Rev Fred Nile Supports Our Christian Heritage In NSW Parliament
The Rev Fred Nile MLC, leader of the Christian Democratic Party, gave the following address-in-reply to the Lieutenant-Governor of NSW:
“On behalf of the Christian Democratic Party I support this Address-in-Reply motion. The motion is addressed to His Excellency the Hon. J. J. Spigelman, Companion of the Order of Australia, Lieutenant-Governor of the State of New South Wales in the Commonwealth of Australia, and it reads as follows:
May it Please Your Excellency—
We, the Members of the Legislative Council of the State of New South Wales, in Parliament assembled, desire to express our thanks for Your Excellency’s Speech, and to express our loyalty to the Sovereign. We assure Your Excellency that our earnest consideration will be given to the measures to be submitted to us, that we will faithfully carry out the important duties entrusted to us by the people of New South Wales, We join Your Excellency in the hope that our labours may be so directed as to advance the best interests of all sections of the community.
I fully support the motion, but as I considered the wording I noted that it includes the phrase "to express our loyalty to the Sovereign"—and, of course, the Sovereign is Queen Elizabeth II, the Queen of Australia. I was pleased to hear the Lieutenant-Governor read a special message from the Queen to the joint session of both Houses of the New South Wales Parliament as we celebrated the 150th anniversary of the establishment of responsible government in New South Wales. But there seems to be a contradiction in those words when considered in light of recent actions that the Christian Democratic Party strongly opposed—when references to Her Majesty the Queen and to the Crown were removed from the members' oath of allegiance and when the Queen's portrait, celebrating her last visit to the New South Wales, was removed from its place in the foyer of the Parliament and hung in the lift area.
I raised that issue with the artist who painted Her Majesty's portrait—in light of a statement that the painting had to be removed in order to protect it from the sunlight. The artist told me that she had selected the position in the foyer where the painting had originally been hung, and that the Queen's portrait would not have been damaged because it was well protected from the sunlight. Recently the portraits of Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh were removed from the Strangers Dining Room and were later found hidden in the Parkes Room, out of sight. As honourable members will also be aware, eventually a bill was passed to remove the Royal coat of arms from courthouses and other public buildings in this State. I am pleased to note that the Royal coat of arms is still displayed in this Chamber, and I hope it will remain here, even if only as part of the heritage of this building. In my view, no change should be made in that regard by governments of any political persuasion.
The changes I have referred to were supported by a number of members of this House, but I have always stated that such changes should not have taken place until the Australian people had voted for such changes—not a political party, not members of Parliament, but the people of this State. We have talked about responsible government and the fact that the people of New South Wales were given an opportunity to elect a government. That is why our Constitutions, particularly the Australian Constitution, have built into them these various requirements relating to referendums, so that any attempt to make Australia a republic must be done by way of referendum.
As we all know, a referendum was held and the vote for Australia to remain a constitutional monarchy was overwhelmingly successful in all States of the Commonwealth. The point I make is that no change should be made until the people have spoken—if they do speak at some future date, which I now doubt will happen. I believe Australia will continue to be a constitutional monarchy, as has happened in Denmark, Japan and other countries. There is no time limit on constitutional monarchies. Some of the monarchies to which I referred have been in existence for a thousand years. We will wait and see, but I believe any decision must be made by the people of Australia in a free and open referendum.
As part of the celebrations for the anniversary of 150 years of responsible government in New South Wales I attended the ecumenical service of prayer and thanksgiving held at St Stephen's Church in Macquarie Street, opposite this Parliament. In an informal way it has become a place where over the years ecumenical services have been held for the sake of convenience. The services could, of course, be held at St Mary's Cathedral, St Andrew's Cathedral, or elsewhere, but they have been held at St Stephen's for the convenience of members of the New South Wales Parliament. As I said, I was pleased to attend the service and to see the church reasonably full with members of the public and quite a few members of Parliament in attendance. I realise that an important funeral service was held at the same time, which many members felt obliged to attend. Obviously, that was the correct thing for them to do.
The sermon was given by His Eminence Cardinal Pell, the Catholic Archbishop of Sydney. It is posted on the web site and I would urge honourable members to read it. I will be happy to supply a copy if required. In his sermon Cardinal Pell addressed members of this Parliament and dispensed some very wise advice for the next 150 years. The Venerable Dr Geoffrey R. Huard, representing The Most Reverend Dr Peter Jensen, Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, led the prayers, and the service was led by Reverend Dr Matthew Jack. The first of the Bible readings, Psalm 67 from the Old Testament, was read by the Lieutenant-Governor of New South Wales, the Hon. Justice J. J. Spigelman, AC, and the New Testament lesson Romans 12:2-18 was read by the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, the Hon. John Aquilina.
