Author: gordonmoyes.com

Scripture: 2 TIMOTHY 1:3-7

I was interested in the presentations of the International Psychiatric Conference held in Brisbane during February 2010. I have attended proceedings of such a conference previously in Sydney.

At this most recent conference the University of Ottawa psychology professor Catherine Lee said decades of research had repeatedly shown the benefit of quality time spent with children. This Canadian professor explained how research had shown that simple quality time is the key to a happy family and parents who over-schedule their children’s lives are missing out.

Professor Lee said, “I think we’ve got a bit intimidated so that we think that the expensive lessons, or the expensive activities, or the things that we enrol kids in are somehow more valuable. Sometimes they might just want to play Lego with you, or throw a ball around or do something silly and that can be just as important, if not more important, as the lessons and the clubs and the activity. If we don’t have the basics, like enough sleep, if they’re not spending time on those simple meals together, then I think we’re missing something.”

“We know what kids need. Kids need one-on-one with parents and they also need downtime, they need unstructured time and they need to be able to deal with boredom. If you ask kids to think about a happy Christmas, they usually won’t think about what they were given at that Christmas, it will be what they were doing and it’s the time that is the important thing.”

Prof Lee said more research was needed on the changing role of fathers and its impact on family dynamics. “Sometimes when we talk about parenting, we actually mean mothering because we haven’t done enough research with dads,” she said. “And some of the research that has been done has asked mums about dads, which is a filter that is not very helpful.

“This generation are the pioneers who are making this up as they go along. You can’t look at how your dads behaved, that will give you part of the picture. It gives you the soccer and so on, but doesn’t give you the intimate kind of contact that current dads want”, she said. With overlapping roles, modern parents had to learn to accept each other’s style of raising children. When mums think they are giving helpful comments to make dads better dads, dads really don’t see that as helpful”.

“If we want men to back off, that’s probably exactly what we should do. Men are much more likely to be involved if we let them get on with it. Men parent in a slightly different way than mothers do. We’re just starting to understand dads’ role.”

This came home to me through a film of some years ago, Kramer vs. Kramer, which won Oscars in 1979 for best picture, best director, best actor (Dustin Hoffman) and best supporting actress (Meryl Streep). It also showcased one of the typical attitudes of our misguided world. Streep and Hoffman played a wife and husband living in New York City with their young son. Early in the film, the wife announced she’d had enough of their unhappy marriage and was leaving. She promptly took off, forcing the father and son to cope without her and with the pain of her rejection.

Later, however, just when Dad and the boy were coming to terms with Mum’s desertion and getting on with life, she reappeared to say she wanted custody of their son. Her explanation for why she left in the first place? “I had to find myself,” she said, even though her search came at incredibly high cost to her husband and child. Now that she felt good about herself and she wanted to be a mother after all, she expected to walk back in and take possession of the boy.

That kind of self-centred, hurtful thinking, where personal needs take priority over everything else, is all too common in our society today. It’s part of a culture that is destroying homes by the thousands, including many Christian families, where the selfishness may be more subtle but is no less real.

There are no shortcuts when it comes to building a healthy, loving and caring family. It requires time, tears, hard work and sacrifice, putting others first. It also requires the ability to recognise the influence of our misguided world on our own families and the wisdom to guide ourselves and our children safely through it according to biblical principles and values.

We may live in a disintegrating society, but we believe there are principles that families can follow to enable them to stay united. However, if these principles are not followed then we shall see further disruption and decline of family and social life.

1. We live in a disintegrating society

Can there be any doubt that our society is eroding at a frightening pace? The greatest threat to our nation does not come from any force or power outside our borders. The decay is coming from within. The destruction of the family structure is accompanied by an attitude that says the traditional family is to be looked down upon, and even reviled.

Yet given a list of six things giving the greatest satisfaction to Australians, a poll found that 70% nominated “family”. Next were leisure activities (10%), friends (7%), work (5%), religion (5%), and possessions (1%). [“The Age Saulwick Poll” ].

When The United Nations declared 1994 to be the “International Year of the Family” it declared as a universal sentiment: “The family constitutes the basic unit of society and therefore warrants special attention.” This echoes The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.”

In all societies families care for children, educate them, form their character, develop their moral commitment and sense of worth. The nuclear family (mum, dad and kids) is the norm in Western cultures but this way of doing family is historically quite recent. It is a product of the industrial age and the need to be mobile, relocate for work, and the growth of cities. Before the Industrial Revolution most families were self-sufficient economic units, but today very few Western families produce everything they need. It is expensive to have children, so we limit the size of our families.

The ideal of the two-parent family where a man and a woman promise life-long fidelity to each other is under great pressure to survive. These days all kinds of arrangements are called ‘family’: single parents, blended families, unmarried and de facto families. Now gay and lesbian couples want recognition. An Australian politician recently defined ‘family’ as any group of people living together with a common purpose. A squat full of drug-pushers qualify under that definition.

Dr Rolly Croucher, wrote: “There have been two recent revolutions in family life, one in the 18th and early 19th centuries, the other since the 1960s. In the first, the nuclear family broke free of the restraints of village and kin. In today’s revolution, the declining stability in family life and resulting increase in social chaos has been caused by:

• The sexual revolution and the contraceptive pill;
• the ‘Me decade’ in the 1970s;
• women entering the workforce in greater numbers;
• young people staying longer at school;
• easier divorce;
• a higher profile by homosexuals;
• paid maternity and paternity leave;
• parents hesitating to offer any clear value system;
• the right to do your own thing outside of marriage.”

Today there is a great need to re-discover the extended family, which includes older people, single people, disabled people, lonely people. The family of God contains all kinds of people who should be accepted into our extended family. The well known Australian academic and psychiatrist, Dr John Court, said many years ago: “The nuclear family is not the kind of family which will survive beyond 2000, nor indeed would I want to fight for it. It is the extended family which has a long history of stability and the backing of Christian teaching” [“The Family in the Year 2000”, ANZAAS Symposium, University of Adelaide, August 1975 p.2].

The Bible is full of wisdom about family living. We were created to be a family (Genesis 2:24), but sin distorted family relationships (Genesis 3:16). Marriage and family are signs of God’s love for his people. The Mosaic law was family-centred, hence the prohibition of adultery and the command to honour parents. When God came in Jesus Christ, he was born into a family and raised and cared for in that family (Luke 2:51-52). Jesus’ followers, the apostles, affirm a stable family life (Ephesians 5:22-6:4); we are to care for members of our family (1 Timothy 5:8). Earth is the place where God wants us to bear the family likeness of his Son (Romans 8:28f), and heaven will be a grand family reunion, where we shall belong to a spiritual, eternal family rather than a biological family (Matthew 22:30).

2. We can find ways of keeping our families united

United families, extended to include people from different racial, cultural, social, economic, religious and political backgrounds, are the hope for the future. It is through both the physical and spiritual nurturing of our families that we can best combat the difficulties currently experienced throughout the world today. Families are precious for providing the framework of life, the morals, values and learning required for each and every individual as they seek to make a good life for themselves, and in turn, for their families also.

One example of an extended family found in the Bible is that of Timothy’s. During the 17 silent years after he had become a Christian and before he left on his first missionary journey, the Apostle Paul visited throughout Turkey from his hometown of Tarsus. In Derbe, Paul met the family of Timothy. Timothy and his mother and grandmother became Christians.

Timothy came from a mixed marriage. His mother, Eunice, was a Jew and his father was a Greek. That mixed marriage gave Timothy an insight into both cultures. That Greek culture was to help Timothy, especially when he ministered in the Greek cities of Corinth, Nicopolis, Thessalonica and Philippi. His mother’s strong faith, firstly as a Jew and then as a Christian, was something for which Paul was thankful. He said “I remember the sincere faith you have, the kind of faith that your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice also had. I am sure that you have it also.” (2 Timothy 1:5)

From examples of Biblical families who remained united despite all the pressures towards fragmentation due to racial, religious and social differences, see what you can do to keep your family united.

A. ACHIEVE A LOVING RELATIONSHIP TOGETHER

I believe we must work to achieve a loving family relationship. I remember going to a golden wedding celebration of a lovely old Christian couple. They had a cake, which was like two cakes joined together. Under their names they put two words which had helped their marriage stay together: Perseverance and Patience. All families must work to achieve a loving relationship. It grows slowly requiring patience and perseverance.

B. BE TOGETHER

How can you be a family if you are not together? There are many people who try to keep out of each other’s company. One of the most important things any family can do is learn to be together. You cannot hope to stay together if you do not spend time together. We should learn to build time into our marriages and into our family life when we can be together, to talk and to listen to each other. As a family we have a family meal together for everyone’s birthday, and with 21 of us, that makes for regular gatherings. Every week we have some member of the family to dinner. We have to learn to spend time together as a family unit.

