A Mixture Of “Different beliefs”… When is a “charity” not a Charity?
Howard govt - - Posted on March, 13 at 10:03 pm by Aussie Bob
Santo Santoro claims to have “donated” the proceeds of his share bonanza “to charity”. According to ABC radio this afternoon, it wasn’t a charity (that’ll teach you to bash the national broadcaster, Santo).
After a bit of Googling…
The organization Santo Santoro donated to was the “Family Council of Queensland” (FCQ), comprising support from the following:
“…the Australian Family Association, the Salvation Army, the Catholic Church, Endeavour Forum, Drug-ARM, the Festival of Light and the Australian Council for Adoption.”
There are scant references to the FCQ on the net, but one of their constituent members, the Endeavour Forum, claims:
“Endeavour Forum was set up to counter feminism, defend the unborn and the traditional family. (”A feminist is an evolutionary anachronism, a Darwinian blind alley”.)”
Trendsetters too, it seems.
One of FCQ’s patrons, emeritus professor Patricia Noller, comes from good conservative stock, being prepared to wallow in animal dung for none other than the young Queen Elizabeth The Second, back in 1954:
“Patricia Noller was at Sydney Girls High School when she performed in “the Wheat Dance” before the Queen and the Duke at Sydney Showground: “It began with us lying on our stomachs in pouring rain and among animal dung. We wore green costumes to show the seed in the ground. Then we all went yellow, to show the ripened wheat.
Noller is now emeritus professor of psychology at the University of Queensland. Her memories are part of A Royal Romance, a National Museum of Australia exhibition from February 26″
Yes, well…
President of the FCQ is Alan Baker… or should I say “Brother Alan Baker” of the Church Of Jesus Christ Of The Latter Day Saints, aka the Mormons. Baker campaigned actively against the recent Patterson Bill (since passed by the federal Parliament) concerning human embryonic cloning. He has also recently (2005) been a guest of Peter Jeffery, the Governor General, for afternoon tea. Baker was also (and may still be) vice-President of the Queensland Right To Life Association and took a strong stance against the legalisation of the abortion drug, RU-486.
So, FCQ is an alliance of the Catholics, Fred Nile’s crazies, anti-feminists, adoption reactionaries, drug war hard liners and dung-wallowing monarchists all presided over by a Mormon brother in good standing. All in all, a pretty reactionary-sounding bunch and definitely not a charity, as admitted by Baker this afternoon on ABC radio.
They are, in fact, a right-wing, multi-denominational political action organization, comprising an unholy alliance of politicised religious pressure groups with a definite reactionary agenda.
Other, genuine charities, are currently under serious threat of having their tax-exemption status reviewed for just such political activities. Perhaps this is why Santoro’s “charity” never bothered with registration. Yet Santo Santoro has claimed he indeed gave the proceeds of his share sale “to charity”. He has clearly misled the Prime Minister and the parliament of Australia. What seemed at first to be a storm in a teacup is turning into a virtual cyclone of political intrigue. Once again the connection between far-right religious groups and the Howard government is under scrutiny, and rightly so.
And the funny thing is, it was all Costello’s idea, under Howard, to re-open this crazy “Ministerial Code Of Conduct” can of worms. Couldn’t happen to a nicer couple of chaps.
So did Santo pay tax on the profits of the share sale? Did he claim a deduction from the “donation” to the FCQ? What’s the “religious” fascination that Howard seems to have for nutbag fringe groups like FCQ?
As they say, there are many more questions to be answered on this grubby matter (forgive me for being undiplomatic, but if Lexy Downer can use the word, “grubby”, who am I to demur?).
************************************************
ELSEWHERE: Tony Abbott, the government’s own one man religious political action committee, is at it again. Apparently he believes the Eumundi Dairy Farm Affair can be milked a little more before he is booed off the stage. In dismissing their importance to the national discourse, Tony feels it necessary to re-list and remind us of the latest “scandals” dug up regarding Kevin Rudd - Eumundi, Burke and Rudd’s attempt to take over the “Religion” franchise from Abbott himself - and then tells us that this isn’t what politics is about at all.
No, no, no, secret meetings with Cardinal George Pell pre the last election are matters of faith, while meeting Burke was a seedy, grubby deal. Politics: it’s about policies, not mudd-slinging. The Mad Monk’s article ends with the memorable line,
“Politicians can’t win holiness contests and shouldn’t try.”
