Author: gordonmoyes.com

Scripture: 1 Corinthians 7:25-35

Throughout this year I have researched and written twenty studies on Family Life. I have tried to write inclusive of people living in all sorts of differently shaped families. As Family First Party, I felt there should be some overarching philosophy apart from all of the policies on different aspects of Government policy for families. Although Family First is a party of family values, and not exclusively a Christian party, I have been a Christian minister for 50 years so I write out of that set of values and faith system. To do anything else would deny what is essential to my thinking and understanding. I respect the views of others and I quote many people whose works I have read, but whose values and lifestyle I do not promote, as you will read as you progress through this study for example.

Many people have been considering the issues and have given me their views. But nothing has attracted negative comment as much as this theme when I announced it some months ago. Only five words long, this title “BEING SUCCESSFUL ON YOUR OWN” has been criticised on two accounts. The first is that I should be writing on a theme of people being successful at all.

1. BEING SUCCESSFUL

Some people are not happy with the concept of success in life. They trot out trite little sayings like “God does not call us to be successful, but to be faithful.” That sounds good, but it fails to answer the issue: “Is God honoured when his people are failures, wasting His gifts and squandering His resources?” The answer is clearly seen in the teachings of Jesus who praised successful people in His Parable of the Talents and in some 200 references in scripture to ‘succeeding’ and ‘success’.

The Bible encourages us to be successful. The theme that runs throughout the cycle of stories of Joseph in Genesis which is repeated after every episode that sees the hero badly done by is: (39:23) “but the LORD was with Joseph and gave him success in whatever he did.” After the people of Israel entered the land of Canaan, Joshua said (1:7-8) “Be strong and very courageous. Be careful to obey all the law my servant Moses gave you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, that you may be successful wherever you go. Do not let this Book of the Law depart from your mouth; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.”

When King Uzziah ruled, he learned from Zechariah, who instructed him in the fear of God (2 Chron 26:5) and the result? “As long as he sought the LORD, God gave him success.”

Nehemiah, who was a great hero of Israel, prayed (1:11) “O Lord, Give your servant success today.” David prayed (Ps 118:25) “O LORD, save us; O LORD, grant us success.”

But in Australia we have been through an era of greed where people tried to be successful financially at the expense of others, and at the expense of morality and ethics. Whatever happened to public morality? Many Australians asked the question again this week, as a former Chief Judge of the Supreme Court was buried and people remembered the behaviour that led to his resignation from the bench in disgrace.

Three successful business leaders are before the courts, another judge is in jail, a former Catholic priest pleaded guilty to the sexual abuse of children, a millionaire who ran away after his friend was murdered was found hiding in Queensland, and a former businessman who was the nation’s wealthiest is having his will contested by a former mistress who bore his child, and a stripper who was his escort while being unfaithful to his wife and his mistress.

These so called “successful” people were immoral, greedy and sinful, not successful. You can only call them “successful” when you have a twisted or a limited definition of success. No one now calls them successful.

Professor Peter Singer, the famous Australian Philosopher, says: “Australians are now taking ethical issues more seriously. We are a bit more moral than we were. Australia has a golden opportunity to redefine the ethical landscape in which we live, and I hope we don’t squander it. Some organisations have taken on an ethical stance which employees feel they can share and which can give people some new confidence.” Hugh Mackay, the social commentator, says: “Perhaps we are beginning to realise that we need to take a closer look at what makes communities function so that we can do a better job of designing environments where humans can more easily act like social and moral creatures.”

Following a TV interview earlier this month with Tony Abbott, the Federal Opposition Leader, a full discussion has occurred about politicians who do not tell the truth, and who deliberately make promises that they have no intention of keeping.

I remember Justice Michael Kirby, recently retired from the High Court, saying upon his return from Cambodia, “The Cambodians lost their spiritual framework when the Khmer Rouge killed the monks and destroyed the temples. At least in Australia, despite the decline of religious belief, we have a cultural memory of the teachings of Jesus Christ. I am not a churchly person but the teachings of Jesus remind us of the transience of human power and ambition and the enduring nature of spiritual and ethical values.”

When people ask, “whatever happened to morality?” they are stating that society will not tolerate actions against the common good.

We have been through an era of “the privatisation of morality” while warning about rampant individualism and the need for shared moral values. Our commitment to each other was dangerously weakened as a result of the unbridled individualism in the 1980’s, the “me” decade when people believed God had arranged matters so that everything occurring under free enterprise was designed for our success, and the Global Financial Crisis of 2009 when everything came tumbling down.

In some churches Prosperity theology found in some preachers taught that if you were to receive the blessing of God, it would be in the form of financial riches. Some of these heretical preachers are still active in fringe denominations. The erosion of the moral environment made it easier for them to behave badly by equating blessing with money, success with getting away with it.

Damian Grace, who taught in the School of Social Work at the University of NSW, wrote in the Sydney Morning Herald: “Morality is not about conformity, but about developing those personal excellences once familiar to us as the virtues. It should not be equated simply with prohibitions or a list of obligations. It is also about courage, generosity, patience, trust and love, the kind of qualities we can really acquire only in our relations with others.”

That is the kind of success I am talking about. Individuals growing in personal excellence and virtue, growing in “courage, generosity, patience, trust and love.”

This is true, not just of successful people, but successful organisations. They too must have a moral and ethical heart, and develop those qualities that mark out successful individuals. The managing director of Bankers Trust Australia, says: “Capitalism is based on self-interest which, on the face of it, seems to conflict with ethical behaviour. But in a capitalist society, we accord genuine respect only to enduringly successful organisations, not fly-by-nighters. To be an enduringly successful organisation, your staff must work to their optimum, respect each other and, most important, the organisation needs to have a social purpose beyond itself and its constituents. In other words, values and standards that go beyond self-interest.”

Professor Don Edgar, a professor at Monash University, says: “The irony is that we have glorified independence and personal choice in a complex modern society where little can be done without dependence upon the expertise and goodwill of others, rather than a message that as human beings we need one another. Society works only if people make it work for the benefit of all rather than a few.”

A clear example of such a successful single woman is Miss Marian Anderson, the African-American contralto who died in 1993, and who won worldwide acclaim as a concert soloist. I found in her bestselling autobiography, “My Lord, What a Morning”, that in spite of her fame, she remained the same gracious, approachable lady, a beautiful model of humility.

A reporter, while interviewing Miss Anderson, asked her to name the greatest moment in her life. The choice seemed difficult to others who were in the room that day, because she had many big moments. For example: there was the night Conductor Arturo Toscanini announced, “A voice like hers comes once in a century.” In 1955 she became the first African American to sing with the Metropolitan Opera Company of New York. In 1958 she became a United States delegate to the United Nations.

On several occasions during her illustrious career, she received medals from various countries. There was that memorable time she gave a private concert at the White House for the President and the Queen of England. She was awarded the coveted Presidential Medal of Freedom. There was that Easter Sunday in Washington D.C. when she stood beneath the Lincoln statue and sang for a crowd of 75,000, which included Cabinet members, Supreme Court justices, and most members of Congress. Which of those big moments did she choose?

None of them. Miss Anderson quietly told the reporter that the greatest moment of her life was the day she went home and told her mother she
wouldn’t have to take in washing anymore. There was a successful person!

2. BEING SUCCESSFUL ON YOUR OWN

The second criticism I received in proposing to write on this theme resulted from the comment: “This series of studies has been most helpful to our family life and even when you discussed issues that did not directly affect us at this stage, we found insights that became relevant over the next week or two. But why on your family theme have you spent a couple of studies discussing the issues effecting single people only, and why are you going to do a study on “Being successful on your own?” Doesn’t this cut right across the family theme?”

I replied that people who are neither parents nor married are not excluded from a discussion on the family, for single people are important members of their extended families. Not everyone is called to nurture a family, and although single people have no family of their own they can make an important contribution to the well-being of their extended families.

Single people also share in some of the family responsibilities and bring an added dimension to family life. But not only that, single people who may have no extended family and no nearby relatives, can make a significant contribution to society as a whole, and to every functioning part of it.

We need to help single people be successful on their own. Then they are in a better position to make an even greater contribution to the community and to those families who need an extra family member who can help them cope.

Some single people without families live in community with other single people. Religious communities of sisters, brothers and priests are groups of single people freely committed to each other in this way. So some single people adopt a community lifestyle.

I think of the Christian community at Bundeena that has existed for many years. And others have turned one of blocks of units operated by Wesley Mission into a large family centre consisting of single people.

I have always encouraged single people to be successful on their own. The Australian Institute of Family Studies predicted that 25% of Australian men and women born in the 1960s will never marry. (“With This Ring” AIFS).

Christianity was born in the hearts of single people. The early church expanded the faith through the work of single men and women. The Apostle Paul, like the Lord Jesus, was a single man. Paul wrote: (1 Corinthians 7:8) “Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am.” He also wrote (v27) “Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife.” Paul continued (v32-35) “I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs, how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world, how he can please his wife, and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world, how she can please her husband. I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.”

Paul believed that singleness gave a person opportunity for Christian growth and service. He wanted single people to realise the worth and significance of their singleness. He would approve of being a successful single.

Success does not lie in the abundance of your possessions, as Jesus taught, but in your commitment to God. Success lies in being the best you can be by God’s grace. So HOW CAN YOU BE SUCCESSFUL ON YOUR OWN?