C. COMMUNICATE TOGETHER

You have to learn to communicate with each other. Communication is a two way process. It means not only speaking at others but it means listening to others. And we have to learn both to speak and to listen.

Mal Meninga, one of Australia’s greatest rugby league coaches, and before that player, was born in the Queensland town of Bundaberg. His father, Norm, was a talented rugby league player whose jobs as a canecutter and later a saw miller were secondary to his success as a captain/coach of country teams. Norm was his son’s coach and also his hero. Looking back, Mal admired his father because Norm was the best footballer he knew. “You’d find Norm and you’d find Mal one step behind,” said his mother Leona.

Things began to go wrong in 1967, when Norm broke most of his ribs in an accident at the sawmill. He had to give up football and became an invalid pensioner. Meninga says his father’s “whole outlook changed. He thought he was useless because he couldn’t do the things he did before. And he took it out on the family a fair bit. He started drinking fairly heavily and got very abusive. It was hard when you came home from school and found your dad trying to strangle your mum.”

When he was 15, his mother enrolled Mal at the police academy in Brisbane. “He didn’t really want to go at that stage, because of what was happening in the family,” she says. It was a turning-point. “If I didn’t go into the force, I’d still be a beach bum on the coast; I’d just be running around in the local league.”

Meninga’s father died in 1982, two weeks before Mal was first selected to play for Australia. Norm had pretended to lose interest in his son’s football career, but Meninga knew this wasn’t true. “One day I was playing at Davies Park, Dad was there, watching me through the fence.” When Mal looked after the match, his father was gone. “I know he was proud of me. He never showed it though. He never told me.”

Family life is impoverished if we do not take the time to communicate with each other about how we feel, about how proud we are of the other person, of how much we love them. I have heard regrets from people at funerals when it was too late to say what we feel.

D. DETERMINE TO STAY TOGETHER

The Kinsey Report is out of date but I can remember way back in the 1950’s that the No. 1 factor in marriages that stay together was the determination of the couple to persist within that marriage. Today too many people give up too easily too soon. Those who have been together for 20 or 30 or 50 years who will tell you it took a lot of perseverance and patience and determination to stick together.

How do you explain that to people? Once a man talking to me about his kids asked: “What is the best thing I can do for my children?” I replied, “Love their mother.” And I meant it. Determination is part of love.

E. ENSURE THAT CHRIST IS HEAD OF YOUR HOUSE

That saying “Christ is the head of this house. The unseen guest at every meal and the silent listener to every conversation” needs to be in the heart of every family. Whenever a family has a basic religious affiliation and commitment at its heart that family stays together and has a centre of hope within it. Statistically, more than anything else, a real faith, whether it be Jewish, Muslim or Christian, provides a basis for a family life together. Jesus and His teachings provide an objective standard against which we can measure our behaviour and values. People who just live together, have children, work, spend, go from one activity to another, subject themselves to every tide of public opinion. Jesus Christ gives us an external standard.

F. FIND WAYS OF SOLVING YOUR PROBLEMS

Find ways of positively coping with your problems. Every family has difficulties. Every family goes through valleys and shadows and storms and desert periods. The way is never smooth. You must learn to find positive ways of coping. I always put faith first because if you have Jesus Christ in your life He then starts helping you to find the positive ways of overcoming your problems.

A recent poll showed that the problems in Australian family life were 91% related to alcohol abuse; 92% involved marital disharmony and argument; 90% involved unemployment and 88% involved financial worry. None of these main causes of family problems should ruin a marriage. Each of them can be handled together. Many organizations have expert staff to help your family cope with each of these problems. No family is sheltered from problems, and I believe that faith in Jesus Christ and following His way is the answer to every one of them.

Most Australians believe that the Christian faith can help you. In the Morgan Gallup Poll, 96% said they believed a religious faith was a positive factor in harmonious family life. Many people have made errors and have started again only because of their faith.

Get your life right with God. Become one of His family and find the resources of faith that help keep your family life united. Our society is rapidly disintegrating because people have no will to find how to hold their marriages and families together. The first step is to place Christ at the centre of your personal life, and then allow His influence to affect your family relationships, and then your marriage.

Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

For those in the audience who may still harbour any doubts about the urgency of the issue of peak oil I will quote the former US Energy Secretary, Dr James Schlesinger, who in 2006 addressed the “Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas”(ASPO) in Ireland with this comment:

“The peakists have won … to the peakists I say, you can declare victory. You are no longer the beleaguered small minority of voices crying in the wilderness. You are now mainstream. ”

In other words, the issue of peak oil is no longer up for debate, no longer controversial, no longer considered alarmist, and has been accepted as valid by scientists worldwide.

The term “peak oil” was coined by M.K. Hubbert in the 1950’s to refer to the theoretical turning point – when oil production would peak and then begin to decline, signalling a future of dwindling supplies. Hubbert also correctly predicted that US oil production would peak between 1965 and 1970. The Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association reports oil production in Australia peaked in the year 2000 .

Today’s petroleum industry analysts predict that the Global peak will occur any time now – predictions have varied – but pinpointing the actual year is not as important as knowing that it is inevitable and that we need to be ready. The analysts maintain that global oil reserves are more limited than they once believed, and that we are quickly headed for an inevitable energy drought whose impact is too massive to estimate.

Although ‘peak oil’ does not technically mean running out of oil, but rather ‘the peaking and subsequent decline of the production rate of oil’, it is used popularly to mean exactly that: running out of oil. Oil is a finite resource but it is the very basis of our modern civilisation. Oil is the key raw material for petrol, diesel, jet fuel, industrial oils, numerous chemicals and most plastics. Many industries are dependent on oil in ways that are not immediately apparent.

For example, our systems for producing and distributing food rely heavily on oil, not only for fuel for farming machinery and transport, but also for producing fertilisers and as a raw ingredient for agrichemicals, packaging plastics and so on. The more dependent we are on oil, the more vulnerable we are to increases in oil prices and declines in supply.

Robert Hirsch’s report, “Peaking of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation and Risk Management” commissioned by the US Department of Energy, was published in February 2005. In it Hirsch examined the issue of peak oil, suggested mitigating actions, and discussed the likely impacts based on the timeliness of those actions.

Such mitigation will take much longer than a decade to take effect, Hirsch believes, because of the enormous scale of world oil consumption. But, he commented, “unless mitigation is orchestrated on a timely basis, the economic damage to the world economy will be dire and long-lasting.”

A recent documentary film, “The End of Suburbia: Oil Depletion and the Collapse of the American Dream” highlighted the fact that many Americans are oblivious to the fact that their lives are ‘running on empty’. Many seem to feel that their car-centred way of life is an entitlement that operates apart from the laws of nature. This was further illustrated at the Earth Summit in 1992 when President Bush declared, “the American way of life is not negotiable”.

That ‘way of life’ requires a highly disproportionate use of the world’s non-renewable resources, and the mainstay of that way of life is suburban living. I mention this because more Australians live in suburbs than in any other settings and the warning applies to us, too. Oil depletion will mean the collapse of the Australian Dream of home ownership that relies on the automobile to transport us between our jobs in the cities, our food supplies at the shopping centres and our homes in the suburbs.

It is not, of course, as though we have not been warned. Scientists have told us since the 1950s that the world had a limited amount of fossil fuel left. And there was an oil crisis in 1973 throughout the industrialised nations – with petrol rationing here, too.

In recent decades we have been repeatedly warned by environmentalists to use less energy. Some “early adopters” gave up their cars and turned to public transport, but most people in western societies have ignored those warnings, and continued to develop more oil-thirsty, energy-intensive lifestyles. Such commentators wonder if we are experiencing collective denial by ignoring the warnings year after year?

We need to act fast, because the whole western world needs to be planning ahead. As part of that effort New South Wales needs to examine all of the issues concerning the future of our own

supplies of oil and alternative forms of energy such as wind, solar, wave and tidal, biomass from green waste, and small scale hydroelectricity.

A number of other states and cities have already done this, and are actively implementing their findings. For instance, the City and County of San Francisco, California, has a Peak Oil Preparedness Task Force that through free online “Town Hall Meetings” educates its citizens about the issue and how to prepare. Sessions have included “What’s happening with Oil”, “Growing food in an urban environment”, “Creating communities and local economies”, “Transportation”, “Personal Preparation”, and “Keeping Healthy in a Post Peak World”. They will have a prepared citizenry that will not panic when the time comes.

Closer to home, in May 2005 the Honourable Peter Beattie MP, then Premier, established Queensland’s Oil Vulnerability Taskforce. The Taskforce was asked to report on Queensland’s vulnerability to rising world oil prices driven by supply constraints including the potential peaking of world oil supplies.

