaining its faith base.
Now in the interest of being non-partisan, it is very important to say that the Coalition’s positions on all these three were unequivocal from the start and attractive to Christians. While there are still differences in the party policies, we certainly did not have to approach the Coalition to make them more attractive.
As for the leaders’ addresses, it is equally important that you now view both. Julia Gillard declares her atheism honestly, but also her high regard for people of faith and her appreciation of the role of the church. Tony Abbott’s address makes his faith and its importance to him clear, as he does its importance to Western civilisation. I found Julia Gillard a very engaging and warm individual and, as I always have, Tony Abbott equally engaging and one of the most refreshingly forthright of politicians.
You have everything here in their performances and the parties’ replies to help you form your opinion.
Tomorrow we will talk more about developments.
hi there Jim
A real pleasure to meet you last night in perth. We came home inspired by your vision of the ACL tackling the issue of our socirty’s welfare as affected by what comes out of Hollywood.
However I raise with again the failure to acknowledge the Opposition’s position on Chaplancy in the item on this in today’s email from the ACL.
When I was canvassing for people to join us last night a friend made the comment that the ACL was instrumental in the election of the Rudd Governemnt.
It would have been good to have seen in the ACL’s email today an acknowledgement such that you wrote in your own blogg today. Also perhaps the By Line could also have been more balanced:
Governement and Opposition both give their commitment to the schools’ chaplancy program.
Rather than singling out Gillard’s support.
Perhaps you may see this as being over reactionary but it is critical for the integrity of the ACL that I write to you.
All the very best and we pray that God’s providence will sustain you in the “David” of a task that you have taken on.
Michael Rose
“Now in the interest of being non-partisan, it is very important to say that the Coalition’s positions on all these three were unequivocal from the start and attractive to Christians. While there are still differences in the party policies, we certainly did not have to approach the Coalition to make them more attractive.”
Hi Jim,
I am concerned about a couple of issues regarding your position in these (and the last) elections. I feel that you cause confusion among Christians, who do not know which way to vote. Ultimately all Christians should seek God regarding this, but many are needing direction.
Is it possible that your stance makes you ‘salt that has lost it’s saltiness’ and hence ineffective to make a difference. Why should you be so neutral? Is it not obvious that your position in fact causes people like Julia Gillard to find a platform to gain more Christian support, and gives her the chance to win, and then down the track bring in the policies that she wants to, in time.
You feel you have a win, because she stated she will give chaplains support. Would it not be better to support a truly Christian leader into power before the elections… then if this does not occur after your best efforts,I can see the sense of a role for you to make as much difference as is possible in the worse scenario.
I really do think that Christian leaders, such as yourself and pastors have a big responsibility to help Christians with direction and your bi-partisan approach does not help with this. I think in this particular election it is not even confusing. What is confusing is for leaders such as yourself to be ambivalent. Surely someone like Julia herself does not really expect support from you, and is ecstatic about the support that she is receiving as a result. All she has to do is promise some benefits to say Chaplains, and Christians get all excited and vote her in. Then it will be difficult to get her out again.
It was noted that the Christian vote is what got the last government in, and we have already been losing ground on Christian issues in the short time that they have had.
If I am wrong, I am happy to receive more of an explanation.
Regards,
Ruxu
Jim, thank you for NOT telling us how to vote! If people need direction, maybe they should not be allowed to vote (kidding a little). I appreciate that you ask the various parties to spell out their policies on matters that Christians have a particular interest in. That helps me immensely. The thing that is hard is that each party is like the Curate’s egg, good in parts. The Greens have some just and compassionate policies mixed in with some anti-religious and dubious moral ones. And frankly the major parties are the same to a much lesser degree. Again, thank you for your unbiased and calm information.
On the subject of Julia Gillard’s much-touted endorsement of school chaplaincy, have a look at the website of The Australian Education Union
http://www.aeufederal.org.au/Media/President/Schoolchaplaincy.html
“The AEU has described as misguided and wrong the decision by Labor to extend the school chaplaincy program. AEU Federal President Angelo Gavrielatos said the program did not address the real needs of students.
“Apart from undermining the secular traditions of public schools, this announcement fails to acknowledge what our students really need – qualified school counsellors, psychologists and welfare workers who can meet their complex needs,” he said.
ZW
Jim, Ruxu suggests that your efforts should be to find & promote a Christian leader before an election. I believe that the ACL approach gains better results.
Alan
Dear Ruxu,
I appreciate your comment, but have to say that I object strongly to any suggestion that providing the information for Christians to make their own decision on whom to vote for, as God leads them, could in any way be a failure of my duty as a Christen leader. In fact to do otherwise is to suggest I have the answer for them, that they should not listen to God in forming their response , but me.
