Dear Mr. Sheedy

Chris Sheedy,
Branch Manager, National School Chaplaincy Program,
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations,
50 Marcus Street,
Canberra ACT 2601.

Re: MC11-006409

Dear Mr. Sheedy,

Thank you for you letter dated 21st June 2011 which was made in response to my queries regarding the National School Chaplaincy Program.  While your letter raises a number of points about the program I had not previously considered, I feel your response fails to sufficiently answer the initial questions raised.  For your convenience I shall repeat these original questions below, however I wish to address a number of your points:

In paragraph 2 you state:

“The National School Chaplaincy Program is just one of many initiatives aimed at addressing the wellbeing of Australian school students.”

I understand the combined efforts of the Federal and State Governments amount to a constellation of services, initiatives, and program designed to educate and nurture Australia’s student body.  I would be very surprised if anyone within government or the general citizenship honestly wished to prevent Australian students from receiving the best possible professional care available, which is why many people are seriously concerned about the National School Chaplaincy Program.

According to the Department’s own web site, school communities are to choose the religion and denomination their chaplain shall profess to believe, and “all reasonable efforts to find a suitable [religious] chaplain must be exhausted” before considering alternative workers – which “may include counsellors, youth workers or other secular support staff.”[1]  Glancing at this  approach we might consider it reasonable, however it has a number of serious implications:

1. Minority religious views within the community are unlikely to receive “chaplains” belonging to their religion due to the purely democratic nature of their selection.
2. Minority denominations within a religion are unlikely to receive chaplains who share their particular religious views.
3. Non religious people are actively discriminated against on the basis of their religious views, or more accurately the lack of them.
4. A religious person who professes a belief to the school’s chosen religion and denomination shall be hired in preference to properly qualified professional counsellors, youth workers and other secular support staff.

There are many people who care deeply about the health and wellbeing of Australian students, and would prefer the religious discrimination be removed from the National School Chaplaincy Program to allow properly qualified professionals can be hired to assist children – regardless of their religious views.

You go on to state:

“The vast majority of professional student support services are funded and provided directly by the relevant state or territory education authority.”

While this may be the case, this is not the issue at hand.  Recent events have highlighted concerns regarding state and territory run programs (such as Special Religious Education in Victorian schools), and these shall be dealt with at state level by those concerned.  The issue here is the $220 million the Federal government are spending to promote religious people into schools under the disguise of assisting the “spiritual wellbeing” of Australian students.  The implication behind the program is that non-religious people are unsuitable to assist children, which is both offensive and discriminatory.

“Chaplaincy complements these services by fostering a less structured and formal interaction with many of those students who are experiencing difficulties and seeking or needing advice and successfully linking these students to professional support services.”

According to the published National School Chaplaincy Program guidelines a school chaplain is recognised:

“By the local school, its community and the appropriate governing authority as having the skills and experience to deliver school chaplaincy services to the school and its community; and

Through formal ordination, commissioning, recognised qualifications or endorsement by a recognised or accepted religious institution or a State/Territory government approved chaplaincy service.” [1]

A growing number of people are wondering what skills and abilities formal ordination or an endorsement from a religious institution imposes of people which allow them to “link students to professional support services”?  Surely citizens who do not profess a belief in the supernatural are able to perform these important functions, thus negating the requirement for chaplains to be religious?

Again, at its heart the National School Chaplaincy Program assumes non-religious people do not possess the necessary skills to refer Australian students to professional assistance – and offensive and discriminatory policy instituted by our own Government.

“It is important to note that the participation in the Program at both school and individual level is voluntary…”

The fact the National School Chaplaincy Program is voluntary for both schools and student is irrelevant.  It does not address the underlying discriminatory and divisive policies and assumptions the program is based upon.  One might imagine a program which strived to employ white people over black, or men over women. In such cases I do not believe many would consider the defence the programs were voluntary to be valid, honest, or ethical.

“It should also be noted that the purpose of the Program is to enhance student’s overall wellbeing, not to impose religious belief or persuade an individual toward a particular set of religious beliefs.”

Here we run into one of the inherent contradictions at the centre of the National School Chaplaincy Program.  After the school has consulted with students, parents, teachers and other interest parties to determine the religion and denomination their chaplains shall possess, and every effort to secure a person who professes these beliefs has been made, the program’s guidelines then prevent the chaplain from acting religious in their capacity as school chaplain.  This is a most bizarre situation.

