Now the national conference of the Australian Christian Lobby at the Hyatt Hotel in Canberra, featuring Opposition Leader Bill Shorten as a key note speaker, is over, it is timely to reflect on its broader political lessons. These are more lasting than the initial publicity over the "Hey Hyatt, don't support hate" Facebook campaign that criticised the hotel for hosting ACL on the grounds of its aggressive, and sometimes highly inflammatory, opposition to same-sex marriage.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The anti-Hyatt campaign, condemned by ACL as filled with obscenities, rebounded. Not only did it give the conference publicity that money can't buy, but it attracted considerable community support for the commercial rights of the Hyatt and threatened the free-speech credentials of the marriage-equality lobby. Eventually the Hyatt and Australian Marriage Equality made a great show of reconciliation and the hotel hosted drinks for AME acting director Ivan Hinton-Teoh and his supporters.
Political and community leaders should think about the broader political lessons because ACL will not go away. Despite serious academic criticism, from among others Professor Rodney Smith of the University of Sydney, that its claims to political influence are not borne out by objective analysis of the outcomes of its election campaigning, ACL is now established in the top echelon of lobbying groups.
Even media reports noted that appearances at ACL conferences "have become something of a political rite of passage in recent years". That in itself is a major achievement. Since Kevin Rudd and John Howard agreed to an ACL-sponsored debate/forum prior to the 2007 election, other political leaders have followed almost as a matter of course. Julia Gillard did withdraw under provocation from the 2012 conference but she made time for an interview with Jim Wallace of ACL before the 2010 election. On that occasion Rudd and Tony Abbott had already featured in the pre-election debate in June 2010 just days before Rudd was ousted by Gillard.
Like all other major pressure groups, the ACL, founded in 1995, boosts itself shamelessly in its search for donations and members. It claims to be a Voice for Values and boasts 30,000 members. It reckons it has become "one of the premier political lobbies in the country" and that it is "growing in size and influence". These are big claims but measured by its growth and positioning ACL has been successful.
It has done so in several ways. First, it has effectively taken over the term Christian in the political lexicon, though it does not claim to be the peak Christian voice. But the name says it all. The major churches are fading by comparison, their image blighted by controversies such as child sex abuse.
It is a sleight of hand, of course, to infer that the 64 per cent of Australians who are Census Christians subscribe to the ACL agenda. Half of them are Christian only in name and the other half includes many progressive Christians, who do not accept at all any purported leadership by the conservative ACL. But church leaders, like Cardinal George Pell and the new Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, Anthony Fisher, who was also on this year's program, have enhanced ACL's image among Catholics.
Secondly, it has been a leader among groups in its professionalism and creativity. It has invested in its future through its Lachlan Macquarie internship program and done innovative things, like its broadcasting of leaders' debates before federal elections.
Thirdly, it has continued to attract Australia's top leaders to its conferences, as Hillsong, the mega-church in Sydney did when it was in its political prime. Politicians respond to opportunities so their presence is always a good test of potential group influence. ACL conferences are now on the political circuit even for those wary of them.
This is the first general lesson for political leaders trying to reach as wide an audience as possible. There is a middle ground that may be captured by appearing before audiences that are probably unsympathetic to your message. Middle ground voters follow the media reports that emanate from such events. This wider audience is always more important than the relatively small group who are actually present. Labor MP Shayne Neumann, who also spoke at the conference (in support of constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians, a cause ACL supports), was right to praise Shorten for his decision to speak.
But the second lesson is that there are costs for centre-left leaders addressing such groups. They certainly must be careful not to alienate their own core constituency in doing so. More importantly they must be careful to be true to themselves by not exaggerating the place of faith in their own lives when they engage with faith communities. These events make leaders try very hard to appear at home. The political becomes very personal in a way that is still new to Australian politics.
Shorten started with a story about getting advice from his local priest at Moonee Ponds to begin his speech with something from the Scriptures (it turned out to be the Beatitudes). He ended with a long quote from Wesley and in the middle quoted John Fitzgerald Kennedy about leaders being responsible to all faiths but obligated to none.
Only those who know Shorten well can say whether he was being true to himself. My advice to speechwriters working for any leader who is not naturally deeply religious is not to lay it on too thick. There is a thin line between respecting the values of your audience and being untrue to yourself. The personal remains dangerous territory.
John Warhurst is an emeritus professor of political science at the Australian National University