I do not agree for one moment that this is a correct role for Christian leaders and we have seen throughout history the tragic consequences when leaders attribute to themselves knowledge of “God’s purpose” for others.
Each one of us has a personal relationship with Christ, it is just one of many things that set our faith apart, and I would never presume to impose myself between anyone and their personal Saviour in such a proprietary way.
Your suggestion that we shouldn’t use the campaign period to secure outcomes, that regardless of who is elected, ensure a more Christian society is puzzling to me and I must say shows some misunderstanding of the political process.
No party, regardless of how committed you may feel to it, will be in power forever and we have seen in the US, the great folly of Christians putting all their support behind any one party.
Also to wait for the end of an election campaign, that period when the receptiveness of parties is highest, to put our case, is to forfeit the leverage the democratic process gives large constituencies. No one will be listening on the 22 August!
In the meantime ACL will continue to assist Christians to make an informed decision between them and God at elections, and at all times work to see this country more Christian by influencing public policy – whoever is in Government.
God Bless
Jim Wallace
Zillah Williams reports that unions prefer qualified school counsellors, psychologists and welfare workers. With 10,000 schools in Australia that would represent 30,000 taxpayer-funded jobs. Obviously the union preference.
Without wise leadership a nation falls….. The Lord despises double standards….. When there is moral rot within a nation, it’s government topples easily….. A wicked ruler is dangerous to the poor….. When the Godly succeed everyone is glad. When the wicked are in charge, people go into hiding….. When the Godly are in authority, the people rejoice. But when the wicked are in power, they groan.
If anyone watched to recent Public Forum at Rooty Hill Sydney this week they should take note that there definitely groaning coming from the audience when Gillard was answering her question. None from Tony Abbott. A lot can be taken from Proverbs, they speak truth and light! Keep up the good work ACL but we can not be The Great Southland of the Holy Spirit if we stay secular!
It is astonishing to think that anyone who professes to be a Christian would support or even give the benefit of the doubt to a political party that openly supports gay marriage and/or same-sex civil unions, de-facto relationships, abortion, not saying prayers in parliament, who want to get rid of scripture teaching in schools and replace it with secular chaplains, who are Fabians and Socialists which are anti-Christian movements, who are allied to the Greens who are openly anti-Christian, amongst many other factors. Do you think that the Gospel will prosper in Australia when these people gain full control of government, including the Senate and then set out to destroy Christianity? Until now they have not had control of the Senate but if they did they can set out to make anti-Christian laws. Labor and the Greens have not been too quiet about their anti-Christian beliefs, at least we can be grateful about that, so we know where they stand. It matters little if a leader is warm or engaging or physically attractive or not. Those who think that the parties are quite similar to each other only need to do a little bit of reading, some simple Google searches on their history and beliefs to discover that they are worlds apart, particularly in whether Christianity and the Gospel is hindered or allowed to flourish. Those who were worried about the Coalition’s policies on refugees, now even have the option of Scott Morrison, the Opposition Minister for Immigration, who is himself a practicing Christian in Sutherland who would be fair and compassionate. Think about the teams not just about the leaders. Do a little bit of research, and please pray and think carefully before you vote.
John, if you did research on the teams, you would know that there are plenty of practising Christians in the Labor party. To characterise a party OR its members as either ‘Christian’ or ‘anti-Christian’ is simplistic in the extreme. One should look at each policy on each issue.
Mind you, I also have a problem at times with the idea that there is one ‘Christian’ position to be had on any political issue – including some of the ones that the ACL has a firm position on.
One should also bear in mind that the national Parliament is governing for all Australians, not just the Christian ones.
To ACL who I support with pride .
To Jim Wallace for is capacity and guidance to all Christian Thank You and thank for the inside e guidance you give at the pray meeting in Perth on Sunday the 8Th .
One thing I was like to suggest to the Christian voter is to search the list of the minor party and give the preference to the major one you like.
This Cristian organization I had found very helpful is: http://www.fava.org.au/election-surveys/commonwealth/
Hope that God will will be done like you Jim had suggest to pray.
Amen Love and blessing in Jesus.
Luigi
I received Australia Votes last Sunday in church.
Of particular not was the ALP’s response to the Abortion Question (q10)
Their essence of the response was that members wold be given a “conscience” vote.
This is misleading because a good number (approx.30) of sitting and possible members of the the Labor Caucus are members of EMILY’s List. According to EMILY’s lists website, members are bound by it’s beliefs.
EMILY’s List Members, Supporters, Candidates and Members of Parliament support the following principles : ET AL
We believe women must have control over their own bodies and choices in their lives.
Reproductive Freedom empowers women and men to choose if, when and how to begin the important journey into parenthood, without fear of discrimination, coercion or violence.
-which is a euphemism for abortion on demand.
These women therefore cannot exercise a conscience vote.
This needs to be made public before the election at the weekend.