The Taskforce’s report methodology included a review of published papers on world oil supply issues, consideration of detailed Australian data on proven and anticipated reserves of conventional and non-conventional energy sources, and an overview of current and emerging energy technologies.

The primary focus of the Taskforce was to present the most likely time frame for peak oil, to assess its impact on the mining, transport and primary industry sectors and then recommend options to minimise the impact on Queensland of peak oil.

The recommendations in the resulting “McNamara Report” were preliminary, identifying the requirement for more detailed analysis and modelling of the downstream impacts and substitution effects of the various proven and evolving alternative energy. However, Queensland is off to a good start.

The government of New South Wales will be flying blind if it does not learn and act upon such information for this state, as well. Over a year ago there was proposed legislation, which I supported, that aimed for a task force to assess the impact on NSW of peak oil, including different fuel types, and economic sectors. It would have determined the effect on hospitals, schools, and emergency services as well as the economy and employment trends. The proposed legislation was not passed, however.

I would ask that special attention be given particularly to the most vulnerable people in our society – after all, advice like ‘walk more and ride bicycles’ is not applicable to those with disabilities, nor to the frail aged. There will always need to be carefully planned infrastructure in place to accommodate all our people.

Regional and rural communities already at a disadvantage will be more isolated in the future and particular attention needs to be given to the 30% of the population that lives in these communities. Expanding public transport options must be urgently considered.

Let us review some basic facts for NSW: it is reported that oil production has already peaked in nine of the 11 countries that supply oil to Australia. The other 2 countries that supply us are Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and their supplies are apparently stable. However, it is also believed by various petroleum experts that these countries have over-estimated reports of their oil reserves for commercial advantage; so that these are numbers which should no longer be accepted at face value.

Professor Steve Yetiv, author of America and the Persian Gulf, highlights a number of effects for which we need to be prepared sooner rather than later:

·In the absence of alternatives to oil, prices will rise steeply as the demand outpaces the available supply.
·Those price rises could trigger a global recession “or worse”.
·Even if we have found affordable alternatives it will probably take decades to actually transition to using them fully, because the use of oil is the basis of our entire way of life.
·The Middle East will become more and more powerful in its relationship to the West, and that will inevitably put us in a disadvantageous position.
·Fears about competition for oil may trigger conflicts among the nations. The US and other powers may move to secure oil supplies in ways that could ignite a broader conflict with the Muslim world, which already believes that American policy in Iraq is driven by the need for oil rather than any nobler ideal.

Nothing we do will make the situation facing us go away. But we have to act quickly to keep it from being a catastrophe.

As a Christian minister I believe that we are commissioned by God to be good stewards of the Earth. In the Book of Genesis God shows Adam the Garden of Eden and instructs him to “to tend it and keep it “.

I believe that we in NSW are called upon to assess our resources and make appropriate plans for their proper usage, and to formulate an action plan for a future without fossil fuels.
My answer to the question of the evening, “Is this the end of civilisation as we know it?” is: yes, of course it is. But that can be a good thing looked at from the right perspective.

If our generation can rise to the global challenges posed by peak oil, the new civilisation that emerges will be sustainable, integrated and ready to make a new way into the future.

I believe, along with the members of the Round Table, that the enemies of appropriate progress are ‘ignorance, apathy and fear’, as mentioned on your website. Seeking the truth and acting on it are the basis of all righteousness and will surely save the world from catastrophe when the oil runs out.

References:
Ehrlich, P.R. and A.H. Ehrlich 2004
One With Nineveh: Politics, Consumption, and the Human Future
Island Press; Washington, D.C.
The Long Descent A User’s Guide to the End of the Industrial Age
By John Michael Greer
http://www.newsociety.com/bookid/4014
Worldwatch Institute. 2007. Vital Signs 2007: The Trends that are shaping our Future.
Worldwatch Institute. Washington, D.C. http://www.worldwatch.org/vs2007

Questions and Answers

Question: Isn’t it possible that oil exploration will uncover huge new supplies somewhere in Western Australia, or elsewhere?

Answer: The last time there was a huge new oilfield discovered was in the early 1970s in the North Sea, (according to author Dr Jeremy Leggett, a petroleum geologist). The average size of oil find today is only about 50 million barrels, which barely counts when we are using 84 million barrels per day. The last year we discovered more oil than we consumed was 1981. We now use 2 barrels of oil for every barrel that is discovered.

Question: People have been predicting for over 100 years that we were running out of oil and it hasn’t happened yet. Exxon says there is twice as much oil left than all the alarmists are claiming, and that we have decades left. Do you have a comment?

Answer: I know that the petroleum scientists claim that if they can improve technology by only 10% then they will be able to recover an addition 600-800 billion additional barrels of oil. That would be good, of course, but I would not bank on it. Society needs to be prepared for the scenario as outlined by people without vested interests in the petroleum business.

Question: What can we do?
Answer: We will have no alternative but to adjust to the new circumstances, and to prepare an alternate infrastructure built on oil substitutes such as biofuels, tar sands, shale oil, and so forth.

Each generation apparently thinks the younger generations are going to the dogs, as illustrated by the old criticism of misbehaving youth that regularly makes the rounds in the press that then turns out to have been penned by Cicero, the ancient Roman orator. It always gets a laugh because the 2000-year-old complaints could have been made yesterday.

However, the level of social disorder, mayhem, and senseless violence now erupting on the streets of both urban and regional New South Wales is unprecedented, at least since drunken gangs of convicts roamed the streets of the new colony; it is not harmless fun being indulged in by a few youths. And it is not just so-called ‘wowsers’ who are appalled by what they see happening. The statistics are nauseating: apparently one in four teenagers across Australia has been hospitalised as the result of an alcohol-related incident – being either the culprit or the victim. What kind of madness is that?

Dr Gordian Fulde, Head of Emergency Services at St Vincent’s Hospital described the recent Mardi Gras weekend as “ a war zone, absolute carnage”. Even with extra staff on hand, many partiers had to wait a long time to be seen for their broken bones and smashed faces. He explained with some apparent desperation to the press, “If everybody drank less and thought about what they put into their bodies they wouldn’t get into trouble.” But alas they do not drink less, and do not think about what they put into their bodies. St Vincents, as well as the other hospitals, report the same kind of inundation every weekend by injured drunks and drug users from age 13 and up.

The breakdown of our society has gone so far that alcohol related bashings and murders are no longer unusual; they are now just part of the regular news. The senseless beatings to death of hapless strangers; the stomped heads of innocent people walking home after work or a birthday party; the unrecognisably mutilated face of the Irish backpacker who will never recover full brain function. What kind of savagery is this, and why are we not calling it what it actually is: a state of emergency?

Installing cameras on every corner will not help if this behaviour becomes the standard that society simply accepts. The very telling photograph in the Monday 1 March 2010 Telegraph with young men in a Kings Cross fast food outlet mulling over what to order as they stand next to a floor drenched with blood from an attack minutes before illustrates vividly the desensitisation of our society. I suspect the audience at the Roman gladiatorial games would not have looked twice at the blood, either, unless there was some entertainment value of an attack in progress. Or are we all just too cool to show any human feeling, any respect for life, or any shock?

What kind of people carry on as if it is ‘work as normal’ with their premises bloodied? People who don’t know any better. Besides being an OH&S slipping hazard if stepped in, blood can carry killer viruses Hep B, HIV, etc. If not out of respect for the terribly injured man taken to hospital with his throat slashed why not some basic respect for food safety, or at the very least aesthetics? Looking at and smelling blood spilled in violence should, at the very least, be off-putting. It should make ordinary people with their consciences still intact lose their appetites. But because no one cared the workers carried on, the hungry guys in line carried on. No one said: “Stop. This is inappropriate. Close the shop; it is a crime scene.” Of course not, it would have meant a loss of a few dollars income, wouldn’t it?

What is decency? Can it be taught to adults on a population wide basis, or is that a hopeless task? It does not seem to be a common trait in today’s Sydney. If the populace cannot be spontaneously decent then perhaps they can at least be controlled by the authorities, a suggestion which will appal the civil libertarians. The authorities should renew their commitment and capacity enforce the legislation already on the books such as The Crimes Act 40/1900; the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002; the Liquor Act 2007; the Local Government Acts pertaining to alcohol free zones; road transport legislation with regard to drink driving; and the Summary Offences Act.