The choir that took part in the service, The Cathedral Singers, added inspiration and quality to the service, and I am sure all those who were able to attend were blessed by being present. I have been somewhat troubled by the phrase "responsible government". I understand that the word "responsible" is used to indicate an elected government, and I hope we do not infer from the word "responsible" that the Legislative Council, which operated from 1823, was irresponsible. I would say from my reading of the activities of members of the Legislative Council that they were responsible, even though they were not elected. As honourable members know, the first Legislative Council was established in 1823 with members nominated by the Governor. They consisted of heads of various departments in the State, such as the Surveyor General, who was responsible for the State's buildings, the medical officer, and others including representatives of the military.
One of the other representatives was the archdeacon of the colony. I understand that was Archdeacon Scott, and later Archdeacon Broughton, who became Bishop Broughton. Interestingly, there has always been a representative of the Christian faith in the Legislative Council, certainly in the early years, and at other times in both Houses of Parliament when members involved with the church were elected. In looking at the history of the Legislative Council on this important occasion, I note that next to the side door into the Chamber is a sign titled "A Little Piece of History …", which I asked the attendant to photocopy for me. The sign provides a summary of the history of this building, and states:
In 1855, with a new bicameral (two House) Parliament due to come into existence in the following year, it was decided that the new Legislative Assembly would take over the existing Council chamber and a new chamber would be found for the Legislative Council. In February 1856, a prefabricated iron building in Melbourne, Victoria was purchased for the Council. The building, made in England, had been shipped to Melbourne and was originally intended for use as a church or accommodation on the gold fields at Bendigo. The iron building was purchased for £1,835 and shipped to Sydney aboard the Callender and delivered to the Macquarie Street site in March 1856. In April, a tender for £4,475 was accepted from Mr Thomas Spence to erect the building on the southern end of the former Surgeon's Quarters, together with adjacent rooms and offices, and to provide internal fittings. Initially, the inner walls of the iron frame chamber were lined with the boards from the packing cases in which the building had been shipped to Sydney. These were covered with hessian and the wallpaper was plastered over this. The walls have been reconstructed since but a small section of this thrifty original arrangement has been retained and a small door cut into the wall to show visitors.
In the doorway people can see the packing case boards that held the iron pieces that made up the building which was shipped to Sydney. Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes, in his maiden speech, said that he had done further research into what were called the iron churches. He found that three or four—perhaps more—iron churches were manufactured in England. Additional advice from the Clerk states:
The building, made in Scotland by the engineering firm, Robertson & Lister … Ironically this company of smiths, engineers, millwrights, iron roof constructors and iron house builders occupied offices at 340 Parliamentary Road, Glasgow.
The buildings were designed by local architects Bell and Miller. Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes found out that these iron churches were shipped to Australia. One was purchased by the Methodist Home Mission Department, because iron churches would not be affected by termites and other problems. The church was sent to Palmerston, which is the former name of the city we call Darwin. That church still stands although it is no longer used. Another iron church was sent to Ararat in Victoria. It was also purchased by the Methodists for use on the goldfields. On the side of these huge churches were four big wheels 5½ feet high and made out of slivers of huge tree trunk on which they were dragged by teams of oxen around the goldfields. The last goldfield it was taken to was Dunkeld in 1863. It was then dragged to Ararat and left temporarily in a vacant paddock behind the Methodist church. It was still there when Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes visited.
Another iron church was purchased by the Anglicans, and was sold at a profit of £1,200 to the people of New South Wales to become the Legislative Council Chamber. Some questions have been raised about the history of this place so I thought it would be good to put that on the record. However, I note—and this may have caused some confusion—that another iron church was established on the land on which the Mitchell Library stands today. It was quite a large iron church, which was used by the original congregation of St Stephen's Presbyterian church. The church building was then moved from one side of Macquarie Street to the other; that became the public library, and the Parliament House buildings were developed on the site. Looking at the history I was able to identify that the library reading room was opened by the Governor, Sir Harry Rawson, on 22 May 1906 on the occasion of the celebration of the jubilee of responsible government. At that function the President of the Legislative Council, the Hon. Sir Francis Suttor, presented to the library the first Address-in-Reply to the Governor's speech adopted in New South Wales. So tonight we are repeating what occurred on 22 May 1906. The Address-in-Reply to the Governor's speech in 1843 was presented to the library in 1906; the first Address-in-Reply to the Governor's speech was in 1843.
