Everyone in politics wants friends with spare money at their disposal. They can do you so much good when an election comes around. But you don't want to get them offside.

The combination of money and friends is now a common campaign theme in two Sydney seats, Bennelong and Wentworth. Bennelong is held by Prime Minister John Howard and Wentworth is represented by Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull.

They are two of those 20 marginal seats that Labor needs to win if Labor leader Kevin Rudd is to triumph. Labor needs a swing of 4.2 per cent to defeat Howard in Bennelong, while Wentworth requires only 2.5 per cent. If the Government manages to hold both of them, Labor will be straining to win enough seats overall.

That's where extra money comes into play. There are few players in politics with cash to splash about at election times. With the exception of the trade union movement, most of those players have made their money in business. As a consequence, the Coalition has come to depend on support rather than opposition from the cashed-up brigade.

But occasionally Labor strikes it lucky. In 1972 and 1983, both Gough Whitlam and Bob Hawke respectively benefited from the support of progressive businessmen dissatisfied with the incumbent Coalition government.

The Exclusive Brethren are friends of Howard and regard him very favourably. The world leader of this small, traditional Christian sect, Bruce Hales, lives in Eastwood and is one of Howard's constituents.

At the last election in 2004, the Exclusive Brethren spent lavishly to support the Government. The Australian Electoral Commission reports that the members of the sect, who eschew voting but have no problem with political lobbying apparently, spent $370,000. That tally puts it above what just about every other non-party group was able to muster.

The group may get involved again, and Howard needs its support in his own electorate. Money seems not to be an issue for it. It has plenty to spare because its 14,000 Australian members include many successful businessmen.

Howard makes no excuses for continuing to meet with Hales and his Exclusive Brethren colleagues, most recently in his Parliament House office early this month. He defends them merely as a legitimate Christian denomination like any other. His senior colleagues, Treasurer Peter Costello and Health Minister Tony Abbott, also enthusiastically defend the right, even the responsibility, of ministers to meet with such groups as a matter of course. Yet other less amenable Christian leaders have faced difficulties in getting such meetings.

Howard blusters about the status of the Exclusive Brethren and tries to fob off Labor's criticism of the group with a vacuous response. This is despite, or perhaps because of, the well-documented record of its enthusiastic, and often shadowy, support for conservative politics in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States. It is not afraid to play dirty politics.

In Wentworth, there is another twist on this theme of friends with money. Turnbull, who is a millionaire himself, has plenty of money for campaigning, and demonstrated this during both his preselection contest with the incumbent Peter King and in the election proper. Yet, so too, apparently does another friend of Howard's, Geoffrey Cousins, a former prime ministerial adviser and presently a Government appointee to the Telstra board. Furthermore, Cousins is threatening to use some of his money against Turnbull because of his objection to the proposed Gunns pulp mill in north-eastern Tasmania.

Cousins placed a full-page anti-Turnbull advertisement in the local free newspaper, and gathered together celebrity friends such as playwright David Williamson and actor Bryan Brown to join him.

Cousins says this is above party politics and, to demonstrate this point, is now also campaigning against the shadow minister for the environment, Peter Garrett, in Kingsford Smith. But this is hardly evidence of even-handedness as Kingsford Smith is a safe Labor seat, held by 8.7 per cent, that Garrett will not lose.

Turnbull's reaction to this development was testy and ill-judged. He accused Cousins of using his money to bully him. Furthermore he questioned his suitability to sit on the Telstra board. That line of invective just won't convince the public when the sitting member is a millionaire many times over and has a reputation for fiery exchanges. Both men have often been described as abrasive.

The pro-pulp mill Labor member for the seat of Lyons, Dick Adams, has also been critical of Cousins. Howard took a remarkably conciliatory stance, given one of his own ministers was being attacked so close to an election. He refused to take sides between, in his words, an excellent minister and an excellent bloke.

The combination of friends with money and close election contests has distorted the judgment of both Howard and Turnbull. They have been thrown off balance in different ways.

Howard's usually good political judgment has deserted him if he has managed to convince himself that the Exclusive Brethren is just another Christian denomination. His judgment is also surprisingly flawed if he chooses not to stand up for one of his own ministers when they are under this sort of pressure.

Turnbull's judgment in this matter will disappoint many of those supporters who, impressed with his personal and professional growth since he entered Parliament in 2004, think he is the best long-term candidate for the Liberal leadership.

Labor needs to win both these seats. One businessman will assist its cause in Wentworth, but in Bennelong another might be just what Howard needs to survive.

John Warhurst is professor of political science in the Faculty of Arts at the Australian National University.

 

Extract:

...

Bless also the Exclusive Brethren, particularly those humble souls who donate hundreds of thousands of blessed dollars into my campaign coffers.

Grant them the fortitude to withstand the federal police investigation into their donations and deliver them from the evils of the media, hell-bent on questioning their beliefs.

Bless their little children, who are not allowed to watch evil television programs such as Play School, or movies such as Bambi. Keep them safe from being schooled with heathen children and bless the taxes from the heathens that support their schools.

Guide their parents wisely, even as they profess to being uninterested in politics, the real world or the stock market, and help them deliver unto me more money to support the work I do on earth in your name.

...

Other people can't just stroll into the Prime Minister's office and chew the fat, as far as we know. But according to Tony McCorkell, spokesman for the Exclusive Brethren, that is just what happened when Howard met leaders of the reclusive sect two weeks ago.

"It was purely a last-minute meet-and-greet type arrangement," McCorkell tells Inquirer.

The Brethren at the meeting included salesman Mark Mackenzie, who is under investigation by the Australian Federal Police for the money he spent in 2004 on election advertising promoting Howard and attacking the Greens. Mackenzie, who reportedly makes a modest living selling and servicing pumps, spent $370,000 on advertising and leaflets, money funnelled through Willmac, a small company incorporated a few weeks before that election.