And while they are at it, why should we not seriously consider raising the drinking age to 21? Enough research has already established that younger brains are too immature to handle alcohol properly, and in addition are seriously stunted by it. Such age limits work elsewhere, where they are appropriately enforced, why not here? Elements of our society that demand 24-hour access to alcohol for anyone who wants it are not concerned about people’s welfare. Who really needs another drink at 2 am, 3 am, or 4 am? Giving alcohol to people who have nothing better to do with their time than pickle their brains is plain stupid. These are the very people who have no self-control when they finally leave the premises; are quick to be offended, quick to use weapons or their boots. Are drunks’ rights to order another drink or hotels’ rights to sell it a higher priority than the civil rights and safety of the innocent non-drinking people on their way home from a concert or their jobs who will later be set upon?

A few years ago we had not even heard yet of glassings, and now they are happen regularly, damaging faces, destroying vision, scarring people for life. Knives are being used more and more frequently, turning a normal night out into terrible injury in a moment of insanity. And now, in the midst of all this ghastly bloodshed, the demand for ‘cage fighting’ is growing – where, I note, the rules allow for kicking and punching after the opponent has been knocked to the floor. A sold-out arena hosted such a fight last week with the crowd in a frenzy of bloodlust. If this dark side of human nature continues to be indulged and catered to then I foresee the eventual demand for Roman-style gladiatorial games within 20 years, at most. Why not, if that is what people want? Isn’t that the reasoning behind allowing the grotesque spectacle of cage fighting?

Well, I will explain why not. Because blood sports are not decent, they are depraved. They desensitise us, and cater to the savage side of human nature. Public drunkenness is not decent: men and women vomiting and urinating in neighbours’ gardens around the nation’s racetracks and nightspots are not being decent. I believe that laws against public drunkenness should be brought back. The safety for all law-abiding citizens should be made the number one priority for every authority. Standards of decency in public should be reintroduced to a people hardened by drink and indifference to the violence and the suffering of their fellow human beings.

What we need now is a new Telemachus to stand up and say: “This is wrong. Enough is enough!” Better yet we need all concerned citizens to stand up and say ‘this is not acceptable behaviour’, and to force the government and police to make the streets safe again. I will do what I can in Parliament, please do what you can in your communities. We all need to work together to reclaim the streets of our society for decency.

Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

The Auditor-General, Mr Peter Achterstraat, yesterday called for improvements in the management of Sydney metropolitan bus services. He stated: “Buses are vital for moving people and the public deserves good service. Sydney metropolitan bus services need to be improved.”

There remains major performance issues with Sydney metropolitan buses although significant advances have been made as a result of the Unsworth review in 2004, with new bus contracts, a network improvement program, strategic corridors and uniform bus fares and concessions.

According to the Auditor General, wide variations in service levels exist, with privately operated services less frequent and less accessible than publicly run services. For instance, a survey in 2009 showed that 1 in 4 bus users said they were left standing at the bus stop at least once a week and 1 in 3 wanted to catch a bus at times when the services had stopped operating.

There is also a wide disparity in the costs of operating metropolitan bus services, with some regions costing just over $4 per kilometre compared with almost $10 per kilometre in other regions. The Auditor-General added: “With bus contracts worth $5.6 billion over seven years, the public is entitled to value for money. Contracts were directly negotiated with existing operators and not through an open competitive tender process. This may prove costly to the public.”

The Auditor General outlined three key solutions to improve the performance of Sydney buses. “The transport department needs to benchmark performance, hold bus operators accountable, and introduce penalties for poor performance. Secondly, they need to strengthen controls on operator self-reporting to ensure that performance information is accurate. Thirdly, there has to be more frequent bus customer satisfaction and usage surveys.”

Sydney’s metropolitan bus services play an essential role in helping people access work, education, shopping, health services, as well as social, cultural and recreational activities. They help to reduce traffic congestion and pollution in Sydney’s roads. Critical investment in bus services is needed in order to have an effective and efficient metropolitan transport plan for Sydney.

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 a confidential report into New South Wales Juvenile Justice has found that without an overhaul of government laws and policy regarding young offenders, an additional 123 detention places, costing a staggering $350 million, will be needed within two years? Is the Minister aware of the report findings that the number of young offenders in detention will peak at 733 in 2015? In particular, is the Minister aware of the report’s criticisms into the juvenile justice system? The report states:

Despite spending upwards of $100 million a year on juvenile justice centres … NSW is achieving a poor return on investment for this spending. It is not effective in reducing juvenile offending.

Will the NSW Government implement the report recommendations and establish a policy of ‘justice reinvestment’ that focuses on early intervention strategies, rehabilitation or diversionary programs instead of condemning hundreds of young people to a life in jail

The Hon. Peter Primrose: As the honourable member indicated, the Minister for Juvenile Justice has responsibility for issues directly dealing with young offenders and the services that the Government provides for their rehabilitation. However, I am glad to provide the honourable member and the House with some information of the measures taken in this area. Last year the Minister for Juvenile Justice commissioned a high-level review of the juvenile justice system in New South Wales. The review considered broad government policy and legislation aimed at improving the juvenile justice system, in line with State Plan goals to reduce youth crime and reoffending.

The last review of the juvenile justice system was undertaken more than a decade ago, and national and international research and experience of effective methods of dealing with young offenders has progressed significantly since then. One key element of the review was to assess research and programs for their applicability in New South Wales. The review evaluated the impact of existing legislation, policy and practice and developed recommendations to government on appropriate reforms to reduce juvenile reoffending. The review was recently completed and Cabinet is considering the report and its recommendations. A high-level working group is to be established to develop a whole-of-government response.

Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes: I direct my question without notice to the Minister for Planning. Is the Minister aware that the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water has categorised the bushland of Cumberland Plain as priority conservation land? Is the Minister aware that Penrith City Council’s flawed local environment plans allow rural zonings across 504 hectares of land owned by the Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council? In particular, is the Minister aware that Penrith City Council’s local environment plans fail to protect the long-term survival of a suite of threatened species and endangered ecological communities in Western Sydney? Will the Minister reject and amend Penrith City Council’s local environment plans to ensure that all the priority conservation lands in the Penrith local government area are zoned E2 environmental conservation and protect the remaining 1,296 hectares of the Deerubbin land?

The Hon. Tony Kelly: Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes has asked a detailed question, which I will take it on notice and obtain an answer for him. In the interim, I can inform him that there is a process for local environmental plan preparation and the recommendation from the department will come to me soon.

Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes: I direct my question without notice to the Attorney General. Is the Attorney aware that there has been an escalation of civil and family law issues and criminal matters in Aboriginal communities in New South Wales? Is the Minister aware that decreasing levels of funding to Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander legal services mean that they no longer offer civil law services in New South Wales, despite growing demand for child protection, and civil and family law matters? In particular, is the Minister aware that family civil law services provide indigenous people with the ability to realise their full legal entitlements across a range of housing issues, consumer rights and employment law, and that improved access to civil law in New South Wales ultimately will assist the economic and social development of indigenous people? Will the Minister implement programs to ensure that civil law is promoted actively in this State’s indigenous communities and seriously invest in community legal education of civil and family law among indigenous people?

The Hon. John Hatzistergos: In reality the New South Wales Government has invested heavily in expanding the range of free legal services that are available through legal aid in New South Wales, in particular, during the period in which the Howard Government pulled back funding for that specific purpose. It pulled back funding for a range of disadvantaged communities. Even the veterans who were appealing against decisions made by the Department of Veterans Affairs had their funding cut and we had to fill that vacuum. Traditionally, the Commonwealth Government funds Aboriginal legal services. It funds those services, and this Government provides some in-kind support for the services that it provides. As I said, the Commonwealth Government has always funded Aboriginal legal services.

Under a funding agreement the Commonwealth Government also funds family law services. Legal Aid New South Wales provides the services but the funding comes from the Commonwealth Government. I am pleased that in more recent times, under Robert McClelland, the Commonwealth Attorney-General, funding has been restored—not to the level that we would like, but it is much more substantial than it has been in the past. I am not aware of the research to which the member has referred. If he wishes to provide it to me, I will be happy to look at it and make appropriate recommendations to the Commonwealth that may flow from the issues that he has raised.

In a recent report on food labelling the RSPCA has pointed out that the terms “free-range”, “corn-fed”, and organic are not used in a consistent, standardised manner across the range of animal-derived food products, and are calling for mandatory national standards.

Choice, the consumer watchdog agency, has awarded the RSPCA ‘Paw of Approval’ a high rating in its review of the various food labelling schemes found in Australian supermarkets. The ‘Paw of Approval’, fashioned on the lines of the tick from the Heart Foundation on foods it deems to be heart-healthy, can be found on eggs and pork products at this time. Soon the RSPCA Paw will also be applied to chicken meat products. The presence of the paw indicated that the foods have been produced to the RSPCA’s high animal welfare standards. It is wonderful to know that the RSPCA standards are actually much higher than those required by law or recommended by the various model codes of practice. The RSPCA standards ensure that animals in these farming systems are provided with an environment that meets their behavioural and physiological needs so now your family’s food purchases can help improve the lives of farm animals in Australia.

