Religion Report Interview

23 August 2006

John Falzon: Christian charity organisations and the

Federal Government's new case management scheme

The announcement by Catholic social services and Anglicare that they were pulling out of

the Federal Government's new case management program for breached welfare recipients,

is a setback for the Howard government. Almost all the Christian charities have either

refused to join up or pulled out after only a few weeks, including the Uniting Church, the

Brotherhood of St Laurence and Mission Australia.

Stephen Crittenden: The announcement by Catholic social services and Anglicare that

they were pulling out of the Federal Government's new case management program for

breached welfare recipients, is a setback for the Howard government. Almost all the

Christian charities have either refused to join up or pulled out after only a few weeks,

including the Uniting Church, the Brotherhood of St Laurence and Mission Australia. The

Salvation Army is still making up its mind where it stands. And since this program first

went to air this morning Hillsong has brought out a statement saying it also has

reservations about the scheme and will closely monitor and assess its involvement in the

days ahead.

But it was John Falzon from the St Vincent de Paul Society who started the ball rolling on

this program six months ago, when he declared that Vinnies would have no part in what he

described as an immoral regime. Since that interview, John Falzon has become the Chief

Executive Officer for the St Vincent de Paul Society National Council, and with Social

Services Minister, Joe Hockey, accusing the churches of turning their backs on the poor,

we thought we'd invite him back. John, welcome to the program; is this a victory for the

churches? Does the government have to go back to the drawing board because their

program is unworkable without the church charities? Or what?

John Falzon: I'd conceptualised the question differently Stephen. I would say that we're all

missing the point if we see this simply in terms of a battle between the churches and the

government. What's at stake here is the daily struggle of those who are already pushed to

the margins; as far as we at Vinnie's are concerned it is they who are suffering and are

going to suffer even more keenly, the effects of the punitive welfare laws that have come

into play, especially when you see them combined with the Work Choices legislation

where people are going to be pushed onto even more meagre Centrelink payments. They

are really systematically being herded into an ever-cheaper pool of labour that is going to

benefit some sections of society enormously. Added to that, you're going to see the

increased use of the breaching mechanism which is a blunt tool, in terms of actually

delivering any positive policy outcomes, but it's a very sharp weapon in terms of cutting

into the hearts of families, who are already hurting incredibly. So in answer to your

question is it a victory for the churches? No, I don't conceptualise this as a victory for

anyone.

Stephen Crittenden: Well let me put the question a different way. Given that

organisations like Vinnies have refused to sign on, other church agencies have pulled out;

has that just annoyed the government? Will it change anything?

John Falzon: It shines a light onto the bigger problem of what is structurally,

systematically being done to further marginalise those who are at the margins of Australian

society. In that sense, this debate is a very useful one, because certainly our experience at

Vinnie's is that people are being made to think, and to think very critically and analytically

about what is happening due to this government's harsh legislation. As far as the changes

that our refusal to participate will make to the overall legislation, no, the legislation is

going ahead whether the charities participate in this aspect or not. I think it certainly has

caused some disappointment on the government's side. I suppose there certainly seems to

have been the expectation that we would fall into line. The fact that we've spoken up quite

clearly saying that this breaching regime is immoral and we will have no part in this

breaching regime, to us this has been very important in galvanising our own ability to

prophetically analyse from the perspective of those who are at the bottom.

Stephen Crittenden: Well you just used the word 'galvanise', and you talked about being

prophetic; a lot of people have put to me that your interview on this program last April

actually started the ball rolling on this issue. I'm told that a lot of the churches and church

agencies were galvanised by your clarity, and even a bit embarrassed. Just remind the

listener of the basic point of principle that you were making. You were saying that if

Vinnies accepted the government's funding to help the people the government breached,

that Vinnies would be accepting the breaching regime, and that the breaching regime was

immoral. Why is it immoral?

John Falzon: Frederic Ozanam the founder of the St Vincent de Paul Society, put this so

beautifully. Even though we're talking about a quote that comes from more than a century

ago, it's so fitting to the current events. He said, 'Charity is the Samaritan who pours oil on

the wounds of the traveller who has been attacked. It is justice's role however, to prevent

the attack.' Now as far as we're concerned, in 2006 in Australia it is the role of the St

Vincent de Paul Society to do everything we can to prevent the attack, not to go into

partnership with the attacker. We will continue to pour oil on the wounds of the traveller,

we will always be there to provide charitable assistance to those who've been wounded as

it were, by oppressive legislation and by the economic forces that have pushed them to the

margin. We'll provide the charity but it is justice more than anything else, that these people

have a right to, and we will not cease to clamour for justice.