Mackenzie was there with Bruce Hales, the world leader of the sect, who's known as the Elect Vessel, Hales's brother Stephen and fellow believer Warwick John.

The Elect Vessel lives in a large, lavishly refurbished house in Eastwood, a bit of the Bible belt in Howard's Sydney electorate of Bennelong. But he doesn't vote: Exclusive Brethren are forbidden from voting. That's a comparatively minor prohibition by their standards. They are also prohibited from socialising with people who aren't Brethren (a prohibition regularly used to break up families, according to numerous media reports).

They also used to be forbidden from involving themselves in earthly politics, but as has been reported, they've been leaving footprints all over the political process since Hales took over as Elect Vessel a few years ago. The results have not always been as anticipated. Nor has the furtiveness for which they are now renowned, always helped cover their tracks.

They were caught out in the New Zealand election in 2005, after pouring money into the campaign in the hope of replacing NZ Prime Minister Helen Clark and her Labour Party with the conservative National Party, and then Nationals leader Don Brash.

The Brethren had hired a private detective to follow Clark's husband. Clark accused them of smearing her and her husband. The Nationals lost anyway. Brash quit the leadership, then the party, shortly before the publication last year of a book that exposed his links to the Brethren's dirty campaign.

While that was enough to finish Brash's political career, in Australia the revelations about Howard's meet-and-greet provoked an outbreak of egalitarian fervour. A stampede of Liberal Party politicians hurtled to the nearest microphone to declare they'd not only met the Brethren many times but would be failing in their democratic duty if they hadn't.

Overlooking the fact that he had just pressed the flesh with a bloke being investigated by the feds, Howard stoutly declared that in meeting the Elect Vessel and his pals he was doing what the rest of us pay him to do.

"It's a lawful organisation and as Prime Minister I have met an enormous number of organisations. It's my job."

Treasurer Peter Costello went one better telling radio station 3AW's Neil Mitchell:

"Over the years I have had many meetings with the Exclusive Brethren just as I have with people from other churches. This is no crime. In fact the crime would be if a member of parliament refused to meet somebody on the basis of their religious convictions."

Health Minister Tony Abbott chimed in: "I have no reason to think they are not people of decency and goodwill."

None thought to add that they'd have to be fruit loops not to meet a bunch of constituents busting to spend several hundred thousand bucks to get them re-elected.

Greens leader Bob Brown has been on the Brethren's case since it emerged that the sect secretly bankrolled anti-Greens campaigns on both sides of the Tasman.

There are Exclusive Brethren communities in the central west of NSW. In 2005, when Howard was touring the drought-stricken area, Brown was telephoned by local people, he says.

"They told me the school at Lake Cargelligo waited for Howard for an hour while he met the Exclusive Brethren." Questions about it to the Prime Minister's office go unanswered. Not so questions to the ALP.

Mark Arbib, general secretary of the NSW Labor Party (a post he is quitting to contest a Senate seat), breaks records in his haste to suggest that contact with the group could do political damage.

"It's going to have a huge impact in the Prime Minister's seat," he tells Inquirer.

"The one thing Australians don't like is extremism in any form. And this is definitely a group that holds extremist views."

Labor frontbencher Anthony Albanese has been no slower to avail himself of the opportunity for a flurry of free kicks: "We know that John Howard is under real pressure in the electorate of Bennelong," he tells journalists.

"It would be very interesting to see whether the Exclusive Brethren, as a result of this meeting, are once again engaged in spending tens of thousands of dollars trying to influence voters in the lead-up to that campaign."

But McCorkell is determined to have it understood that nothing of any significance transpired at the meeting and nothing worth talking about was said. No one so much as mentioned the AFP investigation of Mackenzie, McCorkell says.

"There was no discussion regarding Willmac and no discussions of politics at all. The meeting was very uneventful. The meeting was about praying for the Government."

If so, the Brethren leaders spend an inordinate amount of time lining up meetings in the corridors of power. They've even asked for meetings with Labor leader Kevin Rudd.

"They've asked Mr Rudd on several occasions," McCorkell says. "He has made appointments from time to time and cancelled without giving reasons."

This week Rudd made it plain he would sooner find himself in a roomful of strippers than a roomful of Exclusive Brethren.

"I believe this is an extremist cult," he said.

Extract:

The Exclusive Brethren sect gave massive financial and physical help to Howard's Government in the 2004 campaign. Howard does not advertise his occasional meetings with its senior people, but he won't abandon them, either. This election he desperately needs help wherever he can get it.

Yet this quite sinister group, whose clandestine support destroyed one New Zealand conservative party leader last year when it became public, owns and runs schools in all Australian states and is the beneficiary of large lumps of taxpayers' money under the Howard Government's contentious recurrent federal funding regime. The Herald's Michael Bachelard reported last December that funding to Exclusive Bretheren schools totalled $6.6 million last year. One school in Howard's own electorate of Bennelong got $70,000.

After a meeting with Exclusive Bretheren elders in his office last week became public, Howard told reporters this week: "I have met all sorts of people. I am the Prime Minister. The Exclusive Bretheren is a legal, legitimate organisation. I meet them from time to time. As to matters relating to financial support, they're things you should talk to them about, or to the Liberal Party organisation. I don't handle, in a direct sense, any fund-raising matters.

"But I do not deny for a moment that I've met representatives of the Exclusive Bretheren. And why not? They're Australian citizens. It's a lawful organisation. I find it quite astonishing that people think it's odd I meet representatives of a lawful organisation."

No you don't, Prime Minister. This Bretheren mob can be such a nasty bunch, and you know it. Ask New Zealand's Prime Minister, Helen Clark.

Extract from Quotes of the Week:

"I believe this is an extremist cult and sect." - Labor Leader Kevin Rudd, on the Exclusive Brethren religious group.