With so many endorsement programs now appearing on food labels, how do you know which ones truly live up to their lofty claims? Choice’s panel of experts examined the claims of the ten most recognised health and sustainability logos to determine their credibility. They cannot really be compared, as the programs reviewed were quite different – standing for different key issues, values and goals, such as the improvement of conditions for developing-world farmers, protecting dolphins from tuna fishers, improving human health, supporting sustainable agriculture, and of course improving the level of awareness of the humane treatment of farm animals raised commercially. The very worthwhile and fascinating results of their inquiry are online and far too extensive to summarise here.

Choice also alerts consumers that Australian supermarkets are now full of foods with ingredients that could be derived from genetically modified (GM) crops because much of the meat, eggs and dairy products could come from animals fed GM feed. Although scientific evidence seems to suggest GM foods may be harmless, not everyone feels like being guinea pigs. Current labelling regulations make it almost impossible for consumers to know when they’re buying GM foods and that is just wrong. With over 11,988,044 hectares, Australia has the largest amount of certified-organic farmland in the world, according to the 2008 Australian Organic Market Report and there should be a dependable mechanism in place to guarantee consumers know the produce they can trust.

According to Choice, the only GM food crops currently produced in Australia are canola and cotton. However, they warn, nearly all processed foods may now contain GM products because Food Standards Australia New Zealand permits manufacturers to use a wide range of GM ingredients imported from overseas including GM soybeans, canola, corn, rice, sugarbeet, and potatoes, with no requirement that the foods be labelled to inform safety- minded consumers. Dr Moyes believes this problem needs to be addressed, and has spoken out on all of these vital issues before.

To read his speeches and articles please click on the following links: Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment Bill 2009, Chickens, Are you eating unlabelled genetically modified GM foods, GE Canola hits the supermarket shelves, Slow food, Farmers’ markets.

For more information please go to: http://www.rspca.org.au/news/choice-backs-paw-of-approval.html and http://www.choice.com.au/

Over one hundred and twenty-five years ago some unknown party smuggled out a 3000-year-old coffin they most likely obtained from excavations in the Egyptian Pharaohs’ tombs. The wooden sarcophagus was plastered and painted in an elaborate fashion, and covered with images and religious inscriptions that were later deciphered and understood to be instructions to aid the soul of the deceased on its journey through the afterlife.

This month American Customs authorities are going to return the coffin to Egypt’s Antiquities Chief Zahi Hawass, after it was confiscated in 2008 from a Spanish merchant by immigration inspectors in Florida, where it had apparently been shipped for sale. The Spanish dealer had no papers proving his ownership of the casket, which prompted investigation.

The US Department of Homeland Security then discovered that the dealer had family ties with the owners of an Egyptian museum in Madrid where it had been a popular exhibit the year before. Last year the authorities in Egypt asked the US to return the coffin to them, as it is very important culturally. It has been dated to the 21st dynasty (1081-931 BC) and holds the mummified remains of a male named Emus. Nothing else is yet known about this mysterious personage but his lavish burial implies his importance.

The Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA) is the branch of the Egyptian Ministry of Culture that is responsible for the conservation, protection and regulation of all antiquities and archaeological excavations in their country. It was established in 1859 although its title has changed several times over the years. The SCA is responsible for defining the boundaries around archaeological sites and is also the only agent permitted to restore or preserve Egyptian monuments. All foreign archaeologists working in Egypt are required to report all of their finds before publication, which has led to some of them being expelled when they refused to do so. The Cairo-based SCA also oversees the recovery of antiquities either stolen or illegally exported from Egypt.

Since 2002 about 5000 such antiquities and cherished cultural relics have been returned to Egypt due to the remarkable diligence of the Secretary General of the SCA Chief, Mr Hawass. He will be going to Washington DC in person to reclaim the treasure. We understand that before long he also hopes to retrieve the bust of Queen Nefertiti from the Neues Museum in Germany, the Dendara Zodiac from the Louvre and the Rosetta Stone from the British Museum. With his admirable success so far we think he will succeed in his mission.

Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

Town and country.

In the CBD. For the past 100 years, Sydney has been blessed with a Public Library that would be the best in the Southern Hemisphere. To celebrate this centenary the magnificent group of buildings on Macquarie Street have been inviting the public to view their one hundred most unusual objects from the 15th Century in their collections. This includes our earliest diaries (by Joseph Banks, Matthew Flinders and others), the first paintings of Antarctica and Australia, and the earliest correspondence from convicts sand colonialists, an unrivalled collection of some 40,000 books, 300 pictures and about 1400 manuscript volumes. My bedroom window each night Parliament is sitting looks out onto the floodlit Library and the Parliament. Down Macquarie Street centenary flags are flying. Visit the Library and marvel at the exhibits. The public own the Mitchell Library and are invited to join the free celebration.

On the Central Coast. All talk is about the rain of course. Dams are full and spirits are high. The Central Coast Bears, our main Rugby League team are in high spirits. Forget a second AFL team at Blacktown, the talk of the Coast is after a 100 year history, will the Bears be back in the NRL? The NRL support an application for the 2013 season. There are a million people between the original North Sydney ground and Lake Munmorah. There are 7000 young Rugby League players on the Central Coast looking for a senior team. Bluetongue Stadium at Gosford seats 20,000 and is among the finest stadiums in the nation for Rugby. This year a formal bid will be made. After water, this is the next big issue around the cafes and sporting clubs.

Rev the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

On a recent beautiful summer’s day the Legislative Assembly hosted a barbeque for parliamentary staff in the lovely renovated Speaker’s Garden of Parliament House. Being outside together was reason enough to eagerly eat the sausages and fried onions and tomatoes, have a cold drink, and enjoy the company of parliamentary colleagues. But the barbecue was also a fundraiser in response to the tragic events that took place in Haiti back in January when a strong earthquake shook the island. All profits from the barbecue were donated to the Medicins sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) organisation, in support of the fantastic work they are doing to bring desperately needed medical assistance to the people of Haiti. Thanks to the participation and generosity of the parliamentary community the barbecue was a great success, with about 70 staff attending, and which raised $1211.95 for Medicins sans Frontieres!

I rise today to give tribute to the Reverend Robert Richardson Smith who died on the 12th of December 2009, at the age of 91.

Robert Richardson Smith was born the 22nd of October 1918, during the last year of the first World War, to Mary and Samuel Smith of western Newcastle, where both branches of his parents’ families had been established for many generations.

Robert was a young teen during the Great Depression, and it forged indelible memories in him of the social and economic desperation he had seen personally. He told stories of the other children at school with no shoes, wearing shabby clothes, and going without sufficient food. Most of their fathers were unemployed – but not his, and he knew how lucky his family was.

Robert was always conservative with money and advised people not to be complacent, reminding others that the events of the Depression could happen again one day. As Robert grew up his family were devout Methodists – and they attended church services every Sunday morning and evening.

When he completed school he commenced working at BHP, as his father had done for many years. It was while working at BHP that he received the call to commit his life to Jesus Christ and to enter the Methodist ministry. He attended the Melbourne College of Divinity, earning his Diploma of Religious Education and Licentiate of Theology. He was ordained in Wesley Chapel in Sydney in 1949. As a young man, Robert was particularly inspired by the ministry of the late Rev Dr Sir Alan Walker.

His first appointment following Ordination was to Milton on the south coast of NSW – a Methodist circuit that extended from Sussex Inlet in the north to Bateman’s Bay in the south. His transport in those days was an A Model Ford.

From that first appointment, he always had that evangelical zeal and the deep conviction to make a difference in people’s lives. He truly practiced Christ’s teaching to “go into all the world & preach the gospel”. From Milton he was appointed to the Wollongong circuit where met Miss Dorothy Mae Crux, an active member of the Port Kembla Methodist church who worked as a nurse at Wollongong Hospital. They were married in 1949.

Following this term at Wollongong, his appointments thereafter were to Dunoon on the far north coast of NSW, then Mudgee, then a return to Newcastle to Hamilton Wesley Church in 1957. Hamilton Wesley was a particularly happy time as it reunited him with his parents, and it was a large, dynamic church.

Then he moved on to Chatswood South Methodist Church in 1963. Robert later transferred from a ‘Circuit ministry’ and commenced with the Department of Home Mission. In 1966 he undertook the first of many overseas preaching and study tours, being away half of that first year in the USA, UK and Western Europe, and sailing home as the Methodist Chaplain aboard an ocean liner.

While in the US he became a very strong supporter of the Civil Rights Movement and was deeply inspired by the work and preaching of the Rev Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. Robert also admired the ministry of Rev Billy Graham.