CELEBRATE YOUR SINGLENESS

Being single gives a person great opportunities. Celebrate them! You have freedom for educational opportunities, additional time for leisure and cultural activities, and you can be financially independent. Never complain about being single. Some of the most integrated and competent people celebrate their singleness.

DO WHAT YOU CAN DO – WELL

Everyone has a gift of God, some talent that can be used in His service. Not everyone has the same capacity or range of abilities as Jesus indicated when he told in the parable of talents that one person possessed ten talents, another five, while another has only one. The essential point was that each person had to do what they could do, well. It is important that single people do – for many wait for another person to make the decisions for them. It is all too easy to procrastinate. But the successful single is the person who learns to do what you can do well!

DISCOVER YOUR GIFT AND USE IT

God has given you talents, and gifts and one of the gifts God has given is Celibacy. Use your celibacy as God intended. When I was fourteen, I wanted a watch. My widowed mother told me we did not have enough money for me to expect a watch for Christmas. But I thought she just might buy one. One day alone in our house except for a friend from school, we were discussing what each would get for Christmas in a week or so.

I told him I was getting a watch. He didn’t believe me. I told him I was, and that my mother probably had already bought it and it was hidden somewhere in the house. He urged me to look for it. I guessed she might have hidden it behind the linen in the linen press. We looked. I found it!

I opened the watch box and there was the most beautiful watch in its velvet box. I tried it on and felt so excited, then carefully hid it way again. Then came Christmas day. But what was supposed to be a great surprise, wasn’t. I already knew.

I pretended I was excited and thanked Mum but I had an empty feeling. My gift had been opened with the wrong person at the wrong time and all the joy was gone. Celibacy is a gift of God. Don’t unwrap it until you are with the right person and at the right time! God has given you a gift, use it well in serving others.

HELP OTHERS MEET THEIR NEEDS

Successful people are those who know how to serve others. I have observed over many years that some single people grow incredibly narrow in their interests and self-centred in their concerns. The successful single has learned to be interested in other peoples’ interests and committed to helping others. That’s why they are so popular!

VISUALISE YOURSELF ACHIEVING

One of the great arts in being successful is in visualising yourself achieving. This requires that you will have great faith. Unless you have a goal, can dream of yourself achieving that goal and visualising yourself accomplishing it, you are not using all the inner power you have within you to help you be successful. Whatever your purpose, dream the dream and visualise yourself achieving it, and then get on your way.

AIM AT BEING A TOTAL PERSON

The successful person is not measured by their net asset worth financially, but in their achievement of a total personality. That means your all-round development as a person. Both our Lord Jesus and the Apostle Paul were great people with well-developed personalities and skills. They were both single, but total people. I rejoice with single people who have developed their skills, who manage well on their own, who have expanded their competencies and who are living a fulfilled life.

In all of our emphasis upon families in these studies this year, I would note with appreciation the contribution made by single people, and urge you to become a successful person on your own. Making your commitment to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour is the first and ultimate step in being a successful person.

REV HON DR GORDON MOYES AC MLC

The latest hearing in the trial of the five men accused of murdering three Christians in Malatya, Eastern Turkey was held on 15 April 2010. In mid April 2007 three Christian men, Necati Aydin, Ugur Yuksel and Tilmann Geske, were murdered while working at the Zirve Christian Publishing and Bible Distribution Company. Five local men were arrested at the scene of the crime and later charged with the murders. Their trial opened in November 2007 and still continues in Malatya, which, oddly enough, is also the hometown of the Turkish man who shot Pope John Paul II in 1981. The area is well known as a radicalised, angry region of the country.
The most recent hearing took place just a few days before the 3rd anniversary of the murders, and there were some surprising developments. It brought to light information that had not been known before: evidence from witnesses revealed that these murders may have been linked to a series of earlier murders carried out by a group of ultranationalists using the name of “Ergenekon”. The group is named after a place in Turkish mythology located in the inaccessible valleys of the Altai Mountains, the original home of the Turkic speaking peoples; and is a shared symbol of pride.

At the previous hearing in February the prosecutors had pressed for the trial to be concluded and for the five defendants each to be given the maximum possible sentence but two of the defense lawyers excused themselves from the hearing, thereby preventing the judges from issuing a verdict. The judges have decided to call a new witness to the next hearing, which is scheduled for the 14th of May 2010. This witness provided evidence to the court that he had been offered money for killing Christians. Lawyers representing the victims are now planning to formally request that this case be integrated with the ongoing Ergenekon investigation. In the previous hearing the judges rejected a prosecution request to link the Malatya and Ergenekon trials but the evidence is now stronger.

Middle East Concern, a Christian advocacy organisation, pointed out on their website that this action is based on the allegation that the leaders of Ergenekon clearly stated that missionary activity in the region was linked to the terrorist organization known as Kurdistan’s Workers Party. Information gathered earlier by the Ergenekon investigators found that such nationalists had been documenting all the Christian activity in the region. They also found that the same people had links to one of the perpetrators of the murders as well as to perpetrators of assaults against other Christians in 2006.

The news service ‘Compass Direct News’ quoted the Chairman of the Association of Protestant Churches in Turkey, as saying that while churches want to see closure for the sake of the families who lost their loved ones, they also want “the truth, the real culprits and mindsets behind the killings to be revealed somehow.” He said that their prayer is that “God who is the worker of miracles will work these two contradictory expectations out; a closure and an exposure at the same time.”

Turkish Christians need our awareness of their situation, our concern, and our prayers asking that a full investigation will be undertaken against Ergenekon, and others in any political group that may have participated in these crimes, that the families of the victims will know the presence of Jesus throughout the trial process, that the legal team will know the Spirit’s guiding and equipping, and that the judges, lawyers and journalists present will be receptive to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

According to a review of a recent book “High Society – How Substance Abuse Ravages America and What to Do About It ” by Joseph Califano (Public Affairs, April 2007), the cost of drug abuse has grown to approximately $1 trillion dollars per year to America. Mr. Califano, the former US Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, highlights how substance abuse is a major cause behind America’s most destructive social problems: substance abuse is related to poverty, violent crime, academic under-achievement, high health care costs, family breakdown, child abuse, homelessness, teen pregnancy, work problems, and diseases like AIDS. He also shows the costs of drug abuse in the nation’s criminal justice, health care, and social service systems, and states that this one epidemic is responsible for the death of more Americans than all America’s wars, natural catastrophes, and traffic accidents combined.
http://alcohol-abuse.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_economics_of_alcoholism_and_drug_abuse

All of these issues are also to be found in Australia, in proportion to our population. The cost begins early in life. In Australia maternal alcohol abuse is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. These include the foetal alcohol syndrome, pseudo-Cushing’s syndrome, alcohol withdrawal in the newborn, and increased risk of perinatal mortality. The incidence of foetal alcohol syndrome has been estimated to be between one and two per thousand live births, or 250 to 500 new cases per year in Australia.

During childhood, we also have problems with underage drinking. The sight of a mother screened on television news recently, trying to revive her fourteen-year-old son in a Sydney High School following a school class drinking bottles of whiskey, disturbed many viewers. Research shows that more young people are drinking alcohol, drinking at an earlier age and increasingly adopting harmful drinking patterns. The 2001 National Household Drug Survey found that the average initiation age for drinking alcohol was 17.1 years, and it is estimated that at least two thirds of the alcohol consumed by young people under 25 years of age poses a risk of short-term or acute health consequences.

A study of almost 400 young people in the manufacturing, building, hairdressing, fast food and retail industries in Melbourne found that these young workers face major health issues including smoking and excessive alcohol consumption. Another study of 300 first year building trades apprentices found that a substantial proportion consumed alcohol at harmful levels. Nearly 50 per cent consumed alcohol more than weekly and just over 50 per cent drank six or more drinks at least weekly. Those who reported that alcohol was available at work reported higher drinking rates.

This obviously leads to many hospitalizations. In Australia the Alcohol Education and Rehabilitation Foundation (AER) estimated that approximately 72,302 hospitalisations were attributable to the misuse of alcohol and the financial burden of alcohol misuse to the community has been estimated to be $4.5 billion per year, including lower productivity due to lost work days, road accident costs and legal and court costs, as well as health costs.

In Australia drinking alcohol at risky and high risk levels for long-term harm was estimated to have caused 3,290 deaths in Australia in 1997, accounting for about 4 per cent of all male deaths and 2 per cent of all female deaths. The short-term and long-term effects of excessive drinking make roughly equal contributions to these deaths. As a minister of religion I have conducted the funerals of nearly a thousand people. Far too many of them contributed their own deaths, depriving the country of what might have been, and bringing upon their family unnecessary hardships.
Many other funerals have been of victims of someone else’s irresponsible alcohol consumption through road accidents (many innocent victims) and violence by partners that lead to deaths.

In Australia, past studies have found that alcohol abuse plays a significant role in violent crime. It is estimated that about 13% of Australians aged 14 years and over (well over one million people) have been physically abused at least once by someone affected by alcohol, while 16% have had their property damaged at least once. Alcohol has also been implicated in about one-third of sexual assault cases. In 1992, 294 people died from alcohol-related assaults in Australia. Many other innocent people bear the scars of glassings, assault and injury in road accidents.

In Australia thirty-seven per cent of road injuries in males and 18% in females are attributed to alcohol, as are 12% of male and 8% of female suicides. Alcohol is also implicated in 47% of assaults, 44% of fire injuries, 34% of fall injuries and drowning and 16% of child abuse incidents. At least 1% of our population (about 180,000 people) has a close family member with a serious alcohol problem. Isolation, neglect, aggression and disruption within the family, particularly spouse abuse, are frequent. Sexual and financial problems, stress, verbal and physical abuse, separations and divorce are also common between couples where at least one partner abuses alcohol.