Extract:

The religion that is Australian football mixes happily enough most of the time with national politics but not so some other sects, one of which looks set to play a pivotal part, on Prime Minister John Howard's doorstop of Bennelong, in this year's election.

"So what?" was the resounding chorus from minister after minister to the revelation that the seriously odd Exclusive Brethren visited Howard at Parliament House during the last sitting fortnight. Any Australian citizen is allowed access to their parliamentarians, including the nation's leaders, they said.

True enough, even if the Brethren's beliefs appear well out of Howard's "mainstream". Not that we know for sure, however, because, as Greens leader Bob Brown points out, Brethren chief, or "Elect Vessel", Bruce Hales has never allowed himself to be interviewed by the media.

The Brethren aims at exerting political influence to the tune of $370,000 and a continuing police investigation at the last election yet it formally encourages adherents, estimated at 40,000, not to vote.

Brown says it is a sect that forbids its children from eating or drinking with other children at school recess. It is also against university study and military service, does not allow members' wives to work and, most harmfully, "maintains that there shall be no connection with any family member who leaves", effectively cutting off many children from grandparents and other close relatives. Do these sound like the "Australian values" that Howard shapes and endorses?

Democrat accountability spokesman Andrew Murray has already found that, when it comes to the Brethren, there is no law against hypocrisy. At a Senate estimates committee hearing in October last year, Murray sought to pin down what action could be taken by the Australian Electoral Commission against the Brethren for proclaiming themselves deliberate non-voters but then heavily financing a targeted election campaign. He suggested that Brethren members who sought to exercise the legal religious-grounds exemption from voting would have made a consciously false statement if they then turned around and worked hard to influence the votes of thousands of others.

Deputy Electoral Commissioner Paul Dacey told him, "There is certainly nothing that prevents anyone of any persuasion to participate in what they might see as an electoral process by a donation to a political party or a third party." Even if they choose not to put their votes where their money is.

Electors can reasonably demand more information about Howard's recent meeting with the Brethren, given the large sums of quickly raised and confusingly sourced campaign contributions and that we are in the shadow of the next election.

Brown says, "The Prime Minister's far too clever to be involved in directly talking about money, but he knows the influence that this sect wields. It converts from the prayers offered in the Prime Minister's office into the advertisements in the newspapers in Bennelong."

Brown has learned at estimates that a Brethren-controlled company made its disclosure of paying for 2004 election ads in January 2005 only a matter of days after Brown wrote to the commission seeking details of who was paying to "Keep Bennelong in safe hands" and declaring "Australia has never had it better".

The most recent estimates hearings into the matter indicate that the police probe into the payment for pro-Howard campaign advertising centres on the speed with which a corporate entity came into being and was able to raise the funds disclosed. It appears a company emerged before the last election, coughed up $370,000 and disappeared.

Is it unreasonable to suggest the recent prime ministerial reception for the Brethren will lead to something similar for the 2007 election?

Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd's calls this week for Howard to explain himself showed Rudd solidly against the "extremist cult". But his words ring a little hollow given Labor's calculated decision only last week to not support a Brown motion for a Senate committee inquiry into the Brethren. Labor Senate leader Chris Evans said such a probe "looks a bit like a witch-hunt", the same word chosen by Government senator John Watson at estimates.

Evans told Parliament last week that the the Senate is "not responsible for investigating allegations into the activities of a particular body", and urged those with allegations of illegality or mistreatment to go to the police.

Meanwhile Labor's star candidate in Bennelong, Maxine McKew, has nothing to say, at this stage, about the potential for the Brethren to turn her opinion-poll lead around.

But Greens' candidate Lindsay Peters notes that the Brethren's power extends well beyond the financial. He is in no doubt who was behind the tearing down of Greens posters from Bennelong front yards, sometimes damaging fences, during the 2004 campaign and who turned up to cast an intimidating shadow at Greens rallies. He is certain of a flow-on effect this year.

The Exclusive Brethren's elect vessel, or world leader, has stepped up his verbal brawl with Kevin Rudd by issuing his first direct comments to the media, rejecting the Opposition Leader's criticisms.

Sydney businessman Bruce Hales, who leads the secretive sect of about 40,000 devotees, hit back at comments by Mr Rudd on Wednesday that the church was "an extremist cult" that "breaks up families".

Mr Hales said those comments were "not factual, they were not informed, and it seems to us they were deliberately intended to put the Brethren in an unfair light for political purposes".

Mr Rudd said through a spokesman that he would "not be intimidated by the Exclusive Brethren" and that he stood by "everything he said, 100 per cent".

The war of words is likely to goad the sect into another expensive campaign for Prime Minister John Howard, whom they consider one of the "Christian men in Government" — and for the Brethren, money is no object.

The dispute started when The Age revealed that Mr Hales, accompanied by three senior Brethren figures, met Mr Howard in Canberra two weeks ago.

Willmac, a company owned by one of the men at the meeting, Mark Mackenzie, paid for $370,000 of pro-Howard advertising in the Prime Minister's seat of Bennelong and elsewhere at the 2004 federal election.

That company is now under investigation by the Australian Federal Police for its electoral activities.

Describing himself as the "church leader", Mr Hales said in his statement that Mr Rudd had "failed to respond without citing any reasons" to a number of requests to meet Brethren leaders.

"If we cannot explain ourselves to him and he will not inform himself properly about what we believe and practise, how can he have a realistic idea of who we are and what we do?" Mr Hales said.

"The Brethren is a recognised church. The church organisation does not participate in politics and members abstain from voting based on their individual conscience.

"Individual members are free to support causes or principles in which they believe," he said.

The Brethren has consistently argued that, despite its members funding conservative election campaigns in Australia, New Zealand, the United States, Canada and Sweden, the church did not involve itself in politics.