Interestingly, on that occasion it was moved that a humble address be presented. However, the members objected to the word "humble" and it was struck out of the motion. I note that we do not use the word "humble" today. History probably shows that the word "humble" does not appear in any Address-in-Reply motion. Another person who had a tremendous impact on the history of the New South Wales parliamentary process was Sir Henry Parkes. As honourable members know, he served as the Premier for at least five or six terms, but in those days he was called the Prime Minister of New South Wales. There was always controversy about replacing the buildings with a huge Parliament House as big as, if not bigger than, the House of Commons in England. The designs on display in the library show buildings that are so grandiose they would have looked out of place in the city of Sydney. Sir Henry Parkes was not very enthusiastic; indeed, in one speech during debate on constructing these great buildings he said:
It always appeared to me that it is far better to have good Parliamentarians than grand buildings to put them in.
I think his attitude discouraged spending the limited resources available in those days to build huge grandiose buildings for Parliament House. So as we celebrate the 150th anniversary of responsible government, with the proviso that the Legislative Council was here before 1856—it was a nominated House, not elected—we should thank God for all the blessings of our heavenly Father over the years and for our Christian heritage. That heritage is still predominant in our nation, with about 70 per cent of the people claiming a Christian heritage. We talk about the multifaith and multicultural aspects of our society. All the other religions of Australia—the Muslims, the Buddhists, the Hindus and the Jewish people, whom we respect—make up only 5 per cent of the Australian population. I do not think we should be thrown off balance because we have minority religions in this country that we respect.
In particular, I thank God that we acknowledge God's presence every morning in this House with our opening prayer, which is led by the President or by a member nominated by the President. It includes those important words based on the Romans 13 and which are part of an original prayer from the first British Parliament in the 1600s. That Parliament opened with a very long prayer by a Christian Minister. It has been shortened to three lines, but the heart of the prayer is:
Almighty God, we humbly beseech thee to vouchsafe thy blessing upon this Parliament. Direct and prosper our deliberations for the advancement of thy glory and the true welfare of the people of our State and Australia.
That prayer reflects the biblical teaching in Romans 13, that governments are meant to be the servants of God. Sometimes they rebel against God's will, but the principle established in the Bible is that governments are meant to be the servants of God, always seeking guidance and direction in the decisions they make. As honourable members know, after that prayer we say together the Lord's Prayer. This procedure was raised in this House in two separate debates. On the first occasion the House voted 30 to 5 to retain the prayers and on the second occasion it voted 30 to 7 to retain them. I thank God for that expression by the majority of members of the House, without reflecting on those who voted against the motion for their own reasons. Earlier I referred to Sir Henry Parkes, who is known as the father of Federation. He lived from 1815 to 1896. He made an important statement that I find inspiring and helpful when we discuss our Parliament and Constitution. He said—honourable members must remember that he said this in his day:
As we are a British people—pre-eminently a Christian people as our laws, our whole system of jurisprudence, our Constitution are based upon and interwoven with our Christian belief, and as we are immensely in the majority, we have a fair claim to be spoken of at all times with respect and deference.
Sir Henry promoted—I support what he promoted—the free secular public education system. Some people have made the mistake of thinking he was insisting on an atheistic or humanistic education system, but he used the word "secular" to mean non-denominational, that it would not be Catholic, Baptist or Anglican but Christian in the same way as our Commonwealth Constitution says there can be no establishment of a religion. It was not speaking of Christianity or Islam or Buddhism; it was speaking of establishing the Church of England as the established Church in Australia, as it applies in the United Kingdom.
This confuses our generation. When we think of the word "religion" we think of Buddhist, Muslim, and so on. When these words were written they referred to different Christian denominations. Catholics, Anglicans and Baptist were looked upon as different religions. We thank God that that period of confusion has passed and we now understand they are all part of the overall Christian community—not separate religions—that works and prays together in harmony, as was demonstrated by the ecumenical service that was held to celebrate the anniversary of 150 years of responsible government in New South Wales”, Rev Nile said.