In addition, since there are no minimum qualifications beyond “formal ordination or endorsement by a recognised or accepted religious institution” many chaplains do not hold professional qualifications to “address the wellbeing of Australian school students”.  No wonder Tim Mander, CEO Scripture Union Queensland (the largest provider of school chaplains in the country) has publicly stated:

”Our catchphrase with chaplains is refer, refer, refer, and if in doubt, refer.” [2]

Again, I do not see any peculiar skills religious people might possess which allow them to “refer, refer, refer” that a non-religious person could not possess.  Additionally, many people might consider hiring professionally qualified people in the first instance to be in the best interests of Australian students.

“The program does not preclude counsellors and youth workers from being appointed as chaplains.”

While this is strictly true what you have failed to mention is that the program’s guidelines state counsellors, youth workers or other secular support staff can only be considered once all “exhausted all reasonable avenues to find a suitable [religious] chaplain” have failed.  In this situation an individual’s likelihood of gaining a position as a school chaplain is greatly increased if they profess a belief in accordance with the one chosen by the school concerned.  Once again the inherent discrimination within the system reveals itself.

“Irrespective of the stated aims of their employing agency, Chaplains appointed under this Program are required to sign and observe a Code of Conduct.”

This is true, and a welcome measure to ensure public education within this country remains free and secular.  However, one has to wonder why the requirement for chaplains to be religious exists in the first place when every effort to hire religious people is made, and then they are prevented from acting religious.  Notwithstanding, many employing agencies have explicit statement of belief, aims, and goals which employees are forced to sign as part of their employment conditions.  For example, Scripture Union Queensland’s published Chaplain Profile and Role Statement [3] includes the following:

“In matters of faith development, SU Qld Chaplains have a particular role in supporting and nurturing the faith of students whose families have a Christian affiliation. In doing so, each SU Qld Chaplain will be involved in local Christian churches and the local community informing, teaching, and at times communicating Christian messages with conviction. SU Qld Chaplains will refer students from other faith backgrounds seeking nurture in their faith to appropriate avenues of support as relevant.”

“SU Qld Chaplains exercise all of their duties and all aspects of their roles from within a Christian framework, promoting positive Christian values.”

“Expected to lead public prayer at formal school functions”

“Liaise between the school and local Christian churches (essential)”

“Regular visits to local Christian churches (essential)”

“Communicate with conviction Bible-based Christian messages in local churches.”

“Connect students with local Christian churches with parents’/caregivers’ permission (essential)”

“Publish a regular newsletter for distribution to local Christian churches and Chaplaincy supporters (essential)”

“Facilitate Christian activities on school campuses with voluntary student participation (essential)”

“A demonstrated ability to both apply the teachings of the Bible to real-life situations and communicate its message relevantly to others.”

Such statements are fundamentally at odds with the guidelines of the National School Chaplaincy Program and place the individual in a difficult situation, since both objectives cannot be meet simultaneously.  Such contradictory goals would be avoided if the religious requirement for school chaplains were removed and the system were replaced with a secular program.

As you can see, there seem to be some serious contradictions at the heart of the National School Chaplaincy Program and I again request specific answers to the questions raised in my initial letter, which were as follows:

1) The program seems to violates the spirit of Section 116 of the Australian Constitution, which reads:

“The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.”

The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations own Frequently Asked Questions under the question “What do I need to know about Secular Pastoral Care Workers?” notes:

“For this reason, the Government made the decision to allow the funding already approved for these schools to be used for alternative support workers, if they could not find a chaplain by July 2008. These alternative providers may include counsellors, youth workers or other secular support staff. The offer only applied to those schools that had exhausted all reasonable avenues to find a suitable chaplain.”

The result of this policy heavily biases Chaplaincy positions towards those who profess a religious belief, effectively imposing a religious test for an office of the Commonwealth.

2) On the basis of item 1, a concerned Queensland parent has launched a legal challenge against the National Schools Chaplaincy Program which is due to be heard in the High Court of Australia in August 2011 [5].  The High Court of Australia has accepted the case to be heard, which indicates there case to answer.  The defendants are the Commonwealth of Australia, the Minister for School Education Childhood and Youth, the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, and the Scripture Union Queensland.