Mr Hales also denied the police investigation into Willmac had anything to do with the church, even though it was a company directed and owned by a Brethren man, its advertisements were authorised by Brethren figures and used properties that included church-owned schools.

"We regard these repeated allegations as a very public slur against the church and its members," Mr Hales said.

The church's leader also rejected Mr Rudd's comment that Brethren schools had "real problems with the provision of modern education" because of a general ban on computers.

Mr Hales said the church's schools had "IT facilities and audio-visual equipment" — a point The Age can confirm, having toured a Brethren school in Sydney earlier this year.

"We encourage education and our children have retention in years 11 and 12," Mr Hales said.

But Mr Hales did not respond to all Mr Rudd's other questions, including how much money the church had given the Liberal Party, and what undertakings were given at Mr Howard's meeting with Mr Hales.

Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd has called on Prime Minister John Howard to come clean on his links to the "extremist cult", the Exclusive Brethren, amid claims he is cosying up to the group to help win his seat of Bennelong.

Both Mr Rudd and Greens leader Bob Brown pointed yesterday to the continuing Australian Federal Police investigation into the group after a $370,000 donation to the Coalition at the 2004 election.

Senator Brown called for the probe to be finalised before this year's election, at which he felt certain the "very kooky and socially harmful" Brethren would back Mr Howard again.

He believed the group's support could make the difference in Bennelong, where Labor candidate Maxine McKew leads Mr Howard in the polls.

The group allegedly has 40,000 followers in Australia.

Mr Rudd called on Mr Howard "to level with the Australian public" about his links with the group, led by Bruce Hales, described by Senator Brown as a multimillionaire who lives in Bennelong.

It was revealed yesterday that Mr Howard had met senior leaders of the sect, including "Elect Vessel" Mr Hales, in his office at Parliament House on August 8.

Sydney pump salesman Mark Mackenzie, whose former company Willmac spent $370,000 on pro-Howard advertising at the last election, also reportedly attended the meeting.

Mr Rudd asked yesterday, "How much money has the Exclusive Brethren given the Liberal Party.

"What was the content of his most recent meeting? What undertakings have been given."

Mr Howard has denied he discussed the coming election campaign with Mr Hales at their meeting.

However, Senator Brown said that would be done by other people in the background.

"The Prime Minister's far too clever to be involved in directly talking about money, but he knows the influence that this sect wields," Senator Brown said.

"It converts from the prayers offered in the Prime Minister's office into the advertisements in the newspapers in Bennelong."

Mr Rudd's call came despite Labor not supporting a motion last week from Senator Brown for a Senate committee inquiry into the Exclusive Brethren, which Labor Senate leader Chris Evans said "looks a bit like a witch-hunt".

"We [the Senate] are not responsible for investigating allegations into the activities of a particular body," he told Parliament on August 15, urging individuals with allegations of illegality or mistreatment to take them to the police.

Senator Brown said that Mr Hales had never allowed himself to be interviewed by the media and there was "no logic" in the Brethren's aims of exerting political influence while formally encouraging adherents not to vote.

The group is also against mobile phones, TV, radio and non-business internet use.

"This is a sect which forbids its kids from eating or drinking with other kids," he said.

It was also against university study and military service, did not allow members' wives to work and "maintains that there shall be no connection with any family member who leaves", cutting off many children from their grandparents.

Mr Howard said it was his job to meet "an enormous number of organisations" and that he met with the Brethren "from time to time".

"I find it quite astonishing that people think it odd that I have met with a lawful organisation," he said. "I do not deny for a moment I have met with members of the Exclusive Brethren, and why not? They're Australian citizens."

He was unaware of any donation to the Liberal Party.

"I don't handle, in a direct sense, any fund-raising matters," he said.

Treasurer Peter Costello said there was nothing wrong with meeting the Exclusive Brethren.

"Over the years I have had many meetings with the Exclusive Brethren just as I have with people from other churches. This is no crime."

The separatist conservative Christian movement, the Exclusive Brethren Church, has accused Kevin Rudd of unwarranted and inaccurate slurs against its members.

The Opposition leader said on Wednesday he would not meet the group because its lack of tolerance and antiquated policies, particularly the treatment of children.

Mr Rudd said the Exclusive Brethren were a "dangerous cult" and asked John Howard to reveal the contents of his dealings with the group's leader.

But Church leader Bruce Hales said the group did not live in isolation and insisted the “organisation’’ did not involve itself in politics.

“Our homes are situated amongst the homes of other Australians and in business we employ and deal with the general community,’’ he said in a statement issued by email.

“We encourage education and our children have retention in Years 11 and 12.

“Contrary to what Mr Rudd proclaims, our schools have IT facilities and audio-visual equipment which the students are encouraged to use and the level of curriculum offered provides access to tertiary studies.”

Mr Hales said Mr Rudd’s reference to an Australian Federal Police investigation into political donations was a "very public slur" because the Australian Electoral Commission had recently told a Senate inquiry the original complaint had been examined and would not be pursued by that authority.

Individuals in the Brethren have made large donations to politicians and finance advertising campaigns against left wing political groups, such as the Greens, claiming their policies undermined Christian values.

Mr Rudd was speaking after its was revealed that John Howard met with some of the group including Mark McKenzie, whose pump company Wilmac donated the $270,000 to the Prime Minister’s campaign in Bennelong in 2004.

Greens senator Bob Brown has campaigned against the group, which has been active in Tasmanian elections, proposing motions in the Senate reviewing Government funding for the community’s schools and tax concessions.

Labor voted with the Coalition against Senator Brown’s motion last year.

Health minister Tony Abbott as well as Treasurer Peter Costello have met members of the church. Mr Abbott today accused Mr Rudd of un-Australian behaviour after outlining details of two meetings he had had with the group.