St. Kevin really got under your goat with that religion thing didn’t he? Blow me down! You sly dog! All that breast-beating and your real position was that politics and religion shouldn’t be mixed.
You should know, Tony. Perhaps you should tell Santo Santoro, and then try that idea out on yourself.
*********************************************
LATE “LIGHTBULB” THOUGHT: Something that didn’t occur to me at first was the significance of the makeup of the FCQ.
We know it is not a charity, and never could have been one, due to its political lobbying activities. So, full marks to them for not even trying for registration.
No marks of course to Santo who claimed they were a “charity”. I guess he meant small “c”.
But consider this: several of the organizations that make up the FCQ are charities, with the capital “C”: Salvos, Catholics, Uniting Church, Mormons, etc.
What I’d like to know is this: is the FCQ an organization set up to launder tax deductible charitable donations made to its constituent members. Is the arm between, say, the Archbishop’s residence and FCQ’s lobbying of parliamentarians on “moral matters” long enough to qualify for the term “arm’s length”?
With many other big “C” Charities being leaned on by the Howard government for political activity unbecoming a tax-deductible charity, is the FCQ a way of getting around this?
Posted in Howard govt |
March 13th, 2007 at 10:35 pm
Dunno about this “Wheat Dance” caper.
I prefer the Hops dance myself: While standing, you pour beer down your gullet until you are no longer capable of standing, and fall over.
A celebration of the great cycle of life.
No animal dung required.
March 13th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
I thought he said “worthy non-profit”, not “charity”?
March 13th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
The first thing I thought of was did Santoro claim a tax deduction, then if it was not a charity, did he pay tax on that amount?
There is more to this than meets the eye. Maybe thats why Howard is trying to fob it off, as after all me JoHo accepted his explanation about 12 months after being made a Minister of the Crown, so it must be OK.
After hanging around Bush for so long he believes he too is the “decider”.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:38 am
[...] It seems there is a direct link between the Burke bucket and the Santos affair. Senator Santos is the treasurer of the Queensland Liberal Party (?), and he gave the profits from his shares to a lobby group( via cs at Troppo) . Now it seems it is not just any lobby group, but “a worthy non profit” as noted by fatfingers at The Road to Surfdom. As the plot thickens, the vortex accelerates. “Urgent, urgent, spin control can you hear me?”. [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 2:53 am
Aw I dunno. I would have thought Wheat Dancing would have been a real cultural highlight for those who think aboriginal rock art craps all over junior primary finger painting. No bloody wonder they made her a university professor.
March 14th, 2007 at 7:14 am
Evan I was going to make a serious comment but you derailed me LOL
March 14th, 2007 at 7:37 am
Any more hilarious comments like that Evan and you will be barred.
March 14th, 2007 at 8:07 am
When I heard “charity” I immediately knew it wouldn’t be. You see the government’s behaviour fits a pattern. Corrupt to the core.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:11 am
I see the Monk is at it again in this morning’s SMH, banging-on at Rudd’s supposed character deficiencies: his meeting with the leperous Brian Burke, allegedly making-up stuff about his traumatic childhood etc.
These guys just don’t get it.
No-one gives a toss if he met Burke and there can be little doubt that his childhood was, in fact, a traumatic one.
And as for this attempt to smear Rudd about whether his father died of peritonitis due to injury or medical negligence, gimmie a break.
He was a kid who lost his dad in tragic circumstances.
Anyone who has lost a parent could pretty-well relate to what he’s been through.
This is yet another ill-thought out character attack that is likley to blow-up in their faces, adding another 3 or 4 points to the Labour 2PP figures in the next poll.
I’m tempted to say: Keep at it boys, you’ll get Labour to 70% yet, but frankly, their US-style “Swift-Boat” attacks are making me, and apparently a sizeable portion of the voting public, furious. Such tactics have no place in Aussie politics.
It’s something infectious the Libs have caught from the US Republicans, like their passion for fighting foreign wars.
And as with the US Republicans, it’s going to cost them power.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:16 am
That was a fine piece of content-free bile from Brother Abbott. The Oz Politics blog has some telling stats.
I suppose we should thank young Tony for making it clear that all we can expect from this Government, right up to the election, is more of the same.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:33 am
In the Tony Eastley interview on AM Santoro talks about the profit going to “a very worthwhile organisation”, but not a charity. PM had a statement from the PM saying “he donated the profit to a charity.”
It seems the PM isn’t interested enough, or well enough briefed, to get the detail right.