A Victorian report in 1988 found that alcohol was definitely or possibly involved in 53% of several thousand reported incidents of family violence. Children are particularly affected by having an alcoholic parent and they are more likely to become depressed, have lower IQ, and be alcohol dependent themselves in the future. In 1992, there were 226 hospital episodes resulting from alcohol-related child abuse in Australia. However, the extent of family problems is probably underestimated because there is underreporting of alcohol-related domestic violence.

Alcohol and drug abuse have reached epidemic proportions: crime, violence, divorce, cancers, cardiovascular diseases, organic brain syndrome, school problems, job problems, mental health problems, family problems, financial problems, etc., are all consequences of alcohol and drug abuse as it ripples throughout society and all of these have financial costs. Police and paramedics and others involved in public security are often assaulted. We need a return of the Summary Offences Act so that violent drunks are locked up for the sake of public safety.

I can never laugh at the antics of a drunk nor can I accept his fellow drinkers praise of how well he holds his drink or what he achieves in spite of it. The rest of society pays the price of his drinking. I have spent fifty years of my life helping people who have willingly drunk alcohol only the find the cost was extremely high. I have worked every week for fifty years with those who were homeless, who lost their mental capacity, whose marriage and professions were in tatters, whose children were on their own, and whose actions in the end added nothing to our nation.

I am sick of caring for unpleasant drunks with watery eyes appealing for compassion, and crying in their drinks to a bar attendant, excusing their violent actions and promising never to do it again. It doesn’t matter what office they hold nor what achievements they have accomplished, if they have the intelligence to know the consequences of their actions and still continue to drink, they are a disgrace to society which has a right to be protected from them.

When I was 8 years of age, I found my father dead in the gutter near our home. He was 38 years of age but suffered from cirrhosis of the liver, hardening of the arteries and brain damage due to drunkenness. That was trauma enough, but over the next 25 years I watched my mother struggle to bring up four children, the youngest only two months old, run a family business was that left without the breadwinner and children who had lost a father. We all paid a price for his drinking. Of course he achieved something, but his failure to discipline himself had consequences far greater than any achievement.

I realise that many people lack the confidence to live without mind changing stimulants. I know that many depend upon alcohol to lower their inhibitions so that they feel better. But their need is no excuse to so behave, as others always bear the cost. May I ask you to examine your own practise and do something positive about it now?
Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

Parliamentary Leader of Family First NSW, Dr Gordon Moyes has pointed to the severe social, economic, and health costs to society and family life incurred by the widespread misuse of alcohol. As he explained, “Alcohol and substance abuse are related to poverty, violent crime, academic under-achievement, high health care costs, family breakdown, child abuse, homelessness, teen pregnancy, and work problems.”
He continued, “The cost begins early in life, with maternal alcohol abuse associated with adverse perinatal outcomes such as foetal alcohol syndrome, pseudo-Cushing’s syndrome, alcohol withdrawal in the newborn, and increased risk of perinatal mortality. The incidence of foetal alcohol syndrome has been estimated to be 250 to 500 new cases per year in Australia, which is heart-breaking and preventable.”

“During childhood we also have problems with underage drinking,” Dr Moyes explained. “Australian research shows that more young people are drinking alcohol, drinking at an earlier age and increasingly adopting harmful drinking patterns. It is estimated that at least two thirds of the alcohol consumed by young people under 25 years of age poses a risk of short-term or acute health consequences.”

“This heavy use leads to many hospitalisations. In Australia the Alcohol Education and Rehabilitation Foundation (AER) estimated that approximately 72,302 hospitalisations were attributable to the misuse of alcohol and the financial burden of alcohol misuse to the community has been estimated to be $4.5 billion per year, including lower productivity due to lost work days, road accident costs and legal and court costs, as well as health costs.”

“In Australia, past studies have found that alcohol abuse plays a significant role in violent crime. It is estimated that about 13% of Australians aged 14 years and over (well over one million people) have been physically abused at least once by someone affected by alcohol, while 16% have had their property damaged at least once. Alcohol has also been implicated in about one-third of sexual assault cases, and many other innocent people bear lifelong scars of glassings, assault and injury in road accidents.”

“In Australia thirty-seven per cent of road injuries in males and 18% in females are attributed to alcohol, as are 12% of male and 8% of female suicides. Alcohol is also implicated in 47% of assaults, 44% of fire injuries, 34% of fall injuries and drowning and 16% of child abuse incidents. At least 1% of our population (about 180,000 people) has a close family member with a serious alcohol problem. Isolation, neglect, aggression and disruption within the family, particularly spouse abuse, are frequent. Sexual and financial problems, stress, verbal and physical abuse, separations and divorce are also common between couples where at least one partner abuses alcohol.”

A Victorian report in 1988 found that alcohol was definitely or possibly involved in 53% of several thousand reported incidents of family violence. Children are particularly affected by having an alcoholic parent and they are more likely to become depressed, have lower IQ, and be alcohol dependent themselves in the future. In 1992, there were 226 hospital episodes resulting from alcohol-related child abuse in Australia. However, the extent of family problems is probably underestimated because there is underreporting of alcohol-related domestic violence.

“Alcohol and drug abuse have reached epidemic proportions: crime, violence, divorce, cancers, cardiovascular diseases, organic brain syndrome, school problems, job problems, mental health problems, family problems, financial problems, etc., are all consequences of alcohol and drug abuse as it ripples throughout society and all of these have financial costs. Police and paramedics and others involved in public security are often assaulted. We need a return of the Summary Offences Act so that violent drunks are locked up for the sake of public safety.”

“I never laugh at the antics of a drunk nor can I accept his fellow drinkers’ praise of how well he holds his drink or what he achieves in spite of it. The rest of society pays the price of his drinking. I have spent fifty years of my life helping people who have willingly drunk alcohol only to find the cost was extremely high.”

“I have worked every week for fifty years with those who were homeless, who lost their mental capacity, whose marriages and professions were in tatters, whose children were on their own, and whose actions in the end added nothing to their credit or to our society. It doesn’t matter what offices they have held nor what achievements they have accomplished, if they have the intelligence to know the consequences of their actions and still continue to drink, they are a disgrace to society which has a right to be protected from them,” he said.

REV THE HON. DR GORDON MOYES, A.C., M.L.C.
Contact: Rev Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC – 0407 433 499 or 4389 1860

Parliamentary Leader of Family First NSW, Dr Gordon Moyes believes that if politicians deliberately lie, and it is proved, they should be jailed. He explained, “Few professions have fallen as low in public perception as politics. Politicians are suspected of lying, immorality and hypocrisy. A Morgan Gallop Poll revealed only 14% of people trust a politician’s word. Rorts in parliamentarians’ travel and living away from home allowances reveal the lack of integrity in the lives of those who offer to lead this nation, and who say to electors, “Trust me.” In speeches in Parliament, on my radio and television programs and website, I have advanced these ideas previously and advocated positive measures to improve political integrity.

The opening of State Parliament following an election always brings a flurry of claims of “cover-up”, fraud, lying, and deception – all signs of a lack of integrity. But integrity is the bedrock of social relationships. When we can no longer depend on one another the future becomes bleak. We need to be able to say “When the time comes, you can count on me.” But we are discovering we cannot trust governments, corrupt police, many friends, and sometimes our church. There is a dearth of integrity. We despise the person whose private life does not reflect his public image. We despise the politician who misappropriates public money or abuses women or children. We despise the police officer who takes bribes. We despise the schoolteacher who is a paedophile. We despise the educated businesswoman who makes racist quips. We despise the family man who abuses his wife and rages at his children.

We do not accept hypocrisy between public talk and private action, between moral claims and immoral acts, between open demands and closed deeds, between inclusive statements and exclusive works. What you are is not what you say you are, but what your deeds show you are. Your word must be your bond. That is integrity. With God, integrity counts! But personal integrity is a rare commodity.

The key is the practice of intentional integrity. You can have a better family life and career success by being a person of intentional integrity who consistently applies ethical standards to conduct. You need to avoid the pitfalls of conditional integrity. You must not compromise personal character, competence, or commitment. Do not capitulate to conditional integrity when under fire, being honest only when it’s convenient. This is promoted as the way to get on in life, marriage, and business; yet we see all around us the tragic results of selective dishonesty. Small lies, deceptions, and improprieties lead to fraud, theft and serious social problems. Overlooking lying as just a normal part of politics corrupts the integrity of the political process”, Dr Moyes said.

END

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [5.17 p.m.]: After we celebrate Christmas Day we have a recovery day on Boxing Day, which was called originally the Feast of St Stephen. Stephen was the first Christian deacon and martyr. You can read about him and his death in Acts 6 and 7 of the Bible. Stephen was honoured wherever Christians served the poor, the widows and the orphaned, and where Christians died for their faith. The lovely old church across the road from Parliament House is also called St Stephens and has a fascinating history. It was founded in the middle of the nineteenth century by a group of dissenters from the Scots Presbyterian Church, which had been founded in 1823 by the brilliant Reverend John Dunmore Lang, who later became an outstanding parliamentarian in this very Legislative Council. In fact, it is said that Reverend John Dunmore Lang while in this Chamber is owed much of the credit for the development of New South Wales as a free country, rather than as a convict settlement, due to his foresight and vision.