It included an exclusion from workplace laws which he said Labor supported in parliament.

"Look their theology is not my theology, but as far as I am aware, they’re perfectly good citizens, they obey their laws, they pay their taxes, and why is Kevin Rudd discriminating against this particular Christian group" he told Sky News.

"If a politician was refusing to meet with every religious group which didn’t exactly correspond with his own ideas of true religion, you’d start excluding an enormous number of people. For Kevin Rudd to discriminate against these people on the grounds of religion, arguably, he is the person who is being un-Australian."

SYDNEY - The secret meeting of Australian Prime Minister John Howard with an ultra-conservative Christian group shows how desperate he is to win the next election, opposition frontbencher Anthony Albanese says.

The Prime Minister's relationship with the Exclusive Brethren sect was a worry for Australians, Albanese said yesterday.

"It is of a real concern that this sect can say that they can get a meeting with the Prime Minister of Australia on no notice and with no agenda," he told reporters.

"We are particularly concerned to find out whether the election campaign coming up later this year was discussed," he said.

Albanese said the beliefs of the Exclusive Brethren were "anti-Australian and anti-family".

In New Zealand, Labour MPs have attacked National's links with the Brethren, which ran an initially covert $1.2 million campaign attacking Labour and the Greens in the lead-up to the 2005 election.

In Australia, Fairfax newspapers reported yesterday that on August 8 in his parliamentary office, Howard met Mark Mackenzie, a Sydney pump salesman whose former company Willmac funnelled $370,000 into pro-Howard advertising for the 2004 election.

Willmac's spending subsequently triggered an Australian Electoral Commission investigation and a federal police investigation, it said.

Albanese yesterday told reporters the sect had campaigned in the Prime Minister's seat of Bennelong in Sydney and had paid for full-page newspaper ads.

"Exclusive Brethren don't believe in voting but do believe in interfering in election campaigns, and they have a history not only of covert funding and also engaging in personal attacks and smears against non-extreme right-wing conservative candidates," he said.

"Increasingly, [we see] a desperate Prime Minister who is prepared to associate even with sect organisations like Exclusive Brethren in order to hold on to his seat."

They describe themselves as "a Christian fellowship based on the Holy Scriptures", but others call them a sect, and they have meddled in elections in New Zealand and Australia.

So when the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, admitted that he had recently met leaders of the ultra-conservative Exclusive Brethren, his critics smelt something unsavoury. The group, an offshoot of the Plymouth Brethren, with followers in Australia, New Zealand, Britain and the US, enforces a policy of separation, including from other Christians. Children are educated in Brethren-run schools; adults work in Brethren-owned companies. Brethren eat, drink and socialise only with other Brethren. Television, mobile phones and computers are banned.

But although members are also forbidden to vote, the group tries to mould the political landscape. Australian Federal Police are investigating expenditure of A$370,000 (£150,000) on advertisements supporting the Howard government by a company owned by Mark Mackenzie, a senior Breth-ren member, before the last election in 2004.

During the last election in New Zealand, in 2005, the Brethren spent an estimated A$100,000 on pamphlets attacking the social policies of the governing Labour Party and the Greens. The former leader of the conservative National Party, Don Brash, later admitted meeting Brethren leaders during the campaign, and said he knew about the pamphlets.

Last year, the New Zealand Prime Minister, Helen Clark, accused the group of spreading rumours that her husband, Peter Davis, was homosexual. She said they had hired a private investigator to follow Mr Davis. It was later confirmed that the Brethren did recruit a private detective to investigate Labour politicians. Now an election is due in Australia before the end of the year, and polls suggest that Mr Howard's chances of winning a fifth term for his right-wing Liberal-National Party coalition are slim.

But yesterday he defended his meeting two weeks ago with Brethren elders, including Mr Mackenzie, and the group's world leader, or "Elect Vessel", Bruce Hales, in his Sydney electoral office.

"I do not deny for a moment that I have met with members of the Exclusive Brethren, and why not?" Mr Howard said. "They're Australian citizens. It's a lawful organisation." Asked about political funding, he told ABC radio: "As to matters relating to financial support, they're things that you should talk to the Liberal Party organisation about."

A Brethren spokesman told local media that the elders had merely assured the Prime Minister that they were praying for him.

Two other members of the Government, the Treasurer, Peter Costello, and the Health minister, Tony Abbott, said they had also met Brethren members. "I have no reason to think they are not people of decency and goodwill," said Mr Abbott, who is a conservative Roman Catholic.

But the opposition leader, Kevin Rudd, described the Brethren as "an extremist cult and sect... [that] breaks up families". The group has also been accused of trying to cover up sexual abuse by a Brethren elder.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard was capable of knowing if anything untoward was going on with the religious sect, the Exclusive Brethren, whose leader he met, Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews said.

Mr Howard earlier this month, met with Bruce Hales, the "Elect Vessel" of the Exclusive Brethren, and with other leading members of the reclusive sect.

Australian Federal Police are investigating the expenditure before the 2004 election of $A370,000 ($NZ431,637) on pro-Liberal and anti-Greens advertising by Willmac Enterprises, a company with links to the Exclusive Brethren.

The Brethren has been accused of running a smear campaign against New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark and hiring a private detective to investigate leading members of the New Zealand Labour Party.

"It's democratic right of anybody in Australia to lobby their politicians," Mr Andrews told ABC TV.

"It doesn't mean we believe or don't believe what any of them say but one of the beauties of democracy in this country is that anybody can lobby their politicians about whatever matter they think is important.

"I've known the prime minister for a long time. I find him a very serious man, one whose got the national interest at heart, and I'm sure if there was anything untoward the prime minister would know about it."

Asked if he would accept funds from the Exclusive Brethren, who do not believe in voting, for his own election campaign, Mr Andrews replied:

"I hope I have sufficient funds for my electoral cause.

