Law & Politics

Andrew Leigh’s rose-coloured religious glasses

Andrew Leigh, who grew up in a religious family, may now be a self-described atheist, but he views religion through rose-coloured glasses.

As he toured the country to discuss his ambitions for boosting philanthropy in recent years, the assistant minister for charities often quoted American social scientist Robert Putnam – to whom Dr Leigh was once an understudy – in claiming that being religious and going to church simply made people “nicer”.

He told one audience last year:

“What matters most for communitarians is that attending a religious service has often been a gateway into volunteering or donating. Those who attend a religious service are more likely to volunteer, even excluding their religious volunteering. They’re more likely to donate, even excluding their religious donations. As Robert Putnam in his book American Grace puts it, attending a religious service just makes you a nicer person. So the decline in religious participation matters to the community, as well.”

No doubt many people would find it perplexing that Dr Leigh so frequently quotes a 15-year-old book from America in making the case for the benefits of religious life in modern Australia.

Putting aside for a second all the abuse and financial scandals that have engulfed faith communities in recent decades, consider how conservative religious leaders and lobbyists have spearheaded opposition to many positive social policy advancements that have made modern Australian society vastly better, and more compassionate and caring. Many of those nicer religious folk tried their best to block same-sex marriage and voluntary assisted dying laws.

Dr Leigh’s views on religion provide an interesting backdrop at a time when religious lobbyists are putting intense pressure on the Albanese government on a number of fronts – and particularly in Dr Leigh’s portfolios.

Since late last year, religious leaders have mounted an extraordinary scare campaign in the media against recommendations – first proposed in November and then confirmed in July – of the independent Productivity Commission. 

Faith groups branded proposed reforms to religious charities and tax-deductibility status for religious activities as “a direct attack on faith” (National Catholic Education Commission) and described them as demonstrating “a clear anti-religion agenda” (Freedom for Faith). The Australian Christian Lobby even suggested in a submission that the Productivity Commission was motivated by an “atheistic hostility to faith”.

In its final report, the Commission provided well-reasoned justifications for removal of Deductible Gift Recipient (DGR) status to the school building funds which benefit mostly wealthy private religious schools, and also for removal of DGR for religious activities in government schools. 

The government, however, was not so interested in the expert advice of the Productivity Commission on these matters. Almost as soon as the report had been released, Dr Leigh ruled out any changes to DGR status for school building funds and religious activities in government schools. 

The Commission also recommended the removal of Basic Religious Charities – charities that are exempt from the governance standards and financial reporting requirements that apply to all others – in order to “enhance regulatory consistency and public transparency”. The government is yet to announce its position on this issue. But, unsurprisingly, religious lobbyists are already demanding that the government continue to recognise their charities as “special” and to be “given due respect”

Throughout this year, religious leaders have also been running a scare campaign opposing proposed changes to the religion question in the Census. It so happens that the minister responsible for the Census is Dr Leigh. 

The Catholic Church hierarchy has been demanding the Albanese government intervene in the independent process of the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). Having conducted a two-year public consultation and heard the community’s concerns about the inherent bias in the religion question, the ABS is proposing to reformulate the question – changing it from ‘What is the person’s religion?’ to ‘Does the person have a religion?’. The ABS has told key stakeholders it intends to test the new model this September.

Just this week, Dr Leigh sparked anger in the LGBTIQ community when he announced the government would not be including planned questions on sexual orientation or intersex variations in the next Census. According to a report in the Sydney Morning Herald, two Labor MPs angered by the decision said the government feared a backlash from faith groups.

Dr Leigh’s views on religion provide an interesting backdrop at a time when religious lobbyists are putting intense pressure on the Albanese government on a number of fronts – and particularly in Dr Leigh’s portfolios.

The ‘Census21 – Not Religious?’ campaign – which has been leading the push for reform of the religious question – has sought confirmation from Dr Leigh on whether the government’s announcement would affect the ABS’ testing of the proposed religion question. While federal governments have, in the past, removed proposed ‘topics’ from Censuses, it is understood there are no grounds upon which a government can interfere in how the ABS actually asks questions.