But his approach to ministry apparently did not please everyone and the resulting dissenters first met in a small hall in Macquarie Place, later ending up in a building across from the Mint in the Wesleyan Chapel and then relocated to Pitt Street, where subsequently I became its minister. In 1848 the Presbyterian Church relocated to the independent chapel in Pitt Street near the School of Arts. Then during the Gold Rush years a prefabricated iron church was imported from Glasgow and erected in 1855 next to Parliament House, between here and the Mitchell Library. Such iron churches were very popular at the time in Britain, and of course we in the Legislative Council are sitting in one such church. The new iron church next door could seat 800 worshippers but, being made of iron, it was exceedingly hot in summertime, and bitterly cold in wintertime. Later it was moved to the Lidcombe hospital, where it became the chapel. In front of the new section of the Mitchell Library on the footpath there is a bronze picture-plaque of that church.

It was around this time that the traditional name of St Stephen’s was chosen for this church opposite Parliament House. It was considered to be traditional because Westminster Parliament in England had met in its St Stephen’s Chapel at Westminster for many hundreds of years. The very fact that members of Parliament sit opposite each other on benches is because the first Parliament in Britain sat in the choir chapel of St Stephen’s. By 1875 the Presbyterian congregation of St Stephen’s combined with another meeting in Phillip Street and became the leading centre of Presbyterianism. It was not until 1935 that St Stephen’s opposite Parliament House became a handsome, newly built church building, which stands on its present position. As members can easily see, the church is currently having a sandstone facelift.

The church has seen some outstanding churchmen in its history, one of whom was John Ferguson. In August 1894 Ferguson was inducted into St Stephen’s, which was by then the largest Presbyterian congregation in Sydney. Ferguson’s first address, which was later published as The Economic Value of the Gospel, caused enormous controversy and was highly praised and distributed by Labor Party and trade union leaders. The Labor politician Billy Hughes, who later became the Prime Minister of Australia, said at the time that Reverend Ferguson “grapples with the problems of poverty, he insists on justice being done, though the heavens fall. I advise every citizen to read every word of it!”

St Stephen’s most famous minister was Reverend Gordon Powell, the extremely popular Australian preacher. More than 1,000 people would attend his Wednesday lunchtime services and Sunday mornings were always packed. Another contribution worth mentioning is that for many years St Stephen’s in Macquarie Street, Sydney, had a brilliant choir led by Peter Dodds McCormick, who was the author of the anthem Advance Australia Fair, which was first sung in St Stephen’s on St Andrew’s Day in 1878. St Stephen’s in Macquarie Street later became a part of the Uniting Church in Australia upon the union of the Congregational, Methodist and Presbyterian Churches in 1977. Since its beginnings it has played a significant part in the heart of Sydney’s business and political districts. With God’s blessing, it will continue its ministry for years to come.

I ask the Hon John Robertson on behalf of Hon Frank Sartor, Minister assisting the Minister for Health (Cancer) the following question without notice: Is the Minister aware that the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare has just released their projections of the number of gynaecological cancers that are likely to occur in New South Wales by the year 2015? Is the Minister aware that the specialist staff to diagnose, treat and provide ongoing care for women with these cancers, including ovarian, uterine, and cervical, is already less than optimal? Can the Minister please indicate what steps will be taken to provide specialist medical personnel to cope adequately for the future needs of the women of NSW who will be diagnosed with a gynaecological cancer?

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [5.17 p.m.]: There was a great deal of media attention on solaria in the past year or two due to the death of some high profile young people from melanoma triggered by the cosmetic use of sun beds. Therefore, I was surprised when the Radiation Control Amendment (Sun-tanning Units) Regulation 2009 was drafted without what I considered to be sufficient safeguards in place. It was obvious to me that the health promotion campaigns highlighting the dangers of solaria were clearly not reaching those who needed to hear the message: That is, the young users who want to be more attractive and politicians who may be well past all that but who draft the legislation that should be designed to protect the public.

It has already been thoroughly proven that the use of sun-tanning units increases the risk of skin cancer. Therefore, I do not understand why they have been allowed to even continue to operate. The Cancer Council of Australia in its book Dangers of Solariums—a major report in August 2008—outlines the risk of skin cancer. Solaria emit high levels of UVA in UVB radiation, which dramatically increases an individual’s risk of developing melanoma, and Australia already has the highest melanoma rates in the world because of our fierce sunlight. Without any exposure to solaria, two out of every three Australians will develop some sort of skin cancer before the age of 70. There are over 1,600 deaths from skin cancer every year—that is, 30 people dying from skin cancer every week—40 per annum attributable directly to sun beds.

If you are under the age of 35, the exposure to radiation in solaria is even more harmful, as the young person’s skin is more vulnerable. The Cancer Council has long defined its stand as being against cosmetic tanning with radiation emitting solaria under any circumstances, for any person. These are legal killing machines, in the words of some who seem to know.

Since they are allowed, it is surely incumbent upon the Government to protect the public by having clear safety standards; competency training and certification requirements for all operators; mechanisms in place for monitoring, with enforcement and penalties for those found in breach, including fines and revocation of licences; and the licensing of premises that have radiation equipment. In short, I believe that the radiation tanning industry needs to come under the control of a regulatory authority. I no longer believe that is the best option, because every industry that has been allowed to self-regulate over the past decade or so has failed to do so. That experiment reminds us again of human folly and greed, and why human beings needed laws in the first place.

We cannot allow a cancer-causing industry to self-regulate because it will not. Would we have considered giving James Hardie the right to self-regulate the issues of asbestos? We cannot sit by and talk about choice when young people are fooled into thinking that solaria must be safe if the Government allows them. They are not safe. A large study in 2003 undertaken by the Centre for Health Research and Psycho-oncology showed there was a low level of compliance with the national standard across the tanning industry. Seven years later nothing has improved in that complacent, unregulated industry, which reports to no-one. Any spa, salon, beautician or any person wanting to rent a shop can have tanning beds and operate them on an unsuspecting public.

I congratulate Lee Rhiannon on moving the motion, which Family First fully supports, to ban solaria outright. Radiation energy is not something that should be left in the hands of amateurs to inflict upon an unwary public for profit. If Mr Frank Sartor, who does such a good job as Minister Assisting the Minister for Health (Cancer) would only believe what the New South Wales Government advises on television, “There is nothing healthy about a tan”.

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Small Business, representing the Minister for Juvenile Justice. Is the Minister aware that an alarming number of children, approximately 5,000, in New South Wales are being held on remand in the State’s juvenile justice centres? Is the Minister aware that the consequences of a high remand rate include unnecessary detention, and increases the challenges that children and young people face, which can potentially create further social problems, and that the high incarceration rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders is damaging indigenous communities? In particular, is the Minister aware that many young people remanded into custody are either homeless or in need of care when charged with a criminal offence? Will the New South Wales Government fund a comprehensive program of residential bail support services across the State to prevent children and young people who are granted bail from being remanded into custody?

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [8.59 p.m.]: On behalf of Family First I speak briefly to the Casino Control Amendment Bill; most of what I had wanted to say has been said by previous speakers. My concern about these issues goes back a long time—not just with regard to a prohibition on gambling but also with regard to setting up Gamblers Anonymous groups, working through Lifeline with gambling counselling services, and the establishment of gambling counsellors who later went on to serve literally throughout Australia.

Members may recall that in the early 1980s Mr Justice Street headed an important commission of inquiry. I presented a major paper at that inquiry. Among the measures put forward to Mr Justice Street were a number of measures to reduce the possibility of criminal control over the new casino, to reduce compulsive gambling, and to set up rehabilitation programs for gamblers, for exclusion benefits which would be overseen by the police commissioner. One of the measures we put forward to Mr Justice Street was the setting up of the Casino Community Benefit Trust, whereby a portion of the casino profits would be ploughed back into the community. For many years—probably 15 years—I served as a government appointee on the Casino Community Benefit Trust and as a result was part of a group of people responsible for deploying many tens of millions of dollars back into the community.

We always recognised that this was only really a token effort in terms of what a casino costs the community, particularly the impact on personal lives and disappointments experienced by so many families. I understand the overview of the bill and its objects, and I will support it. However, in the back of my mind I have grave reservations about it. It is a matter of agreeing to it with one’s fingers crossed, hoping that the best will come out. I place on record that Family First is opposed to all major extensions of gambling in the community as being unhelpful to families in general; we believe too much family money is spent by unwise gamblers. Nevertheless, I recognise that this is a legitimate and legal activity and we must continue to improve the controls. So, with my fingers crossed, I will vote in support of the bill.

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [1.20 a.m.]: Conscious of the fact that it is now 1.20 a.m. I want to make some comments about this very significant issue. Because of the difficulties in this new bill I anticipated that tonight the debate would be of the same proportion as the earlier debate of the Mining and Petroleum Legislation Amendment (Land Access) Bill. I felt there were entrenched differing viewpoints and that I had met those entrenched views. I held discussions with people from the National Parks Association, the forestry workers of the area and some of the mill owners. I spoke with clergy and people concerned with unemployment issues.
<60>
I spoke to some members of local councils from the Riverina and to people such as Mr and Mrs Chris Crump, the timber workers to whom a previous speaker referred. I spoke with assistants who work for the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Health (Cancer), Frank Sartor, and the Premier. I also spoke to Neville Atkinson, who is the chairperson of the Yorta Yorta nation.