In the late 1960’s Robert was appointed General Superintendent of the Department of Home Mission, which later evolved into the Board of Mission with him as the new General Secretary, where he remained for 17 years. In the late 1970’s he invited me to come from Victoria to New South Wales to lecture Methodist, Presbyterian and Congregational ministers on “How to grow an Australian Church”. That was my first introduction to those Churches in New South Wales.

Robert was one of the key architects of the merging of the Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian Churches into the Uniting Church in Australia, and in 1975 he was appointed President of the Australian Council of Churches (NSW) for 3 years.

After nearly 20 years on the Board of Mission he returned to a parish ministry at Castle Hill in the mid 1980’s. He officially retired from the ministry of the Uniting Church over 20 years ago, already well beyond typical retirement age, but it was a retirement in name only.

He was invited not long afterwards to be an Associate Minister at St Stephen’s Uniting Church in Macquarie Street for a ‘short-term’ position that actually went on for 10 years. He sat on the Board of the Wesley Mission for 41 years and in 2005 I presented him with the Superintendent’s award for all those years of service and dedication. My friendship with him for over 35 years was always cordial and appreciative.

Robert Richardson Smith was an immensely positive and driven person. He lived a very long and full life. He died peacefully at home with his wife beside him, just as she had been for 60 years. I admired him greatly, and I know that he was greeted at the gates of heaven by the words, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant’.

Madam President, I rise on behalf of Family First to make a brief contribution on the Crimes Amendment (Police Pursuits) Bill.

The object of this Bill is to create a new indictable offence of failing to stop a vehicle and driving the vehicle recklessly, or at a speed or in a manner dangerous to others, after becoming aware that police officers are in pursuit of the vehicle. The Bill before the House also makes other consequential amendments including license disqualification.

Discussion of the Bill was prompted by circumstances surrounding the death of Skye Sassine, who was killed when motorists fleeing a police pursuit struck the card she was travelling in. Since 1994, 60 people have died in police pursuits, including 19-month old Skye Sassine.

The Bill creates a new offence under Section 51B of the Crimes Act 1900, targeting people who participate in police pursuits while driving in a reckless or dangerous manner.

There are existing offences for people who flee from police, including dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm or death that carry maximum penalties of between 11 and 14 years. At the most serious end of the offences spectrum, a driver who kills another person during a police pursuit can be charged with manslaughter or murder.

This new offence is designed for circumstances where an individual flees a police pursuit in a vehicle but where no one is injured or killed. Specifically, the new offence will involve three elements. First, a person knows that police are in pursuit of their vehicle and that they are required to stop; second, they do not stop their vehicle; and third, they drive their vehicle recklessly or at a speed or in a manner dangerous to others.

The maximum penalties for this offence are three years imprisonment for the first offence and five years for second or subsequent offences. The new offence also introduces automatic driver license disqualification of three years for a first offence and five years for second or subsequent offences.

However, I concur the concerns raised by the Leader of the Opposition in relation to Schedule 1B. Schedule 1B Police Pursuits states “The driver of a vehicle who knows that police officers are in pursuit of the vehicle and that the driver is required to stop the vehicle.”

This is the contentious loophole with the onus on police to prove errant drivers knew they were being pursued. The current Bill as it stands is not workable with this loophole. The Bill requires police to prove a driver knew they were being pursued and were required to stop. This will allow offenders to escape prosecution. The law must change to place the onus to the driver.

Madam President, I thank the Government for introducing this legislation and I commend it to the House.

On behalf of Family First I speak briefly in debate on the Housing Amendment (Community Housing Providers) Bill 2010. I appreciate the comments made earlier by Ms Sylvia Hale relating to affordable housing and I thank her for the information she obtained from organisations such as Shelter New South Wales, which keeps us up to date with the housing situation.

The objective of the Housing Amendment (Community Housing Providers) Bill 2010 is to amend the Housing Act 2001 to make further provision in relation to community housing providers and to provide a means to transfer government-owned special housing to community housing providers. Presently, more than 50,000 people are on New South Wales Department of Housing waiting lists and close to 100,000 people reside in inadequate housing. Just last week it was revealed that the median cost of private houses purchased in Sydney is $569,000. Obviously, many citizens will never afford their own home.

Under these new provisions the New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation will register an ongoing interest in properties vested in the ownership of a community housing provider or properties purchased with government funds for the purpose of community housing. This registered interest will restrict the community housing provider from selling, mortgaging or otherwise dealing in the land without consent.

The purpose of the bill is not to prevent the selling or mortgaging of assets, but to provide a review process. I agree entirely with this responsible decision by the Government in the use of public funds. The bill allows not-for-profit organisations to use the assets to gain bank loans. I am pleased to support this bill.

Many members would know that for 27 years I headed the largest community-based organisation helping people into housing, with several thousand people living in premises owned, supported or leased by Wesley Mission. In the late 1980s I worked with the Department of Housing and the New South Wales Government to lease properties on behalf of Wesley Mission. In the 1990s we developed a program with Housing New South Wales to lease many property blocks. I remember that the Government had the overall responsibility to ensure we well managed the 700 units we leased from it.

We had large numbers of residents on low incomes who appreciated the protected level of rent they could be charged. We also had large numbers of sick and disabled people, of whom as many as a quarter suffered various mental health conditions. We also took, on behalf of the Government, large numbers of people suffering from drug abuse who would undergo rehabilitation programs that Wesley Mission ran in conjunction with housing programs. There were also large numbers of homeless youth.

I remember that the infamous Joe Tripodi, when he was Minister for Housing, did a wonderful job with Wesley Mission in providing suitable homes for homeless youth on the Central Coast, which in turn provided a stable future for many of them. This enabled us to develop programs for education by getting many homeless youth back into school or TAFE and many others into work and other employment.

We also provided housing for a large number of veterans, a program few members in this place are old enough to remember. The Department of Housing did not develop simply because the Government saw the need to help people with social needs or those on low incomes. Commonwealth-State Housing agreements came into being to provide housing for veterans returning from World War II. For many years the most important part of the Commonwealth-State Housing agreements was in providing housing for veterans.

In response to the comments of Sylvia Hale I can say that all the housing blocks over which I had responsibility always had a management committee that consisted of tenants together with Wesley Mission staff. On a regular monthly basis this committee would discuss the condition of the property and the various issues being faced, but also would plan celebrations for Christmas, New Year and other such events.

One reason it worked so well was that in every two- and three-storey block of units with 16 or 20 families I always reserved one unit for the family of a Wesley Mission staff member. This family lived in that unit permanently as ordinary residents. They took responsibility to check on the residents, many of whom needed various kinds of help, including making sure they took medication or attended the employment training program or school regularly.

One thing I have noticed is that as soon as people have a sense of security with this kind of support from a not-for-profit organisation, the property is maintained through pride of ownership. Also, there are fewer problems with law and order. The police used to refer to us constantly and say that the difference between these particular blocks of units and those particular blocks of units was that we had staff living on site 24/7.

The Government Ministers with whom I have discussed this matter over the years have told me that the Government is not in the business of providing support for people with needs, that its business is to provide housing, and that the business of not-for-profit organisations is to provide support for people. Bringing together those able to provide funds and build structures and those able to provide support for people with special needs makes a good amalgam.

Under this new bill about 30,000 people will actually own homes instead of leasing or renting them from some other organisation. I can tell members that the first thing that will be noticed is that gardens will be planted. Those who live in public housing or who rent or lease property are not known for keeping gardens. However, immediately people start to own their property there is a pride in ownership, which will be reflected in their gardens and in the vegetables growing in their backyards. This bill enables not-for-profit organisations to lease properties and to help people actually own them.

For many years after I established Habitat for Humanity Australia, which helped build more than 5,000 houses in Australia, Fiji, Papua New Guinea and East Timor, on being granted low-cost loans people took new pride in what they were doing. The bill provides for the not-for-profit organisation to have oversight of the properties. The bill also enables people to develop a real pride of ownership, because although their names will not be on the title they will have contracts with the not-for-profit organisation. This will give them a sense of permanency by their being able to remain in the house in perpetuity.

The work of Habitat for Humanity worldwide has shown conclusively that when a person has a strong sense of ownership or pride in having long-term commitment to a property, their whole life is improved, including things such as employment and health. On behalf of Families First I congratulate the Government on making these changes through the introduction of this bill. For over 20 years I have had the opportunity to see this evolving.

What will happen under this bill is so much better than what happened in the early days of the 1990s. I congratulate the Government.