I wonder how this worthwhile organization uses its cash reserves.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:44 am
Is the FCQ a front organization set up to launder tax-deductible charitable donations originally made to its constituent members?
March 14th, 2007 at 9:53 am
Is the FCQ the 21st century version of the Groups? Have they been set up to infiltrate the Liberal Party the better to ensure reactionary policies?
Or are they the alternative ‘Exclusive Bretheren’? Whatever. This one should be sniffed right down to its lair. There are plenty of Liberal (small ‘l’ varieties) who would be more than interested in stopping this sort of rot. Tony Abbott may well do to the Liberals what was once done to the labour movement. I hope so. Most sincerely.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:12 am
Note The Australian editorial today refered to the FCQ as a “charity”, despite all the contrary information revealed overnight.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:41 am
Actually on a more serious note, the definition of a ‘charity’ is always problematic for income tax purposes. The secularists here have a beef with religions per se and Muslim charity fronts for backhandedly sponsoring Islamists have really upset the religious applecart. Now if we didn’t use income taxes to raise revenue….?
March 14th, 2007 at 11:09 am
Your question about money going from church charities to this political lobby is a good one, AB. People give money to the salvos thinking they’re buying food for the kiddies of the underclass. That’s what the ads say.
Elsewhere, we hear again the mighty war cry of Warrior Pope Benny: Backwards! Backwards my Catholics! Backwards to oblivion!!”
Pretty soon the one and holy apostolic church will just be a small group of weird old misogynists in dresses chanting to each other in Latin.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:27 am
Aww c’mon Sean, Gregorian chant rockz dude.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Trackback. Aussie Bob, the detailed digging you’ve done on this makes it look even worse — which I would scarcely have thought possible.
March 14th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
So “Honest John”, the ATO and the fraud squad will be looking into this in detail?
I thought not.
P.S. I know he is an obscure figure but the Governor-General is Michael Jeffery not Peter.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Not so detailed. Took about an hour.
March 14th, 2007 at 6:42 pm
What interest me is how little impact the huge profit Santoro’s shares made in only 10 months has had. I know biotechs can skyrocket, but 100% profit in such a short time on a chance pick is remarkable, assuming it was only a chance pick, especially considering phase I & II trials of Cbio’s candidate drugs hadn’t concluded when Santoro bought the shares and it takes quite a while before results are known!
March 15th, 2007 at 8:16 am
It wasn’t a chance pick.
March 15th, 2007 at 9:41 am
AB, a question. Some years ago the Mad Monk was caught out lying by Tony Jones on a Lateline programme. Can you or anyone else remember what it was all about? If so now is the time to be reminded about his hypocrisy.
March 15th, 2007 at 10:14 am
Oracle, IIRC, Abbot got caught out lying about meeting with Cardinal Pell, claimed he didn’t when he actually did, but I don’t remember anything more detail than that.
March 16th, 2007 at 12:26 am
[...] Surfdom’s Aussie Bob too has looked into Senator Santoro’s favorite charity, and found it to be ‘an alliance of the Catholics, Fred Nile’s crazies, anti-feminists, adoption reactionaries, drug war hard liners and dung-wallowing monarchists all presided over by a Mormon brother in good standing.’ Bob thinks this stinks. [...]
March 16th, 2007 at 10:43 am
Gee, there’s some rubbish being posted here.
Aussie Bob asks if the FCQ is “a front organization set up to launder tax-deductible charitable donations originally made to its constituent members?”
The FCQ doesn’t even had tax exempt status! (See http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2007/s1870882.htm)
And Aussie Sheila asks “Is the FCQ the 21st century version of the Groups”, and wonders if they’re trying to infiltrate the Libs. The FCQ doesn’t even have any individual members - it’s a council! A council of churches and other organisations.
Can’t you guys discuss the issue without delving into conspiracy theories which have absolutely no basis? You guys are almost the left-wing equivalent of the ‘commies under the bed’ extreme right.
March 18th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Watched Insiders on ABC TV this morning.
Stupid bloody Andrew “nuts” Bolt was STRIDENT in his insistance Santoro’s favoured mob WERE a charity.
So Bolt-brain - how can something be a charity if it is not REGISTERED as a charity?
I’d LOVE to see Bolt and his bovver boys put the boot in if one of Rudds mob said they’d made a donation TO A CHARITY which was demonstrably NOT a charity but a front for some “dispicable” left-learning union or other group.
So much noise and nonsense about a Burke lunch 2 years ago, and Bolt has the GALL to beligerantly defend Santo’s “charity”.