"People have all sorts of styles. That's what makes up the rich tapestry of what Australia is."

Prime Minister John Howard has distanced himself from the Exclusive Brethren's financial donations to the Liberal Party - even though one of the sect elders he chatted to two weeks ago made a direct contribution to his local campaign in 2004.

Electoral returns show Stephen Hales, the brother of the sect's world leader, "Elect Vessel" Bruce D. Hales, contributed $3000 to the Liberals' Bennelong federal electorate council on September 29, 2004, through his company, All Pumps Sales and Service.

The donation, made a fortnight before Mr Howard's victory over Mark Latham, was just one of five made to the Bennelong FEC in 2004-05.

The Age revealed yesterday that Mr Howard held an private meeting two weeks ago with Bruce and Stephen Hales and another Brethren leader, Mark Mackenzie, who is under police investigation for his massive contributions to the Liberal Party campaign in 2004.

But Mr Howard yesterday dodged any discussion about the sect's donations, saying he did not handle them "in a direct sense". "Any fund-raising matters related to the Liberal Party, they're handled by the organisation," he said.

Liberal federal director Brian Loughnane did not return calls from The Age.

Mr Howard defended the meetings he has had with the sect "from time to time".

"They're Australian citizens and it's a lawful organisation and as Prime Minister I have met an enormous number of organisations," he said. "It's my job and I find it quite astonishing that people think it's odd."

Treasurer Peter Costello and Health Minister Tony Abbott also defended the sect, both saying they had met the Brethren and would again.

But Labor leader Kevin Rudd made his strongest comments yet, saying the Brethren was "an extremist cult" that "breaks up families". "I also believe that there are real problems with the provision of modern education for kids under their system."

He has refused to meet Brethren representatives on a number of occasions, and called on Mr Howard to "level with the Australian public".

"How much money has the Exclusive Brethren given the Liberal Party?" he asked.

"What was the content of his (Mr Howard's) most recent meeting with the Elect Vessel . . . and what undertakings have been given?"

Mr Rudd's comments prompted an angry response from the Brethren, which said through a spokesman that Mr Rudd "doesn't understand their values or actions and would benefit from a meeting with members".

At the last election, the sect funded a massive print advertising campaign across the country advocating a Liberal vote.

In Tasmania, Liberal state director Damien Mantach has admitted discussing strategies with the Brethren about "how you might target" the Greens.

An electoral return by the Ballarat Courier shows advertisements paid for and authorised by a Brethren company were listed as being Liberal Party ads for candidate John Howard.

In 2004, Mr Mackenzie funnelled $370,000 through his company, Willmac, towards pro-Howard advertising.

The amount, the fifth-highest "third party" donation by any group in that campaign, came even though the Willmac company was set up only weeks before the election.

However, the Brethren have always maintained that the money was made from legitimate business activities, and there was no organised church donation through the company that needed to be disclosed.

That claim is now under investigation by the Australian Federal Police.

Kevin Rudd considers the Exclusive Brethren an "extremist cult" that breaks up families and is bad for Australia.

He has rejected its requests in the past for a meeting and said yesterday he had no intention of changing that policy.

John Howard considers the secretive religious sect a "legal legitimate organisation" and said there was nothing untoward about meeting them.

Peter Costello, who has also met the Brethren on occasions, agrees. "This is no crime. In fact the crime would be if a Member of Parliament refused to meet someone on the basis of their religious convictions."

Labor and the Government had daggers drawn over the Exclusive Brethren yesterday after it emerged Mr Howard met a delegation of its leaders in his Parliament House office two weeks ago.

The Brethren bans its members from voting, forbids its women from going to university and does not allow the use of computers.

It contributed $370,000 to help Mr Howard get re-elected in Bennelong at the 2004 election.

At the August 8 meeting was Mark McKenzie, a Sydney pump salesman, whose former company Willmac funded the pro-Howard advertising. This spending was referred by the Australian Electoral Commission to the Federal Police, which is still investigating.

Others present included the sect's "Elect Vessel", Bruce Hales, his brother Stephen and elder Warwick John.

Labor frontbencher Anthony Albanese said the meeting was highly suspicious. "Exclusive Brethren don't believe in voting but do believe in interfering in election campaigns, and they have a history not only of covert funding and also engaging in personal attacks and smears against non-extreme right-wing conservative candidates," he said.

"Increasingly, [we see] a desperate Prime Minister who is prepared to associate even with sect organisations like Exclusive Brethren in order to hold onto his seat."

Mr Howard said funding was a matter between the Liberal Party and the Brethren but there was nothing wrong with him meeting them.

 

The secretive Exclusive Brethren religious group has allowed a TV crew into its compound for the first time, in a bid to curb its reputation as a politically motivated cult.

The group opened its doors to a crew from A Current Affair on Monday, after they turned up unannounced to the Brethren's annual global meeting in Perth.

Meanwhile Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd has slammed the religious group as an "extremist cult" that breaks up families.

The exclusive interview comes after the Prime Minister's office admitted meeting senior leaders of the Exclusive Brethren a fortnight ago.

One of those present at the August 8 meeting was Mark Mackenzie, a Sydney salesman who is being investigated by police over a $370,000 cash spend on John Howard's 2004 election advertising.

However, James Hale — cousin of the sect's elusive leader Bruce Hale — denied the Brethren had any financial ties to the PM.

"We believe in praying — praying fervently for good government," Mr Hale told ACA. "We don't back anyone, the church backs no-one."

When asked if the sect was bent towards conservative interests, Mr Hale admitted, "We're conservative, but Labor likes to paint themselves as conservative these days too."

The meeting between the PM and senior Brethren leaders has raised questions over whether the sect is supporting Mr Howard's bid to retain his seat of Bennelong. They are allegations both the government and the Brethren deny.