On behalf of Family First I comment on the Sydney Olympic Park Authority Amendment Bill 2009. The purpose of this bill is to improve the operation of certain provisions within the original bill by making provision for the management of noise emissions in respect of major events held at Sydney Olympic Park, and to implement the conclusions of the statutory review undertaken in accordance with section 89 of the Sydney Olympic Park Authority Act, primarily addressing minor incidental matters relating to Sydney Olympic Park Authority’s existing functions.

The bill provides legal protection for Sydney Olympic Park by allowing major events, such as those designed to attract more than 10,000 patrons, to proceed without the threat of noise-related litigation. The consent authority to the noise management plan is the Director General of the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water. The same framework has managed such events as State of Origin matches and the AC/DC and U2 rock concerts. The amendment will not affect noise management of the Sydney V8 Supercars race, which is governed by the Homebush Motor Race Authority Act.

A number of times reference is made to this legislation being consistent with the legislation that applies to Luna Park and Mount Panorama. I wonder whether the Government realises that the neighbours around Luna Park have been fighting that legislation for many years as the park generates unbearable nuisance noise. The fact that the bill provides legal protection for Sydney Olympic Park by allowing major events, such as those outlined so eloquently by the Hon. Helen Westwood, that are designed to attract more than 10,000 patrons to proceed without the threat of noise-related litigation makes me very uneasy. Noise-related litigation is based on appropriate State environmental protection legislation, which should not be evaded. It is there for a reason: to protect people in all the areas around Sydney Olympic Park, as well as the animals and birds living there.

The Hon. Helen Westwood said that it is a joy to live in such a vibrant and noisy place but she did not explain how animals, including the bird species she mentioned, cope with that noise. Significant studies have been conducted on the impact of noise on animals and birds. I remind members of the two rabbits who like to live in burrows in the centre of the home straight on Mount Panorama, which is subject to similar legislation. North Sydney Council has repeatedly threatened Luna Park with either soundproofing or removing a number of attractions. The neighbours say that when Luna Park is operating they cannot entertain in their homes, either indoors or outdoors, they cannot use their balconies and they cannot even open the windows to get fresh air.

The Luna Park executives were found guilty of contempt in their dealings with a residents group taking legal action against them when it sued for alleged breaches of trade practices legislation and under the Crown Lands Act. In fact, Luna Park has always been contentious. Members might not remember, but it was booted out of Adelaide, where Luna Park first operated, precisely because of the noise it made, which bothered nearby residents. Adelaide councils had the sense to run it out of town. So it came to Sydney in 1935, which was fine in the early years because there were no homes close to it on the north shore around Milsons Point. But the name “Luna Park” is now almost synonymous with noise because for the past 73 years it has been embroiled in countless lawsuits over the disruption caused by the noise it generates.

Do we really want any new or amended legislation that permits a well-known noise nuisance such as Luna Park to be used as the model for twenty-first century arrangements at Sydney Olympic Park? I would not inflict that on anyone. There will be a serious loss of amenity for all those living around the park and across a number of council areas. I also find it questionable that the V8 Supercars rally races will be excluded from this amendment because they are covered by the Homebush Motor Race Authority Act. It makes the noise abatement laws for the Sydney Olympic Park precinct very fragmented, which does not sound like the best approach to managing any site. In light of the Hon. Helen Westwood’s comments, I hope that residents around the park whose peace is shattered constantly are comforted by the thought that the noise thundering down upon them is different from the V8 Supercars and is like the noise from Luna Park.

The people who live around Sydney Olympic Park have the right to be protected from noise nuisance and injury every day of the year, and I do not accept that noise legislation can be gotten around with these kinds of amendments. This legislation is designed to protect the Government, not the rights of residents. I will not support this amending bill.

An apostle was a messenger sent from God. Jesus gave the twelve disciples the name apostle when he sent them out (Matt. 10:1-15) to preach, teach and heal. Other apostles were also chosen: Matthias, (Acts 1:15-26); Paul, (Gal. 1:1, 15-16); and possibly others (Rom. 16:17) who had the requirements of Christian belief, character, ability and who had been witnesses of the resurrection.

In classical Greek, ‘apostle’ was used of an ambassador sent out on behalf of his country or king, of colonists sent to take civilisation into barbarian areas and even of ships sent on foreign service.

In Hebrew it was used of a messenger from the Sanhedrin to the faithful bearing instructions concerning their faith. Paul was sent as an apostle of the Sanhedrin to persecute the Christians at Damascus (Acts 9:1-2). When the Sanhedrin sent out an apostle their authority rested in him.

Moses, Elijah, Elisha and Ezekiel were called apostles of God because God had delegated to them a special message, task and power. The Jewish High Priest was also called an apostle because he brought the mercy of God to the people as Moses brought the deliverance of God.

In the New Testament Jesus is called an apostle (Heb. 3:1). Like the High Priest (which term is also used in the same sentence) Jesus brought God’s mercy to his people. Like Moses (who is mentioned in the next verse) Jesus brought God’s deliverance to his people. Like the Old Testament prophets he had a special message, task and power. Like bearers of the news of the faith from the Sanhedrin Jesus came from God with the gospel.

Frequently Jesus speaks of himself as being sent under authority using the very word for “apostle” (Matt. 10:40); Mark 9:37). John frequently uses the same term.

Jesus was unique in that while he brought God’s message he was the message. His unique apostleship was recognised by the Church in their use of this term.

FOR TODAY

As Jesus was sent by God so he sends his friends to do his work. (John 20:21) We become God’s ambassadors, living and proclaiming for him (2 Cor. 5:20). Our task is that of an apostle under the guidance of “the apostle and High Priest of our confession.” We too share this heavenly call (Heb.3:1)

A representative sent on divine service is never off duty. We are called to represent our King with confidence. And when an apostle is sent to foreign shores bearing a message it is expected that he will return home. Heaven becomes our home where our citizenship is based. (Phil. 3:20) Jesus has gone ahead to prepare our place for us. (John 14:3)

An apostle stands only for the authority of the one who sent him. Jesus represented the power and the authority of God. This point would be debated with him. (Mk. 11:27-33); but their questioning of his credentials did not lessen his right. We, too, are sent on His Majesty’s Service and in his authority each Christian witness must live.

Jesus both proclaimed with the authority of God’s power and the kindness of God’s mercy. In every congregation there is the need for strength in personal authority and loving consideration for personal weakness and need.

REV THE HON DR GORDON MOYES AC MLC

Marriage is sacred and significant throughout the Bible. It was used as an analogy of God and Israel and of Christ and the Church. There were many patterns of marriage mentioned in the Old Testament. The Bible mentions an evolution from promiscuity to polygamy to monogamy, which was the divine intention (Gen. 2:24).

Marriage was initiated by a father on behalf of his son (Gen. 24:4). The bride was at first purchased, as Leah and Rachel were purchased by Jacob (Gen. 31:15). Sometimes the purchase price demanded was barbaric (1 Sam. 18:25) and sometimes was paid off on terms of service (Gen 29:20,28). When the price was paid the betrothal commenced. The bride was usually eleven years old and the betrothal lasted a year until marriage. Sexual intercourse was forbidden under heavy penalty until marriage but now the couple could speak together, usually for the first time in their lives. Mary and Joseph were so betrothed (Matt. 1).

Israel was spoken of as God’s bride (Isa. 62:5). God betrothed Israel to Himself out of His love for her (Hos. 2:19,20). But Israel became faithless chasing after other gods, playing the part of an adulteress (Exo. 34:15; Judg. 8:27, 33). Jeremiah called Israel to return to her husband, with her illegitimate children (Jer. 3:1, 14). Hosea is built around this theme of constant love and wanton adultery.

Jesus called Himself the Bridegroom. In the parable of the wise and foolish virgin (Matt. 25:1-13) the foolish were those who were not prepared for His coming. He also indicated to the disciples of John the Baptist that He was the bridegroom whom they should expect (Mk 9:14-15). Paul says he betrothed the Church at Corinth to Christ as the bridegroom (2 Cor. 11:2). The Church was to be a pure bride. The marriage relationship was again used as a symbol of the relationship between the Church and Christ (Eph. 5:22-23). John, in Revelation, sees the Church as the bride of Christ joined in a never-ending union (Rev. 19:7, 21:9).

FOR TODAY

The Church must always be faithful to the bridegroom even when we live in an “evil and adulterous generation.” In a world of scientific achievement and technological advance it becomes easier to break away from the Church’s first love. As in all marriages the only answer lies in promoting togetherness and close daily companionship between the bride and groom. Each Christian should daily seek to know Christ’s will.

Every marriage requires the discipline of love. Partners take each other for better or for worse and in times when there are difficulties there is always someone else who appears more attractive or to present greater potential for satisfaction. But the discipline of love holds the partners faithful until they find that the discipline has its own reward. This is true also of Christians and their commitment to Christ.