Whether or not the ABS removes the bias from the question, the key headline from the 2026 question on religion will likely be the continued rapid decline of Christianity and rise of Australians identifying as not religious. On the current trend, ‘no religion’ will overtake ‘Christianity’ for the first time, with Christians set to make up below 40 per cent of the population and non-religious Australians to comprise more than 40 per cent. One study from 2021 suggested removal of the bias from the question could result in an increase of up to 11 per cent for ‘no religion’.

At their peril, governments at all levels will continue to ignore the voices of non-religious Australians in many policy areas. No longer will it be tenable – if it is not already – for governments to continue privileging Christianity and religion in all kinds of areas of public life and policymaking.

Increasingly, elected representatives and communities are telling their local councils and state and federal parliaments that they do not want formal meetings to start with acts of Christian worship.

In the charities sector, the federal government will have to explain why it recognises the ‘advancement of religion’ as a charitable purpose in and of itself when so many Australians have voted with their feet and discarded religion.

The Rationalist Society of Australia has made this point to Dr Leigh and has called for the government to, at the very least, address the religious-based discrimination in the charities system by either removing ‘advancement of religion’ as a charitable purpose, or by providing non-religious or pro-secular organisations – such as rationalists, humanists, atheists and secularists – with equal treatment in advancing their worldviews. 

Past comments by Dr Leigh provide little reason for hope. In a 2019 podcast interview with Christian apologist John Dickson, Dr Leigh backed keeping ‘advancement of religion’ as a charitable purpose, justifying his position on the belief that faith-based organisations do more good than bad for the community.

“A tax concession has been there for a long time. And I think it serves an important social purpose, just as I think religious organisations serve that local purpose in our community. Now, most Australians won’t share the theological views of most organisations. These religious organisations, after all, have theological views that are, generally, in direct contradiction with one another. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t see society as being richer for having their involvement in our community life, just as we see society for being better off for having multiple political parties…

“The great thing about religious organisations is they do act as more effective melting pots. And that’s a vital role in a very polarised politics that we have at the moment.”

The real picture of religionists’ volunteering and donating is, of course, more nuanced than Dr Leigh recognises. In his comprehensive Religiosity in Australia series, social researcher Neil Francis found that, while religious people do have higher levels of giving than non-religious people, this is attributed to selfish giving – that is, it is more for their personal benefit and that of their congregations, rather than for the benefit of others. Francis also revealed that religious people experienced far greater levels of coercion in making donations.

Abusive and coercive practices were key themes in submissions by ex-religious advocates, such as the Say Sorry group of former Jehovah’s Witnesses members, to the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into philanthropy. Recent media investigations into the Exclusive Brethren have only served to expose further alleged abuse and malpractice among such cultish religious communities.

When in opposition, Dr Leigh expressed concerns about the practices of Scientology and even called for a parliamentary inquiry. Yet, as the responsible minister for charities over the past two years, he appears not to have taken action in regard to such organisations, let alone had an appetite to upset more mainstream religious groups in other areas of policy reform.

In the podcast interview with Dickson, Dr Leigh discussed his book, Disconnected, on how to boost social capital and connectedness in Australia. Dickson asked the obvious question of why Dr Leigh, given his belief that being religious and going to church simply made people nicer, did not include among his 10 tips for boosting social capital a recommendation for people to go to church.

Dr Leigh replied:

“Perhaps it should be. My wife and I both grew up in religious households, and we make our way down to church a few times a year. But, every time we do, we find this interesting thing, John. We find that our three little boys have walked out of church a little bit nicer than when they came in. They haven’t always loved every aspect of the sermon. They haven’t always loved having to sit still. But taking a little bit of time to think about others, to go through those sort of basic truths of life, is important.”

With conservative church leaders seeking to pressure the Albanese government at every turn, it would help us all if government ministers like Dr Leigh took off their rose-coloured religious glasses.

Published 31 August 2024.

If you wish to republish this original article, please attribute to RationaleClick here to find out more about republishing under Creative Commons.

Images: Crawford Forum on Flickr (CC); Aaron Burden on Unsplash (CC).

author-avatar

About Si Gladman

Si Gladman is Executive Director of the Rationalist Society of Australia (2024-). He is Editor of Rationale. Previously, he was Campaigns & Communications Coordinator for the Rationalist Society of Australia (2021-2024). He tweets at @si_gladman

Got a Comment?