Earlier this year, government whistle-blower Andrew Wilkie claimed he felt the full force of the Brethren when he stood against the Prime Minister at the last election.

"Clearly a large amount of money was going into political campaigning which, at the end of the day, was supporting John Howard, if only indirectly," Wilkie told ACA.

Mr Hales said the group allowed the ACA crew into their compound in order to help improve public perceptions. "We just think that the bad press out there is unwarranted, we're good people," he said.

Federal Labor leader Kevin Rudd has labelled the Exclusive Brethren as an extremist cult.

He also called on Prime Minister John Howard to reveal what was discussed when he met its senior members recently.

Mr Rudd said he had real concerns about the impact of the Brethren on Australian communities and, unlike Mr Howard, he refused to meet with its members.

"I believe this is an extremist cult and sect," Mr Rudd told reporters in Adelaide.

"I also believe that it breaks up families, I also believe that there are real problems with the provision of modern education to kids under their system where they, for example, are not given full range of access to information technology."

Mr Rudd's comment followed a report that Mr Howard had met senior members of the sect, including a man under federal police scrutiny for his spending on the prime minister's 2004 election campaign.

Mr Howard said there was nothing wrong with him meeting with members of community groups, including the Exclusive Brethren, but deflected questions about whether the sect was providing election funding for the Liberal Party.

Mr Rudd said Mr Howard should detail the content of his most recent meeting with the Exclusive Brethren.

"Mr Howard has a responsibility to level with the Australian public," he said.

"How much money has the Exclusive Brethren given the Liberal Party, what was the content of his most recent meeting with the ... so-called supreme leader of the Exclusive Brethren and what undertakings have been given.

"Remember, the exclusive Brethren are currently under investigation of the Australian Federal Police concerning previous election activities.

"The Australian public deserves some answers on all of this, Mr Howard needs to be fair dinkum with the Australian community rather than pretending 'they are some other group'.

"They are not. They split families and I am deeply concerned about their impact on communities across Australia."

Prime Minister John Howard said today he was astonished that people thought it odd for him to meet members of the Exclusive Brethren religious sect.

It was reported today that Mr Howard had met senior members of the sect, including a man under police scrutiny for his spending on Mr Howards's 2004 election campaign, in his parliamentary office two weeks ago.

"As prime minister, I have met an enormous number of organisations. It's my job," Mr Howard said today.

"I find it quite astonishing that people think it odd that I have met with a lawful organisation. I do not deny for a moment I have met with members of the Exclusive Brethren, and why not? They're Australian citizens, it's a lawful organisation."

Mr Howard said he did not know whether the Brethren had made any donations to the Liberal Party.

"As for matters of financial support you should talk to them," he said.

Among those Mr Howard met in his electorate office was reportedly Mark Mackenzie, a Sydney pump salesman whose company, Willmac, allegedly channelled $270,000 into advertising for the 2004 election in support of Mr Howard.

The Australian Electoral Commission later investigated the Willmac money, while an Australian Federal Police investigation is continuing.

Treasurer Peter Costello today also admitted meeting the Exclusive Brethren many times.

"There's nothing wrong with meeting the Exclusive Brethren, they're Australian citizens just like anybody else," he said on Southern Cross radio.

The sect's world leader, Bruce D. Hales, his brother Stephen and another elder, Warwick John, also attended the August 8 meeting with the Prime Minister, a sect spokesman told Fairfax.

The spokesman denied the group asked for Mr Howard's help on the police probe or offered the PM assistance in his battle to retain his Sydney seat, Bennelong, against star Labor candidate Maxine McKew.

The spokesman said the elders assured Mr Howard they were praying for him, and that Willmac and Bennelong were not discussed.

Stephen Hales ran the Brethren's pro-Howard campaign in Bennelong in 2004, the report said.

Opposition frontbencher Anthony Albanese said Mr Howard's relationship with the Exclusive Brethren sect was a worry.

"It is of a real concern that this sect can say that they can get a meeting with the Prime Minister of Australia on no notice and with no agenda," he said.

Mr Albanese said the Exclusive Brethren were out of touch with mainstream Australian family values.

Their beliefs were "anti-Australian and anti-family."

"Exclusive Brethren don't believe in voting but do believe in interfering in election campaigns, and they have a history not only of covert funding and also engaging in personal attacks and smears against non-extreme right-wing conservative candidates," he said.

"Increasingly, (we see) a desperate prime minister who is prepared to associate even with sect organisations like Exclusive Brethren in order to hold onto his seat."

It is not the first time the Exclusive Brethren have been linked to national politics.

A private detective in New Zealand claimed last year that he was hired by the Exclusive Brethren to dig dirt on Labour MPs including Prime Minister Helen Clark, and her husband.

Miss Clark said at the time that she had been told the Exclusive Brethren religious sect had hired a private detective to follow the couple.

"The Brethren stand condemned for this activity and frankly if the (Opposition) National Party does not now renounce any support either now or in the future from the Brethren then its credibility goes down the gurgler with them," she said.

Opposition leader Kevin Rudd has called the Exclusive Brethren a "dangerous cult" and asked the Prime Minister to reveal the contents of his dealings with the group's leader.

The secretive conservative Christian group Exclusive Bretheren were an “extremist cult’’ and politicians should avoid meeting them. Kevin Rudd said yesterday.

Mr Rudd said he was on the record as saying he would not meet with members of the group, adding that he had rejected approaches from the Exclusive Brethren at Parliament House in Canberra and in his Brisbane electorate of Griffith.

"I believe this is an extremist cult and sect,'' Mr Rudd said.

"I also believe that it breaks up families, I also believe that there are real problems with the provision of modern education to kids under their system where they, for example, are not given full range of access to the full range of information technology systems.''