In one of those real quirks of fate, my parents owned property on the south side of the same area of the Murray River. I frequently spent many delightful occasions, such as weekends, holidays and so on, in an area that was just outside Echuca along the Murray River and in the red gum forest area. As certain members know well, I was interested in taking rootstock and seeds of river gums. I planted them all round the dam on my property because of my love for that type of timber. Red gum timber is beautiful to work with. I was very interested to see what was going to happen. I discovered in Neville Atkinson a direct descendant of one of my closest friends from Cummeragunja, where as a young person I spent many happy times and where people from the Yorta Yorta nation had a close affinity with birds, animals and the red gum forest.

Unfortunately, this bill literally came into the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council at the last moment. I expected that a very long debate would ensue. However, at this point I do not think a long debate will be necessary. I congratulate a number of organisations and people, including some of those I have mentioned by name, together with staff in political departments who have been working towards consensus on this issue. Although not everybody will be happy with the outcome, some real progress has been made.

Probably there has never been a more compelling case for conservation of a forest area than that for the river red gum forests of south-western New South Wales. Over the years they have been extremely heavily cleared, intensively cultivated and greatly despoiled, not only because of the actions of those who cut timber but also because of the devastating drought. The landscape along our iconic Murray River has been more than 80 per cent cleared of native vegetation. There never has been a more compelling case for forest conservation than in the river red gum forests of south-western New South Wales. They are the last remaining refuges in one of the most heavily cleared and intensively cultivated landscapes in Australia. The landscape along the Murray River has been more than 80 per cent cleared of native vegetation. The Riverina bioregion in New South Wales has less than 2 per cent of its land area in reserves.

As I mentioned, the river red gum trees are severely threatened by water stress that is mostly due to the over-allocation of irrigation water and the interruption of natural flooding regimes. River red gums need floods to propagate, to grow strong and to remain capable of overcoming drought stress. With so many of them showing stress by dropping timber and so many of them dying, the species has reached a very important stage in its future. Many river red gum forests are recognised as internationally significant wetlands. They provide habitat for approximately 69 threatened species. They include the New South Wales portion of the two largest red gum forests that remain in the world—the Millewa, which adjoins Barmah in Victoria, and the Koondrook-Perricoota, which adjoins Gunbower in Victoria.

However, these iconic wetlands currently are being logged and patch clear-felled at a dramatically unsustainable rate. For the information of members who do not understand the difference between logged and patch clear-felled, which is an important difference, I asked the timber cutters to explain their procedures to me. Naturally, they indicated their concerns with over-felling of the area, with its enormous environmental impacts on other parts of the community. The New South Wales Government admits that the forests have been cut at least twice as fast as they can regrow. The logging that is occurring does not have valid legal approval under Federal environmental laws.

The logging produces mostly firewood and railway sleepers. I am desperately saddened that such beautiful fine timber, which can be made into lovely furniture, is burnt or stuck under rail lines. We should have only concrete railway sleepers. Victorian timber cutters basically have decimated the entire area south of the Murray River because they are have cut timber for railway sleepers—and are still doing so—that eventually are destroyed by termites. The timber is so tough that it blunts the termites attack. The timber is very resistant, which is why timber is sourced from river red gum forests. In my younger days when I lived in rural Victoria I would take a trailer and load it with old red gum railway sleepers that the Victorian Railways in those days just did not want and left lying along the banks of railway culverts, et cetera. I would use a Canadian wood splitter to make woodchips. In the area in which I lived the only form of heating for our hot water, the house and the laundry was from a wood-fire stove. The large red gum chips would provide us with brilliant heat.

In latter years I have wondered why on earth we put fine timber under rail lines and burnt it for charcoal, among other wasteful practices. Logging has produced firewood and railway sleepers, which I must admit are sold in Victoria. More than 85 per cent of river red gum ends up in what might be described as bottom-of-the-barrel low-value products. The logging does not even pay its own way. I was surprised to learn during discussions with mill owners that the logging of native forests in New South Wales runs at a loss and must be subsidised by revenue from other areas. River red gum wetlands are the traditional country of a number of indigenous nations. I had the good fortune to speak with some representatives of those nations, particularly the Yorta Yorta people, the Wamba Wamba people, the Mutti Mutti people, the Wadi Wadi people, the Barapa Barapa people and the Wiradjuri people. The traditional owners have never ceded the rights to their land or country to those who clear their forests.

We all remember that in November 2009 the then Premier, Nathan Rees, committed in Parliament to the full and immediate protection of the Millewa forest as a national park, along with protection of other small areas along the upper Murray, Murrumbidgee and Lachlan rivers. I remember that he said it was one of his proudest achievements. In December 2009 the final report of the Natural Resources Commission fully vindicated his decision by recommending the immediate protection of Millewa as part of a world class, cross-border Barmah-Millewa national park. I understand that the national parks decision announced by the Government—I received a copy of the Government’s press release in just the last few minutes—indicates that the decision fully implements the findings of the Natural Resources Commission, which comprises very distinguished people from the environmental, forestry and scientific communities.

That decision protects approximately 107,000 hectares in new reserves immediately, with almost 20,000 hectares earmarked for later transfer to traditional owners in protected indigenous areas. It fully protects the Millewa forest immediately. The Millewa forest and the Barmah National Park in Victoria form the largest red gum forest that remains in the world. It is a living Murray icon—an internationally significant wetland and the heart of the whole Murray floodplain. Millewa contains known habitat for 13 threatened species and three endangered ecological communities. This area has been recognised as the most drought resistant and important environmental refuge in the region. The Natural Resources Commission’s modelling shows that this area most readily can have environmental water delivered and has the best chance of surviving in a water-scarce future.

Millewa forest is in better ecological condition than are many other red gum forests growing in the Riverina and along the Murrumbidgee and Murray rivers because the forests have been saved from destructive patch clear-felling. Tree fellers told me that, out of their concern for the long-term future of the area, they did not clear-fell all the areas they could have.

<61>
I learnt later that much of this was prevented from happening by the National Parks Association, which kept up a running legal battle with mill owners and tree fellers. The decision also protects vital areas along the Murray and Murrumbidgee rivers, building a corridor that runs from Kosciuszko to the Coorong. When I chaired a parliamentary select committee inquiry into the Snowy Hydro we heard evidence about the river flows of the Murrumbidgee and the Murray. I listened carefully as the scientists explained the importance of water released from the upper reaches down the Murrumbidgee and Murray rivers in order to sustain the ecological forests in the south-west of the State.

I commend the Government for the important social outcomes arising from this bill. I met with various individuals and representative groups, including concerned citizens, staff working in the employment industry, clergy concerned about the future of members of their congregation, and those concerned with land rights, reconciliation and self-determination for indigenous people. The previous speaker spoke about the sadness that will be felt by people in the area who do not agree with this decision. I believe there are some good outcomes from this bill. The Government’s announcement that it would develop a joint management agreement with the Yorta Yorta traditional owners over the Millewa forest gave the indigenous people a tremendous boost.

Their people will have operative care, control and management of their own country. It will give them opportunities, which they have dreamed about, to share their culture and provide rewarding jobs for young indigenous people. It is an important step forward to bring the Yorta Yorta into management control of the full 70,000 hectares of the cross-border Barmah-Millewa forests. For the first time in the history of New South Wales the State Government will commit a transfer of a State forest directly to indigenous freehold for management as indigenous protected areas. More than 20,000 hectares, from Werai and Taroo, will be handed back to the traditional owners. It is a dramatic step in social justice for indigenous people in the Riverina area.

The Parliamentary Secretary said in her speech that the Government will invest in the Riverina region a total of $97 million, which includes an increase of $17 million for timber industry restructuring and community development. I congratulate the Government on that investment. Some of the people I spoke with, including the mill owners and the tree fellers, were adamant that they had no future. The businesses they were running were not profitable and they depended upon subsidised services to keep operating. This restructure package of $17 million to the timber industry will help them survive a difficult future, a future that would have been much more difficult if nothing had happened. The timber industry, as explained to me by the mill owners and the timber cutters, had been in decline for a long time. Some mills closed in recent years and at least half the mills would have closed in the near future because they were not sustainable. This package will assist the industry in the future. Without it, there would be no financial support for these changes. This decision turns an economically negative situation into a positive one.

The managers of the tourist industry in the area told me that there was a possibility for alternative enterprises. The diversifying of the regional economy will attract new tourists and more jobs. That information came from the people who are running the local tourist industry, not from the Government. When Victoria announced the River Red Gum National Park last year 55 jobs were lost. I am happy to say that since that time 66 full-time jobs have been created. I hope that also occurs on our side of the river. It is an acceptable result from an extremely complex and difficult situation. As late as a week ago, it seemed there would be no harmonious consensus on this issue, no win-win situation. This bill is the best possible outcome.

END

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: On this day when former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam entered a nursing home, I ask the Hon. Eric Roozendaal, on behalf of the Hon. Linda Burney, Minister for the State Plan, and Minister for Community Services, the following question without notice. Is the Minister aware that the number of people over the age of 65 will double in the next 40 years and that there are twice as many women as men in the over 85-year-old population, meaning that public environments need to be planned ahead of time for the known needs of elderly women? Is the Minister aware of the aspects of planning that can make an environment age friendly, including appropriate infrastructure to support mobility, enough seats in public places to offer rest, enough public restrooms, sufficient transport, and being encouraged to age at home near established friends, doctors and shops— [Time expired.]

