Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

Madam Acting Deputy President, I will withdraw the inference that the Star of David was the symbol that the Greens wanted to put on every Exclusive Brethren business. But make no mistake, the Greens wanted to ensure that people of a particular religious persuasion were going to be marked in their businesses. They can deny it and they can try and cover it up but that is their history and that is on the record. If Senator Milne wants to talk about undermining the key principles and the integrity of our system, what about freedom of religion? If you want to talk about preserving taxpayers’ money, what about the hypocrisy and the stunt that they pulled when we were debating means testing a particular government measure? They all stood up and declared that they may be affected because their incomes may be below that specific level. The inquiry should be, ‘How does a leader of a political organisation reduce his taxable income by some 60 per cent in a single year?’ Perhaps you can have an inquiry into that. Where do you get $150,000 worth of tax deductions every year, Senator Bob Brown?—that is the real question. Perhaps it is by donating to some tripe or some nonsensical green organisation that has rorted the system.

If we are going to have an inquiry into tax deductibility of organisations and misuse of funds, then it should not be a persecution of religious organisations that have been recognised as religions. It should be about the integrity of the organisation, and there is very little integrity in these green organisations that secretly fund a party that is bent on overthrowing and undermining the very integrity of our political system in this country. I am extraordinarily disappointed, but not surprised, that the Greens continue to go down this path.

Let me turn to the substance of Senator Xenophon’s motion. I understand the sentiments behind it. I understand and recognise that there are a great many people affected by a great many organisations in this country, some of which do not do the right thing. But I do not support and I cannot support the persecution of a religious organisation. I am not making the judgment whether the Church of Scientology should be deemed a religion or not. The fact is, it is. When we open up the door into what is deemed a religious organisation in this parliament by having an inquiry into the substance of this motion, I think we are chasing rabbits down burrows, which actually threatens the very freedoms that we enjoy in this country.

I recently read Senator Xenophon’s speech about the Church of Scientology. I thought it was considered and heartfelt and there was a lot of evidence. If we really want to go down the path where religions treat people poorly because they choose to not participate in them anymore, then we can look at some of the mainstream religions. We can have a look at the Koranic text that says, if you commit apostasy and renounce your faith, you actually are meant to be put to death. In some countries that happens. Do we support that? No, it is terrible and awful, yet it is part of a religious teaching. If you want to talk about the brainwashing and indoctrination of people into cult-like and trance-like states, then you could actually have a look at some of the customs and practices that take place in the madrasahs in other nations where young children are taught over and over again to recite the Koran. We could look at some of the organisations involved in Islam in this country where there has been repeated incitement of violence, jihad, mayhem and murder, and there has been a defence of people who enact that by some senior Islamic scholars.

No religion is absolutely perfect. There are failings in many of them but people choose to go into a religion and they can choose to leave it. While the Church of Scientology is recognised as a religion in this country I will defend their right to conduct themselves in that practice. The problem with supporting this motion is that, even though it is dressed up in lamb’s clothing, it is a wolf of an inquiry into religious freedom. Senator Milne’s contribution today reinforces that. It is not about public funding, it is not about tax deductibility; it is really, in Senator Milne’s eyes, about going after a religious organisation and she has made that very clear. I do not think that is healthy. If we were to confine it to only the substantive motion and remove ‘any related matters’ from this motion, why would we be having an inquiry into tax deductibility of charitable and religious organisations only weeks—hopefully days but it could be weeks, or a few months—ahead of the Henry taxation review, which is a comprehensive review designed to go through the entire taxation system in this country? I would say that the government should get on with releasing this review. I understand the Prime Minister has said he has not even read the Henry review because he has had more pressing issues to deal with, apparently, than the reform of the Australian taxation system.