3) The National Schools Chaplaincy Program is at odds with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Declaration on Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (1981) (“the Religion Declaration”) which are incorporated into Australian Law through the operation of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986.  The National School Chaplaincy Program effectively discriminates on the grounds of religious belief, thus violating the International Covenant.

4) The National School Chaplaincy guidelines recommend each school community determines the religion and denomination which their school Chaplain shall adhere to.  This process marginalises minority denominations of the chosen religion, minority religions , and completely alienates those who hold beliefs which are not considered religious by the Government.  For example, Raliens are not considered a religion under Australian Tax Law because they do not make supernatural claims (since aliens are natural by definition).  Moreover, those without religious beliefs are effectively frozen out of the Program which constitutes religious discrimination.

7) Within the guidelines of the National Schools Chaplaincy Program, Chaplains are barred from proselytising their religion within school times, or on school premises.  This guideline contradicts the requirement for Chaplains to hold particular religious beliefs in order to obtain a position, and reveals the internal contradictions of the Program.  Serious concerns have also been raised regarding what chaplains are allowed to do outside of school hours or off school grounds.

8) While School Chaplains are directed not to preach, proselytise, or evangelise their faith, there have been many reports of chaplains routinely ignoring these rules, with no perceivable repercussions. This raises serious concerns regarding the oversight and management of the NSCP.

9) Many organisations contracted to deliver School Chaplains have publicly stated Mission Statements which are fundamentally at odds with the rules of the National Schools Chaplaincy Program. For example, the Scripture Union’s Mission Statement [6] says:

“To make God’s Good News known to children, young people and families and to encourage people of all ages to meet God daily through the Bible and prayer so that they may come to personal faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, grow in Christian maturity and become both committed church members and servants of a world in need.”

Another provider (ACCESS Ministries) Mission Statement is:

“ACCESS ministries leads the Church in its mission to reach students and school communities in Victoria and beyond with the transforming love of God and His Son Jesus Christ.”

Concerns have been raised about chaplains ability to simultaneously achieve their employers mission while adhering to the NSCP guidelines.

10) The vast majority of Chaplains are under qualified to deal with the issues they face. The Effectiveness of Chaplaincy Report [7] (commissioned by the National School Chaplaincy Association, who have a vested interest in portraying the scheme in the best possible light) reported 132 Chaplains (of 1,031 chaplains who responded) have diploma qualifications or better, and almost half of those qualifications were in chaplaincy, pastoral care and theology.  Only 2.5% of Chaplains are qualified in counselling or psychology. It would be interesting indeed to know how the other 97.5% of chaplains deal with complex issues.

11) According to The Effectiveness of Chaplaincy [7], despite being unqualified and unable to preach, proselytise, or evangelise their faith, Chaplains were asked to deal with the following issues in the two weeks prior to the survey:

95% of chaplains reported dealing with behaviour management issues, such as anger

92% with bullying and harassment

92% with peer relationships and loneliness

91% with student – family relationship issues

85% with sense of purpose and self-esteem

81% with grief and loss

77% with community involvement and social inclusion

76% with spirituality and ‘big picture’ issues of life

72% with mental health and depression

50% with alcohol and drug use, and

44% with self harm and suicide

12) The program amounts to direct government funding of religion. Taxpayer funds spent on education should employ the best people available to help students, regardless of their religious beliefs.

I look forward to your response.

Yours faithfully,

Andrew Skegg

Footnotes

[1] National School Chaplaincy Frequently Asked Questions.
http://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/NationalSchoolChaplaincyProgram/Pages/nscp_frequently_asked.aspx

[2] Tim Mander, The Age Newspaper, 25 April 2011.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/psychologists-rap-government-over-chaplains-20110424-1dt0t.html

[3] Scripture Union Queensland Chaplain Profile and Role Statement.
http://www.apply.su-chaplain.com/index.php?cmd=information

[4] The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations own Frequently Asked Question page.
http://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/NationalSchoolChaplaincyProgram/Pages/nscp_frequently_asked.aspx#dochaplainshave

[5] Ron William High Court challenge against the National School Chaplaincy Program.
http://www.highcourtchallenge.com/

[6] About the Scripture Union Australia.
http://www.scriptureunion.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47&Itemid=86

[7] Submission by the Rationalist Society of Australia, 23 November 2009.
http://rationalist.com.au/images/stories/To_Gillard_re_Chaplaincy_Program.pdf

Tagged with: letter, NSCP, Sheedy

Tweet