The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: I have always been a firm admirer of Gough Whitlam. I have met with him on many occasions and we have had a number of discussions over the years. I am always pleased to see he is still around, contributing to society and he remains forthright in expressing his views to the world. He is one of the great political icons of Australia and, of course, one of the great political heroes of the Australian Labor Party. It should be acknowledged that his contribution to the Australian community has been important and valuable. In relation to the rest of the member’s question, which was long and detailed, I will take that on notice and get a response from the Minister.

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: I ask a supplementary question. What action is the Government taking to plan for the provision of all aspects of age friendly environments in this State?

The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: I will take that question on notice also.

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [3.37 p.m.]: I thank previous speakers for their lucid presentation of this case. On behalf of Family First I speak on the Mining and Petroleum Legislation Amendment (Land Access) Bill, the object of which is to amend the Mining Act 1992 and the Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991. In particular, this bill amends the definition of “landholder” so that an exploration company only needs to make an access arrangement with a person who has exclusive possession of a property or a right to exclusive possession. It removes the requirement for exploration companies to negotiate access arrangements with secondary landholders such as easement holders or mortgagees. It retains the right for secondary landholders to claim compensation if their interests are adversely affected during exploration, and it provides an exploration company with the flexibility to make more than one access arrangement when there is more than one landholder for a property.

I want to discuss two issues about the bill at this stage. The first issue is the introduction of this bill, which shows the New South Wales Government’s complete disregard for a decision of the New South Wales Supreme Court. The amendments to the mining and petroleum Acts will validate all existing property access agreements and force into the Land and Environment Court the Caroona agreement set aside by the Supreme Court. Finally, I will discuss the consequences of the legislation in securing Australia’s food supply. The legislation before the House today shows that the New South Wales Government has no regard for the law or the New South Wales Supreme Court.
<11>
Justice Schmidt ruled that BHP had breached the Mining Act 1992 by failing to notify all interested landholders, including mortgagees, and that the New South Wales Wardens Court, since abolished, had made serious legal errors in finding in BHP’s favour. In addition and importantly, Justice Schmidt found that BHP had not adequately detailed how it intended to protect the environment during its exploration operations, validating a key community concern. The Hon. Robert Brown spoke about the significance of that community concern and I do not need to repeat it.

This bill is an attempt by the Government to overcome a recent decision of the New South Wales Supreme Court. In common law countries such as Australia, the doctrine of the separation of powers is an indication of a working government and democracy. Evidently it is non-existent in this State. In the current case before the House, the Government perceives the Supreme Court decision as an encroachment and erosion of its power. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition outlined the concerns of the Law Review Committee and the New South Wales Bar Association about this very matter. In a High Court comment a former Chief Justice of the High Court said:
It is self-evident that the exercise of judicial review will, from time to time, frustrate ambition, curtail power, invalidate legislation, and fetter administrative action The High Court from time to time disappoints the ambitions of legislators and Governments. This is part of our system of checks and balances. People who exercise political power, and claim to represent the will of the people, do not like being checked or balanced.

How true that is in this case. The Supreme Court decision highlights that judicial decisions can hamper the execution of important government policies. Their effect can be to work against ” administrative efficiency”, Justice Schmidt said. For the public service in particular, decisions made by the judiciary can mean that plans are thwarted, policy is impossible to implement, and there is an increased expense in carrying out administrative procedures. Private property rights, although subject to compulsory acquisition by statute, have long been hedged about by the common law with protections. These protections are not absolute but take the form of interpretative approaches where statutes are said to affect such rights. The common law caution to the Legislature in exercising its power over private property is reflected in what has been called a presumption, in the interpretation of statutes, against an intention to interfere with vested property rights. In Clissold v Perry, a land resumption case, Chief Justice Griffith said:
In considering this matter, it is necessary to bear in mind that it is a general rule to be followed in the construction of statutes such as that with which we are now dealing, that they are not to be construed as interfering with vested interests unless that intention is manifest.

The High Court decision considered the infringement on individual property rights. The High Court judgment considered the following approach:
In its application to property rights, this long-standing interpretive principle is consistent with international developments in the recognition of human rights since World War II. Although not specifically protected by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the right to property was recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in various other international instruments.

Australia is a signatory to that Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Let me consider for a moment the issue of property rights. Firstly, limiting the definition of “landholder” to a person who has exclusive possession or a right to exclusive possession of a property, and removing the requirement for exploration companies to negotiate access arrangements with easement holders or mortgagees, seeks to completely reverse the recent New South Wales Supreme Court decision in Brown & Anor v Coal Mines Australia Pty Ltd, in which the landholder’s rights were upheld by Justice Schmidt and BHP Billiton’s license to explore for coal on the landholder’s property were deemed invalid due to a lack of consultation with all landholders.

The Supreme Court decision provides greater certainty of rights of farmers whose land is covered by an exploration agreement. The Supreme Court judgment was concluded after careful consideration of the facts and evidence presented to the court. This bill raises question as to whether leaseholders or even squatters may be deemed to potentially have exclusive possession or a right to exclusive possession over land, so would the proposed amendments to the bill seek to allow those parties to have the right to enter into access agreements with mining companies? Secondly, another interpretation of the bill may be that it nullifies a recent decision by the Land and Environment Court, in Rosane Pty Ltd v T & P Clarke, that exploration licence conditions should and can be attached to access agreements. As a result of those two aforementioned judgments the rights of landholders with regard to mining exploration have significantly improved. So a detailed review of the proposed bill needs to be undertaken with an area of express interest being the proposed amendments to section 141.

Thirdly, proposed amendments to section 158 also pose some concerns. Presently access agreements terminate when a bound landholder either ceases to be a landholder, or dies. Significantly the bill seeks to provide that access agreements with two or more parties do not terminate if one party ceases to be a landholder. Rather, in the circumstance in which the land under an access agreement changes landholders, the agreement will continue to operate until it is replaced by a new agreement, whether by agreement or by the determination of an arbitrator or the Land and Environment Court. This amendment could result in significant impacts to property values should the landholder seek to sell his or her property.

Finally, I want to talk about the significance of the Liverpool Plains area and our national food security. Agriculture is a vital contributor to the New South Wales economy with New South Wales being Australia’s most productive agricultural State. Agriculture contributes $10.2 billion to the New South Wales economy and employs more than 122,000 people. This represents 26 per cent of the total value of Australian agricultural production. As well, agriculture is the biggest land user in New South Wales with an estimated 63.6 million hectares or 79 per cent of the landmass of New South Wales being used for agricultural activity.

The Liverpool Plains is critical for the nation’s food security and contributes $332 million to the gross domestic product annually. The Liverpool Plains is part of the Namoi catchment that feeds into the Murray Darling Basin. According to National Dryland Salinity Program, it is the only catchment where cropping is the major land use, and is by far the most fertile and productive. I have spoken about the Liverpool Plains in a previous speech and on that occasion went into some detail about the significance of what is regarded as the most productive form of agricultural land in Australia. The Liverpool Plains is well managed with high-output aquifers, it has reliable summer and winter rainfall, and has high water holding capacity with exceptionally fertile volcanic soils. I will not repeat what I have said in other speeches, but let it be said that the Liverpool Plains is outstanding agricultural country.

The National Pollutant Inventory confirms that the Liverpool Plains does not produce food in an environment contaminated by any industry waste. The mining industry liberates tonnes of toxic metals, fine silica dusts or carcinogenic petroleum hydrocarbons. It also leaves a legacy of acid mine drainage, poisoned rivers and creeks, highly saline evaporation ponds, and unpredictable methane scalds. The ability to produce quality food is directly related to the environment in which that food grows. On the Liverpool Plains, local farmers produce food from clean air, clean water and nutrient-dense soil.
<12>
The future of every organic farmer in this part of Australia, which brings added value to their crops and assures overseas sales for the benefit of Australia, is placed in total jeopardy if mining access continues. As discussed before, the Liverpool Plains yield 40 per cent of the national average. The 16-year average produced by the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries shows consistent, drought-proof winter and summer annual crop production to be over 180,000 tonnes of wheat, over 200,000 tonnes of sorghum, over 5,000 tonnes of oats, over 2,000 tonnes of soybeans, over 60,000 tonnes of barley, over 29,000 tonnes of corn, over 19,000 tonnes of sunflowers, and over 1.2 million tonnes of cotton.

According to the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, the food bowl of Liverpool Plains brings to our table each year the following items: 365 million loaves of bread, 62.5 million packets of pasta, 144 million bottles of beer, 5.4 million packs of muesli, 8 million litres of sunflower oil, 58 million boxes of cornflakes, 276 million pairs of jeans, over 200 tonnes of sorghum for cattle and chickens, $110 million worth of beef production and massive production of chickpeas, soybeans, mung beans, canola, olives, turkeys, pigs, lamb and wool.

And lentils and pulses, if you like. Lest people think that mining exploration does not interfere with this production, I will an email sent to all members of Parliament by Mark Stewart. He writes:
Dear Members,

I believe that this bill is before you this week, I write to you so that you may be aware of the disruption to landholders caused by miners and the environmental damage miners have caused in this area. I am sure that other areas have suffered even more.

Basically I think that entry for exploration should be a matter between the landholder and the explorer. Our experience with our local miner, Hillgrove mine (Straits) has been dismal.

Their first contact with us was by letter which had a return address upon it. When we replied to them the letter was returned ‘not known at this address’. We then wrote to their office in W.A. with what we considered to be our requirements for access – no reply from them. We were then in touch with their local people and virtually denied them access (a moot point, as they have the NSW govt. behind them in this regard).