Stephen Crittenden: Well given that you're saying that, talking like that, perhaps I should

get you to respond to the comment over the weekend by the Minister, Joe Hockey, who

said that in pulling out of these arrangements, the churches were turning their backs on the

poor.

John Falzon: Well this is an amazing claim that the Minister is making. All I can say is

this: we could never turn our backs on the poor, but what we are doing and what seems to

upset and afflict some people, is that we're turning our backs on the government's punitive

welfare laws and we're doing it because of the duty we owe precisely to the people we are

assisting.

Stephen Crittenden: John, does it weaken the position of the Christian church agencies to

some extent that some of the agencies, like the Salvation Army, are still apparently making

up their minds whether they're in or out, while others like Hillsong have signed on. In other

words, does it weaken the position that the churches aren't standing as one?

John Falzon: These decisions had to be arrived at independently, internally, according to

the rationale and the ethos of a particular church or charitable agency. And so it does not

concern me that another charity, or another church, is deciding to respond differently. As

far as I'm concerned, the strength of our position is that we are being true to the people

we're assisting, we're being true to the Gospel that has called us to assist these people, and

we're being true to the traditions, the whole ethos of the St Vincent de Paul Society.

Stephen Crittenden: OK, so outline for us the way in which you would expect the Federal

government will try and deal with this setback now. Do they ring and ask all the church

agencies to reconsider? Is the government likely to offer to compromise over some of the

details that the churches are unhappy about? Do they threaten that other existing programs

might be defunded? If the Salvation Army still hasn't made up its mind, would it be under

intense pressure at the moment?

John Falzon: I really can't speak for what the government is doing or will be doing. I can

say that yes, there have been efforts to interest the charities in singing up to the financial

case management program. We certainly were approached even following our public

statements that we would not be participating. I do see something quite concerning vis-à-

vis the role of civil society in Australia when non-government organisations are somehow

being blamed or being lectured that they should have participated when they have made a

decision according to their lights. But I guess we're hearing slightly contradictory messages

there. Minister Hockey certainly seems to have taken that line that he's extremely

disappointed with various NGOs for not participating, or for pulling out after having

participated briefly. The Treasurer, on the other hand, was quoted on the weekend saying

that participation in the scheme was completely a matter and a decision for the churches

and agencies to make for themselves. So there are two different messages there. Of course

I'm far more comfortable in terms of a healthy civil society with the latter opinion.

Stephen Crittenden: John, last week on The Religion Report we looked at the dominant

role that the Christian charities play in delivering social services in Australia compared

with the UK or the US. Yesterday in Canberra there was a very interesting conference

looking at the collapse of voluntarism and predicting a bleak landscape within a generation

or so, particularly looking at the churches relying on shrinking and ageing congregations to

provide the kinds of services that are provided by the members of Vinnies, and I know you

always come back when you speak to your membership. What's your view about that

landscape in future, and how the churches deal with this problem?

John Falzon: Yes, now this is an area where the challenge is absolutely tangible, whereby

we must seek to deeply and creatively engage with all levels of society to make sure that

our membership base is growing, is varied and healthy, and able to do the work that is

demanded of us.

Stephen Crittenden: And how much of your membership base would be made up of

retirees, people in their 70s?

John Falzon: Yes, indeed. The situation, it's part of a bigger picture Stephen, too, that

people who are in full-time paid work, people who are parents, often both parents are

working, the time to participate in voluntary organisations is diminishing. Greater demands

are being placed on those who have work to work even longer hours. So that's one bigger

social problem that goes beyond the volunteer organisations. Secondly, this question is

being posed at a time when greater expectations are being placed on volunteer labour to do

many of the things that in the past were actually being done by governments as part of their

sense of responsibility to those who are disadvantaged. So that's a double whammy. The

demands are increasing where the capacity to meet those demands is sometimes being

stretched, where you've got the same group of people putting in extra hours. The number of

people who are coming to us for assistance is not decreasing, and I'm sure I could say a

similar thing for many of the other charities that are involved in the same sort of ministry

in Australia today.

Guests

John Falzon

Chief Executive Officer for the St Vincent de Paul Society National Council

ABC 2006