Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the following matters be referred to the Economics References Committee for inquiry and report by 24 June 2010:

(a)

the appropriateness of applying the Public Benefit Test currently in place in the United Kingdom’s Charities Act 2006, including balancing benefits against any detriment or harm, to charitable and religious organisations in Australia with respect to their tax exempt status;

(b)

whether there is a need to amend Division 50 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 to accommodate such as test; and

(c)

any related matters.

This is a matter that the Senate has been well aware of for a number of months now, since I spoke on the Church of Scientology and their tax exempt status several months ago. I have had a motion in this chamber for a number of weeks in relation to an inquiry specifically into the Church of Scientology, but after discussions with my colleagues they felt it was a better approach, a fairer approach, to look at the issue of the tax exempt status generally of charitable and religious organisations. That does not in any way derogate or take away the thrust of what I have been trying to do, but it does make it clear that there was a preference amongst a number of my colleagues that there be a look at the broader issue of a public benefit test for charitable and religious organisations in Australia and that it be looked at by the Economics References Committee.

Let us put this in perspective. Last November I made a number of allegations about the Church of Scientology in this place as a result of being approached by many victims of the Church of Scientology. I tabled 53 pages of allegations and letters from those victims. Those victims have a right to be heard. At the heart of this is the issue that this organisation, this so-called Church of Scientology, receives tax-free status in this country. It is in effect being subsidised by taxpayers by virtue of its tax-free status.

The purpose of this inquiry by the Economics References Committee is to ensure that we have a look at what other countries are doing, and in particular what the United Kingdom is doing because in the United Kingdom for a charitable or religious organisation to have tax-free status they need to show that there is a public benefit in what they do. There is a public benefit test and a public benefit requirement under that legislation. That public benefit test looks at a whole range of factors and what the organisation that seeks tax-free status does and whether it causes harm to others.

In the United Kingdom, for the public benefit test to be fulfilled, the benefits must be balanced against any detriment or harm. In the United Kingdom, examples of things that may be evidence of being detrimental or harmful might include: something that is dangerous or damaging to mental or physical health, something that encourages or promotes violence or hatred towards others, or something that unlawfully restricts a person’s freedom.

The allegations I have had before me and the statements of victims indicate very clearly that the Church of Scientology has been engaged in such conduct. Victims have a right to be heard. Victims have a right to come forward and be heard in the context of a Senate inquiry. It is important, where taxpayers’ benefits are given in this context, that there be a process where the Senate can look at whether we can have sensible changes to our tax laws applying to charities and religious organisations. May I point out that this has been a robust test in the United Kingdom that has been rigorously applied for some 10 or 15 years. It is a test that has been fair and has stood the test of time over many years.

Some honourable senators may have seen Quentin McDermott’s story about the Church of Scientology on the ABCFour Corners program on Monday. That raised number of very serious allegations both from here and overseas of how this organisation operates. This organisation operates in a way that seems an anathema to basic standards of decency. Allegations were made of families being split apart, of false imprisonment, of children being forced to work in quite inhumane conditions and of labour where any concept of fair work has been thrown out the window and where people have been working around the clock for a few cents an hour as part of being tethered to this organisation. It talks about the harm that it has caused to individuals and the financial devastation it has caused to individuals. These allegations ought not to be ignored. I think it is also important that we consider, in the context of what is being sought, an inquiry to see if we can improve things. This is an inquiry for the Senate Economics References Committee to see whether there ought to be better and fairer standards in place for an organisation to obtain tax-free status.

One of the most disturbing allegations made in the Four Corners report and by the victims who have come forward to me—and there have been many hundreds more items of correspondence and emails that I have received since I raised these issues in public—is that of coerced or forced abortions for those women that work in the Sea Org, which is an elite organisation in the Church of Scientology. These matters are very disturbing. Having an inquiry to see whether we should apply a public benefit test is something that I think is very reasonable for this Senate to look at.

Let us look at the issue of mental health. Just yesterday the Australian of the Year, Professor Patrick McGorry; the President of the Royal Australian College of Psychologists, Professor Louise Newman; and the Executive Director of the Brain and Mind Research Institute, Professor Ian Hickie called on senators in this place to vote for an inquiry into these alleged abuses by the Church of Scientology. This group of leading mental health professionals says that the Church of Scientology’s campaign against professional mental health treatment poses a serious risk to the community. Prof McGorry said:

I have long advocated for the early intervention and treatment of mental health issues and am strongly opposed to any group that obstructs people from seeking help

Professor Hickie said:

This organisation has continued to wage a campaign of fear and misinformation that has sought to undermine public confidence in accepted medical treatments.

Professor Newman said:

All groups in the community have a right to mental health treatment. It is vital for common conditions such as postnatal depression that people have timely access to a full range of information to allow early intervention in order to support best outcomes for mother and infant.

Here we have three of the nation’s leading mental health experts expressing serious concerns about an organisation that receives tax-free status in this country. This organisation should be subjected to the very reasonable public benefit test that has applied in the United Kingdom for many years which also weighs up any detriment or harm caused by an organisation seeking tax-free status.

I will have more to say when I sum up in this debate. I would urge honourable senators to support this inquiry. I understand from the information I have received from both the government and the opposition that they do not do so and I look forward to hearing their reasons. But this is an issue that will not go away and I urge honourable senators to reconsider and support this reference to the economics references committee.