The exploration of neighbouring properties was quite disruptive to us, drilling rigs about 600m from us for months, very noisy and dusty. My wife was suffering a Menieres attack at this time and on several days we had to vacate our home due to the noise. The plumes of dust were going several hundreds of metres up and depositing all around including on our roof and drinking water catchment. This dust was admitted by Straits to contain heavy metals such as lead, arsenic etc.

During this exploration they cut a neighbour’s fence for drilling rig access and did not fix it properly, as a result Mr Coventry’s cattle escaped onto the Grafton Rd resulting in the police being called. The explorers also entered crown land, Clark’s Gully travelling stock reserve where they carried out maintenance on their rig with a resulting oil spill. The above were photographed and sent to the relevant dept. (at the time Primary Industries, mining division). To the best of my knowledge there was not any follow up by the Dept.

Hillgrove village was also subject to visual, aural and smell pollution during their mining operations.

This experience of a so called responsible miner has firmed our opinion.

In closing he writes:
Our experience of the previous operator of Hillgrove mine was similar. An open cut mine approximately 600m from our property was very troublesome, once again noise, dust and explosions which shook our house severely…The site has been left as a hole which is visible on the southern side of the Grafton Rd (Waterfall Way) about 22 kilometres from Armadale, just near the Old Hillgrove Road. The promises made by the miner about mediation etc were not carried out and nobody seems to know what happened to the supposed bond put up by the miner. The conditions of the council approval were also not complied with and the council were not interested in policing them, instead when the mine was for sale they donated some of the ratepayers funds to the seller to help him sell.

Another fault with the exploration and any subsequent mining is that the landholder may be compensated to some extent but the neighbours receive no compensation or consideration under the mining rules.

I feel that some of the above problems could be minimised if the landholder had more say about what happens on his land and more say in the granting of exploration rights and any subsequent mining activity, because I believe that the landholder is the person most interested in his local environment being looked after.

There is no question about the authenticity or the accuracy of that statement and I thank Mr Stewart for it. In conclusion, whatever uncertainties we face with the world economy, protecting prime agricultural land will ensure that Australia will always be able to feed our population with high-quality, safe, nutritious and affordable food. Liverpool Plains must remain a pre-eminent food exporter contributing to Australia’s gross domestic product, export growth and international leverage. Australia now has less than 6 per cent of arable land. We must protect the prime areas, in particular the best of all, the Liverpool Plains. It is Australia’s vital source of food security. According to the Australian Farm Institute, the productive capacity of Australia needs to be sustained if each farmer is to continue to feed 150 Australians and 650 people overseas.

Food security is vital for the future of Australians and farmers’ rights are vital for all Australians. Farmers are sustainable managers of their land and the environment and they play a vital role in driving regional and national economies. If governments take away their fundamental right to manage their land and cultivate a productive sustainable return, then governments should compensate them significantly for that loss. It is fundamentally for this critical reason that I support the farmers of this nation and strongly oppose this legislation.

END

I ask the Hon Tony Kelly on behalf of Hon Steve Wann, Minister for Primary Industries and Minister for Rural Affairs, the following question without notice:

1.Is the Minister aware that the Walgett Country Women’s Association in Far West New South Wales is calling for a review into the power wielded by the officers of the RSPCA?

2.Is the Minister aware that RSPCA officers have been destroying farmers’ drought-affected livestock without any warning or advance notification?

3.Is the Minister aware that many rural NSW farmers feel that allowing RSPCA officers to continue coming onto their land unannounced, and without any consultation with them or the vets who have been caring for the animals, is allowing them a power which they are sometimes misusing?

4.Can the Minister please indicate what action will be taken to look into such claims?

REV HON DR GORDON MOYES AC MLC

The original meaning came from one who bandaged wounds. In the Old Testament there is very little said about the physician, for the priest was also the healer and, with the midwife (Ex. 1:15-16), was responsible for community health. Midwives were competent people who could handle difficult births with skill. Consider the midwife who turned the baby during the breech birth of twins in Gen. 38:27-30. Disease in the Hebrew tradition was not fought by magic abut was regarded as a result of a person’s relationship with God. There were strong laws concerning community health. God was the healer (Ex. 15:26) and the physician was literally the one who sewed together and bandaged. The earliest surgery was circumcision in Abraham’s time. Flints were used as scalpels.

In the Apocrypha there is a great description of a foreign-trained physician at work (Eccles 38:1-15).

In the New Testament Jesus quoted proverbs that complimented the healer’s skill (Matt. 9:12). He was seen as the Great Physician. The word Saviour means both the saviour from sin and the healer of the body. The power of Jesus over sickness was a description of His power over sin. Faith was integral to healing (Luke 7:50; Mark 5:34).

Luke, “The Beloved Physician” (Col. 4:14) showed by his use of medical terms both in the Gospel and in Acts that he was well educated in the Greek medical skills, possibly a Graduate of the famous Medical School of Tarsus, the home of Paul. Some expositors, however, show that Luke’s use of medical terms was not beyond that of a highly educated non-medical Greek of his day.

In the Apostolic church healers were part of the team ministry (1 Cor. 12:28). James (5:13-16) outlines the procedures for anointing the sick.

FOR TODAY
Mark’s sideways comment (not found in Luke or on AMA publications!) that the haemorrhaging woman “had suffered much under many physicians and had spent all she had, and was no better but rather somewhat worse” is a statement of fact, a common depreciation of the fine work done by physicians on people with impossible illnesses. It is also a reminder that in this day, when belief in the magic bullet of a pill equals that of primitive superstition, that the physician is not omnipotent.

Galen, the gifted second century physician to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus, who healed mental illness with the first application of shock therapy, also spoke of the task of all physicians: “I bind his wounds but God heals him.”

Many of the words that people use of illness today e.g. affliction, blow, plague, scourge, show how strong the traditional belief still is that suffering is a divine punishment. Both medicos and ministers have a task to educate people in an understanding of suffering. The magnificent Hippocratic Oath, a basis for medical ethics, should also be taken by pastors as a basis for their pastoral care. Ministers, please note and inwardly digest.

The missionary field is an outstanding illustration of the great work done by the physicians who have gone in the name of the Great Physician. We pay tribute to these doctors and nurses who, on the frontiers of the faith, have brought health and salvation.

There is still an urgent need for the priest-healer. Many illnesses have mental, emotional and spiritual causes that are not eradicated by the scalpel or a prescription. The word “salvation” means healing and it implies a healthy and integrated person, physically, mentally, socially and spiritually. The work of salvation is making men whole.

REV THE HON DR GORDON MOYES AC MLC

In the last couple of weeks, while everybody’s attention has been upon Kevin Rudd’s conflict with the States concerning taking over the GST and the Hospital system, and with his failure with the roof insulation and the Carbon Emission Trading Scheme, there has been a series of meetings between the members of the Labor Party and the Greens Party to form an alliance that will seek to push through Parliament some unacceptable legislation in the next few months before both State and Federal elections. This has not been reported in any newspaper or radio program, but has been secretly proceeding, designed to catch the Opposition and the Crossbench Members off guard.

Their reasons are different. Premier Keneally, a member of the dominant Right faction and her supporters are seeking to wrest control of the NSW Labor Party by attracting to it the support of more radical citizens in its fight against Barry O’Farrell and the Opposition. Meanwhile the Greens’ Lee Rhiannon is standing for election in the Federal election for the Australian Senate and she wants to shore up her numbers from the same group of citizens.

So both have formed an alliance that will win them support at the State and Federal Elections from the Gay and Lesbian Lobby. In this they have the support of lesbian members of the State Labor Party.

The issues are on the table. The Premier’s Department, it is said, has ordered the Department of Community Service Minister Linda Burney, to meet with Greens Lee Rhiannon to get up legislation allowing for same-sex child adoption and same-sex “marriage” registration. The Greens have said they want legislation to abolish prayer in Parliament and are also working on a number of measures to reduce funding for Christian and Private Schools.

Elections make parties aggressive and desperate. The numbers are close. In the Lower House the Labor Party has a clear majority. In the Upper House the numbers are unpredictable. Some in the left wing of the Liberal Party agree with these propositions and Barry O’Farrell may not be able to hold all of his members in line. It does not require someone to “cross the Floor”. It only requires someone to be absent for a short time when the vote is taken.

The Shooters can usually be counted on for a conservative vote, but they will trade votes on some measures for which they want Government support. Rev Fred Nile of the CDP, and I, as leader of Family First, will stand resolute but we may not be able to carry the day. Now is the time for people who value traditional family life as we have always known it to “watch and pray”. Otherwise you will wake up one morning soon to a totally different society to that which you value.

Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

This is an edited version of the Gerald Ward Lecture given by Phil Glendenning at the National Museum of Australia in Canberra on 20 November 2009.

I believe over the course of our history we have discriminated most consistently against two groups of people in Australia – those who were here first, our Indigenous peoples, and those who were here last, especially refugees.

We have had new terms of derogatory language to accompany each new group of arrivals, whether it was with the Irish ‘paddies’ and the ‘coolies’ in the 19th century, through to the ‘wogs’, ‘dagoes’ of the 1950’s and 60’s to the other ugly terms used to describe those who came from south-east Asia in the seventies, those from the Middle East in recent years and from Africa now. Such characterisations were used in order to say to people, “you are less equal than me.”

However, I will make a prediction. In 10 years from now, one of Afghan children who arrived by boat this year will be playing fullback for the Rabbitohs, and his sister will be scoring for the Hockeyroos. They will be embraced by Aussies. Others will be at uni, or working hard in the community. This is what happens in Australia.