A beautiful marriage requires both partners to trust each other and to be proud of each other. Christians who are hesitant to talk about their commitment to Christ lack also the trust or the pride. A beautiful Christian relationship can only exist where we are both trustful and proud of our Lord.

And the Bridegroom shall come unexpectedly! The Church is only in the betrothal stage; the completeness of marriage is yet to come. Christ’s return shall catch people unawares but the wise bride is always waiting eagerly.

REV THE HON DR GORDON MOYES AC MLC

The Jewish people accepted that God would send them a king who would liberate them, politically, renew them personally and redeem them spiritually. He was the Messiah. The disciples and others recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt. 16:16).

In the Gospels this is twice transliterated from the Hebrew into the Greek (John 1:41; 4:25) but usually it was translated into the Greek word “Christ”. Usually it was used as a descriptive term: “You are the Christ” (Mk 8:29); “Jesus the Christ” (Acts 5:24); “the Lord’s Christ” (Lk 2:26). But within the time between the death of Jesus and of the writing of the earliest scriptures (1 Thess, Mark etc) it had become a surname for Jesus. For example, Mark commences “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the son of God” (Mk 1:1).

Luke, both in his Gospel and in Acts, seems to have special access to the details proving from the Old Testament that Jesus is the Messiah. In the first two chapters of his Gospel there are more than a score of references to support the messiahship of Jesus, most of them uniquely his. Luke’s attitude in Acts would have been strongly influenced by his companion Paul. In all of Paul’s letters, Christ is used either as a surname to Jesus or as a substitute for His name. His use of the word Christ is restricted to the risen Lord, whereas the name Jesus was used to refer to his earthly life. Paul’s most significant phrase “in Christ” which dominates his writing was the description of all aspects of a Christian life. We live, behave, believe, die and are saved in Christ.

The early church members at Antioch were called “Christians” because they were recognised as believers in Jesus, God’s Messiah. The Old Testament background will be dealt with in the study entitled Messiah.

FOR TODAY

Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ of God” (Lk 9:20) is the minimum requirement of a person desiring to be a Christian, and the unique claim of Christianity. Many people who do Christian deeds claim to be “true Christians”. But performing good deeds without the confession of faith is not sufficient. Unless Jesus is the Christ of God and the Lord of their lives no amount of good deeds will make one a Christian. This was so recognised in the early Church that an early copyist of the Acts of the Apostles, being concerned that the Ethiopian was truly a Christian concluded as he felt sure the Ethiopian would have said, Verse 37 of Acts 9, which is the confession that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God. We have no less a privilege today in making the same confession.

Most Christian denominations state that the only test of the orthodoxy of a believer should be this same confession that Jesus is the Christ the son of God. Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Christadelphians and the like may be very sincere in their beliefs but they are not Christians even though some of their doctrines may be Christian. They are sincere, but sincerely wrong for they do not accept the fact that Jesus is the Christ. This is the touchstone of our faith and is the uniqueness of Christianity that must stand even in an age of syncretism and the desire to unite people of different religious and cultural backgrounds.

“We are all going the same way.” That is not true, if Jesus, who claims to be the way, is not accepted as the Christ.

Matthew opens his gospel by saying it is “the book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ the son of David” (Matt. 1:1). John closes his Book of Revelation by quoting Jesus “the offspring of David” (Rev. 22:16). The title “Son of David” is one of the most frequent in the New Testament and is certainly the most Jewish, and the title most rooted in tradition, history, and theology.

David, of course, refers to Israel’s most illustrious king, its great spiritual leader and a man whose biography has made exciting reading for every generation. He has inspired countless generations of people.

After Israel’s decline the Old Testament prophets foretold the coming of a new national leader who would be another David to restore Israel’s glory. He would be of the same bloodline as David. This national leader soon became identified with the Messiah. Isa 9:7, 11:1; Jer. 23:5, 30:9; Amos 9:11; and Ezek 34:23-4 are some of the prophetic messages concerning the new David.

The Romans so feared patriotic uprisings following one of the “sons of David” that in 70 A.D. and in 90 A.D. fierce persecutions executed any possible leader of David’s line.

Jesus was a descendant of David. That was why Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem where Jesus was born. He possibly held shares in ancestral land at Bethlehem which was the usual reasons for taxation enrolment. Luke, conscious of the virgin birth, lists Joseph as “the supposed” father (Lk 3:23), to indicate his legal and prophetic Davidic descent. Paul (Rom. 1:3) links both his physical descent and spiritual origin as son of God and son of David. In Jesus the promise to David about his kingdom being everlasting was fulfilled (2 Sam. 7:16).

Yet Jesus was more than the son of David. The difficult passage (Matt. 22:41-5; Mk 12:35-7) indicates that while He was David’s son He was not the expected nationalistic leader, but rather as the Messiah He was David’s Lord. The use by Jesus of the Psalm of David (Ps 110:1) was to show that He was not dependent upon David’s greatness, but that He transcended it.

The early Church in the gentile world found the title concerning David confusing and it was not used unless properly understood as a Jewish Messianic title.

FOR TODAY

The ordinary people of Palestine used the phrase “Son of David” as the most frequent form of hailing Jesus. “The great throng heard Him gladly” (Mk 12:37). They saw Him as their national leader. The ordinary people always will respond strongly to Jesus and one important task that the Church always has is to stop inhibiting the gospel and to allow Jesus to speak for Himself that they may respond.

But God does not always fit Himself into our neat pigeonholes of conventional ideas and thought. “Son of David” was to be a nationalistic leader but Jesus transcended this. He was Saviour and Lord. We frequently try to make Jesus fit one title: the Army Chaplain’s use of Jesus as protector; the Christian Surfers’ use of Jesus as a long-haired drop-out; the radicals’ use of Jesus as the revolutionary; the effeminate’s use of Jesus as the soft, sympathetic poet – Jesus transcends all of these!

Jesus drew from the heritage that was His in King David, yet He was larger than His heritage. The best part of many a man’s proud family lies under the ground. While we are careful for our heritage we need to learn from it and then grow beyond it and serve God in our own right.

Only once in the New Testament is Jesus called “Forerunner” (Heb. 6:20) but it is an interesting word requiring our attention. In Classical Greek a forerunner was the word used of scouts who were sent in advance of the rest of the troops. They were fast, light armed, and skilful. Their courage was never questioned. I have seen the word used by the greatest of the Greek military historians, Herodotus, Thucydides and Xenophon, to describe the initiative taken by skilful frontline fighters. Barclay says it was also used of a pilot boat in the harbour at Alexandria to bring in the large ships.

In the Old Testament the word was used in association with preparing the way for others following (Isa. 40:3-11; Mal. 3:1). It was also used of the first figs that ripened, as these were signs of the coming of the harvest (Isa. 28:4). In the New Testament John the Baptist was a forerunner of Jesus (Mk. 1:2-8) even though this term was not used of him. Jesus in Heb. 6:20 is a High Priest in succession to Melchizedek, and He has entered within the Holy of Holies on our behalf. He was our forerunner.

This was a great concept to Jewish people. The Temple consisted of a series of Courts into which progressively fewer people could enter. The High Priest went through the Court of the Gentiles (where the gentiles must stop); The Court of Women (the limit of women’s worship); of the Israelites (Jewish men only); of the Priests (the sacrificial area); and into the Temple proper consisting of the Holy Place and the smaller Holy of Holies where only the High Priest could enter for a moment on the Day of Atonement.

Jesus was seen as the one High Priest who entered the Holy of Holies not just as our representative but as the first of all those who believe in Him. He opens up the way for all of God’s people to enter into the presence of God personally with boldness (Heb. 10:19-20). Jesus commences the priesthood of all believers, of all who believe in Him and follow the way He opened.

FOR TODAY

One of the earliest church papers published by Alexander Campbell was called “Millennial Harbinger”. This paper was the forerunner of the good news that was being spread around the world by believers. The printed word went ahead and opened the way for the preachers and churches which came later. So often our Christian literature lacks this “forerunner” concept. We should be writing literature that goes ahead of the Christian message into non-Christian homes and opens up the way for further Christian cultivation. In my years of broadcasting on radio and television, this was my stated purpose.

When the scouts went ahead and blazed the trail for the immigrants settling in the new land, they had to be followed or else their efforts would have been wasted. Jesus does not want admirers but followers of the way He has opened.

As the forerunner Jesus pioneered the way to fullness of life. The word “pioneer” is also used of Jesus (Acts 3:15; 5:31; Heb. 2:10; 12:2) To Him should be given the pre-eminence honour and obedience as He pioneers our way into faith, salvation and abundant life. As He said, “I am the way, the truth and the life.” (John 24:6)

REV THE HON DR GORDON MOYES AC MLC