Yet whilst attitudes shift towards the last to arrive, Indigenous people continue to find themselves at the bottom of every social indicator in the nation. In NSW, Indigenous people make up 2 per cent of the population but make up 52 per cent of the jail population. Enough. Enough. Enough.

You’d think we could learn from our history rather than continue to repeat it. The apology in Parliament to those taken by the state as children is a reminder of the great unfinished business stemming from the apology in 2008 to the Stolen Generations.

Saying sorry is the very least we should do – sadly, for many, that is the only thing that has been done. It is not enough to say that present generations are not responsible for the actions of previous generations, since present generations benefit from that original dispossession and its ongoing repercussions.

We should also recognise that no compensation could ever be satisfactory because, as Peter Adam said in a powerful speech in Melbourne earlier this year, what was done was so terrible, so immense, so universal and so pervasive, so destructive and so irreparable. But recompense we must. The idea of recompense is not alien to our society. James Hardie had to recompense workers harmed by asbestos. There was widespread support that this should be the case. If this recompense is right, then surely it is also right to offer recompense to the Indigenous peoples of Australia.

The Bringing Them Home report into the removal of Aboriginal children from their families noted that compensation or reparation had to be part of the holistic approach towards delivering justice and facilitating healing. It recognised the enormous barriers that face members of the Stolen Generations in seeking to now make claims of compensation for emotional, sexual and physical abuse. It proposed a national tribunal to facilitate these claims and assist people with a legitimate legal right in accessing compensation. The proposed tribunal would be a partnership between governments, churches, Indigenous organisations and the Stolen Generation’s community, but would also be independent.

As we have seen concerning boat people lately, there is a crisis of moral leadership in the country. Where are our moral leaders with the courage to advocate with passion for necessary changes, rather than continue to start from a fear of offending the powerful, or the static desire to maintain the status quo?

Perhaps a starting point would be to reclaim the language in the national debate. If we were to go back 25 years and listen to the debate in parliament and in the media, it was clear that we lived together in a society. If we unpack the debate today, we seem to live together in an economy. This is significant because the people who live together in a society are citizens; those who live together in an economy are customer or consumers. Thus every human relationship is reduced to an economic relationship.

The dehumanisation of the language is reflected in the treatment given to those who have come to this country most recently – refugees and asylum seekers. There is something about us as Australians and our attitude to people who come by boat. After all, what they are doing is precisely what all non-Indigenous Australians or their ancestors have done – come here from somewhere else. As one Aboriginal leader commented at a function at Government House in Sydney, it was worth noting that we were gathered a few hundred metres from where the first boat load of unauthorised arrivals landed in 1788!

The politics of fear have characterised much of the debate around asylum seekers and refugees. We have locked people away in remote detention centres, and denied them a face. Again the language used points to the ethos at work: “The Pacific Solution”. If ever there was a chilling policy in Australian policy it was this one, reasonating down the years to Europe in the 1940s. Thank God the Pacific Solution is no more.

The way to deal with the politics of fear is to separate the myths from the facts. There have been a number of falsehoods in circulation led by shock jock radio hosts, the press and politicians with a taste of playing the race card. Separate the myths from the facts by clicking here.

In the light of Christian faith lies a fundamental belief that it is possible to live on this planet like a human being: this is sign of the Good News we can never lose sight of. Ultimately, if we remain close to the people we seek to assist we will also hear the truth that liberates us all.

I realised this again recently in Afghanistan in the strength of an elderly woman who had one son killed and had another missing after returning from Australia. I did not know how I could help her so I reached into my wallet and offered her $20 to cover her costs for travel. She lives on $4 a week. Zahra gently refused and said, “No sir. Sometimes when you offer money it makes it worse. Just because one lives in poverty and oppression, doesn’t mean they live without dignity.” I will never forget her courage, wisdom and strength.

We seek a world where those who come first and last in this country might be able to enjoy an equitable place in the life of the nation. We seek a world where the needs of the poor take priority over the wants of the rich; the freedom of the weak takes priority over liberty of the powerful, and the access of marginalised people on society takes priority over the preservation of an order that excludes them.

Phil Glendenning is the Director of the Edmund Rice Centre in Sydney. He is also the National President of Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation.

Commencing last week, the NSW Government is running a Foster Care Recruitment Campaign in partnership with non-government agencies.

There are more than 16,000 children and young people in out-of-home care across the State. Many of these children live with relatives but thousands rely on foster carers to provide them a safe and loving home. While the Government is committed to reducing the numbers of children in care, sadly there will always be children who must be removed from their families for their own safety. There is a need for responsible, caring people to take on the challenges and rewards of fostering with a non-government agency or Community Services.

On 25 April the Government launched an advertising campaign to raise awareness of fostering and refer people to the Fostering NSW website www.fosteringnsw.com.au The website provides a one-stop shop for people wanting to learn more about fostering. The website includes information and contact details about non-government agencies that provide foster care in NSW, including agencies that work specifically with Aboriginal carers. People can also find out about fostering with Community Services.

A call centre is being established and potential carers can ring 1800 2 FOSTER to learn more about fostering and find out about local information sessions. Research carried out for Community Services reveals that 78 per cent of the community has never considered fostering and that it can take someone 12 months to contemplate becoming a foster carer before they make their first enquiry. This is why awareness raising is critical.

Aboriginal children make up a third of children in care. Recruiting Aboriginal carers is crucial to help these children stay connected to their culture and community. The campaign is also seeking to recruit carers from all cultural and language backgrounds. Helping a child in need is rewarding and worthwhile – but it has its challenges. Children in care are overcoming experiences of neglect, trauma and abuse. Carers and their families need to be very well informed before they take the step of bringing a child into their home.

Carers are not superheroes. They are ordinary, good-hearted people from all sorts of different backgrounds who willingly open their homes to children who are not their own. Fostering is not for everyone: carers need patience, a good sense of humour, and compassion to succeed. Carers undergo an assessment and thorough checks including criminal record checks to ensure they are suitable to care for children. Training, support and financial assistance are available to help with the job of fostering.

Family First believe that we all share responsibility for the safety and wellbeing of children. Research shows that a stable and nurturing home environment can provide much better life outcome for kids. For children who cannot live with their parents, this is especially important.

The government has for some time been shifting the problem of children-at-risk to the not-for-profit sector without further funding for those agencies including NSW Family Services Inc. Those agencies were already at breaking point themselves after having received insufficient funding for over 12 years. Their lack of resources was requiring them to turn away children in need as there were already waiting lists of 6 months for the services they offered. They have been lobbying the government tirelessly for increased support, and DoCS supported the recommendations to Treasury for such an increase.

This pressure has finally paid off because it has recently been announced that the NSW State Government is going to invest $36 million in early intervention and prevention programs, and conduct up to 750 home visits by child experts – as part of its Keep Them Safe program. This is excellent news and could not have come at a more crucial time. The funding also includes $10 million to run early intervention programs with specialist psychologists and mental health experts for children from Kindergarten age to Year 2 students showing disruptive behaviours.

Premier Kristina Keneally and Minister for Community Services, Linda Burney, announced on 29 March 2010 $9 million each year for four years from the NSW Government’s Keep Them Safe program which will go to better support families through prevention and early intervention – improving the lives of babies and young children at risk.

As part of the $36 million plan, the NSW Government is planning to provide:

· $18 million for parenting skills, general advice and support programs. This will allow non-Government organisations to help parents to develop the skills to respond to children who are showing signs of difficult behaviours. It will focus on new parents with babies and toddlers, and parents of adolescents.

· $10 million to run a new early intervention program for children from Kindergarten to Year 2 who have disruptive behaviours – Getting on Track in Time or ‘GOT It!’ Children and their parents participate in weekly group sessions with psychologists, mental health experts, and school staff for the duration of a school term.

· $8 million to extend the Sustained Health Home Visiting program, increasing the number of families assisted by the program from 450 to 750. This program will give more parents with children from newborns to 2-year-olds access to home visits by specialist child and family nurses who can identify problems early, and assist in getting the services they need from the start of a child’s life.

Since its introduction in March last year the Keep Them Safe program has produced:

· An online set of ‘Mandatory Reporter’ Guidelines to help people decide when to report suspected cases of abuse and neglect to the Child Protection Helpline;

· Information sessions for 23,000 mandatory reporters on the new system, plus introduction of training package to 200,000 other workers;

· New laws allowing more information sharing between agencies in cases when it will help ensure children’s safety and well being;

· WellNet – a computer system that helps agencies share information about children where there are safety, welfare or well-being issues;

· Four Child Well-being Units established in January 2010 in the departments of Health, Education and Training, Human Services and the Police; and

· An Aboriginal Impact Statement to assess the effects of the reforms on Aboriginal children, young people, families and communities.

For more information visit NSW Family Services at http://www.nswfamilyservices.asn.au/

There are Christian organisations (even one micro political party) which have their future dependent on frightening people in Australia with tales of terrorism and fanatical expansionism of Muslims in Indonesia. They never say anything that presents a balanced picture of Christianity in Indonesia.

Did you know that every Sunday there are more Christians in church in Indonesia than there are people in Australia? That the memberships of the larger churches are double that of the largest churches in Australia? That there are churches that are more opulent and which seat more than any church building in Australia? That Muslim communities are fearful of the rapid growth and conversion rate of Muslims by evangelical churches?

Read TIME’s assessment: http://tinyurl.com/y7jcpvg