Mr Rudd was speaking after its was revealed that John Howard met with the leaders of the group, Mark McKenzie, despite an ungoing Australian Federal Police investigation into donations by his pump company Willmac.

Wilmac spent $270,000 campaign for Mr Howard in 2004.

Treasurer Peter Costello has also met with the group.

Mr Rudd challenged the Prime Minister to “level’’ with the public about the extent of the Liberal Party’s involvement with the Exclusive Brethren.

“I think Mr Howard has a responsibility to level with the Australian public how much money has the Exclusive Brethren given to the Liberal Party, what was the content of his most recent meeting with the elected vessel, the so-called supreme leader of the Exclusive Brethren, and what undertakings have been given (to the group)?’’ he said.

“… Could I just say that the Australian public deserves some answers, on all of these things Mr Howard needs to be fair dinkum with the Australian community rather than just pretending they are just 'some other group’. They are not. They split families and I am deeply concerned about their impact on communities across Australia.’’

Greens senator Bob Brown has campaigned against the group, which has been active in Tasmanian elections, proposing motions in the Senate reviewing Government funding for the community’s schools and tax concessions.

Labor voted with the Coalition against Senator Brown’s motion last year.

Mr Howard said there is nothing wrong with him meeting with members of community groups, including the Exclusive Brethren religious sect.

But Mr Howard deflected questions about whether the sect was providing election funding for the Liberal Party.

Mr Howard said today it was his job as prime minister to meet with all sorts of organisations.

"As prime minister, I have met an enormous number of organisations. It's my job," he told reporters in Sydney.

"I find it quite astonishing that people think it odd that I have met with a lawful organisation.

"I do not deny for a moment I have met with members of the Exclusive Brethren, and why not? They're Australian citizens, it's a lawful organisation."

Mr Howard professed ignorance over whether the Brethren had made any kind of donation to the Liberal Party.

"As for matters of financial support you should talk to them," he said.

"These are things you should talk to the Liberal Party organisation about; I don't handle, in a direct sense, any fundraising matters."

Mr Costello downplayed the significance of his meetings.

"There's nothing wrong with meeting the Exclusive Brethren, they're Australian citizens just like anybody else,'' he told Southern Cross Broadcasting.

"Over the years, I've had many meetings with the Exclusive Brethren, just as I have with people from other churches.

"This is no crime. In fact, the crime would be if a member of parliament refused to meet with somebody on the basis of their religious convictions.

"I don't know why the newspapers get so worked up about it. These are people who are constituents, Australian citizens, they follow their own religious beliefs and they've got every right to do so.

Federal Labor leader Kevin Rudd has labelled the Exclusive Brethren an extremist cult and called on Prime Minister John Howard to reveal what was discussed when he met its senior members recently.

Mr Rudd said he had real concerns about the impact of the Brethren on Australian communities and refused to meet its members.

"I believe this is an extremist cult and sect," Mr Rudd said.

"I also believe that it breaks up families, I also believe that there are real problems with the provision of modern education to kids under their system where they, for example, are not given full range of access to information technology."

Mr Rudd's comment followed a report today that Mr Howard had met senior members of the sect, including a man under federal police scrutiny for his spending on the Prime Minister's 2004 election campaign.

Mr Howard said today there was nothing wrong with him meeting with members of community groups, including the Exclusive Brethren, but deflected questions about whether the sect was providing election funding for the Liberal Party.

Mr Rudd said Mr Howard should detail the content of his most recent meeting with the Exclusive Brethren.

"Mr Howard has a responsibility to level with the Australian public," he said.

"How much money has the Exclusive Brethren given the Liberal Party, what was the content of his most recent meeting with the ... so-called supreme leader of the Exclusive Brethren and what undertakings have been given.

"Remember, the exclusive Brethren are currently under investigation of the Australian Federal Police concerning previous election activities.

"The Australian public deserves some answers on all of this, Mr Howard needs to be fair dinkum with the Australian community rather than pretending `they are some other group'.

"They are not. They split families and I am deeply concerned about their impact on communities across Australia."

Mr Howard said ealier today he was astonished that people thought it odd for him to meet members of the Exclusive Brethren.

"As prime minister, I have met an enormous number of organisations. It's my job," Mr Howard said.

"I find it quite astonishing that people think it odd that I have met with a lawful organisation. I do not deny for a moment I have met with members of the Exclusive Brethren, and why not? They're Australian citizens, it's a lawful organisation."

Mr Howard said he did not know whether the Brethren had made any donations to the Liberal Party.

"As for matters of financial support you should talk to them," he said.

Among those Mr Howard met in his electorate office was reportedly Mark Mackenzie, a Sydney pump salesman whose company, Willmac, allegedly channelled $270,000 into advertising for the 2004 election in support of Mr Howard.

The Australian Electoral Commission later investigated the Willmac money, while an Australian Federal Police investigation is continuing.

Treasurer Peter Costello today also admitted meeting the Exclusive Brethren many times.

"There's nothing wrong with meeting the Exclusive Brethren, they're Australian citizens just like anybody else," he said on Southern Cross radio.

Health Minister Tony Abbott also said he has met with members of the Exclusive Brethren sect and may do so again.

Mr Abbott today said he had met with members of the ultra-conservative Christian group, although not recently.

"I certainly don't believe I have had any recent meetings but, look, I will meet them again if I get the chance," he said.

Mr Abbott said he had no problem with his colleagues meeting members of the Exclusive Brethren.

"They are Australians, they are citizens," he said of the sect members.

The sect's world leader, Bruce D. Hales, his brother Stephen and another elder, Warwick John, also attended the August 8 meeting with the Prime Minister, a sect spokesman told Fairfax.

The spokesman denied the group asked for Mr Howard's help on the police probe or offered the PM assistance in his battle to retain his Sydney seat, Bennelong, against star Labor candidate Maxine McKew.

The spokesman said the elders assured Mr Howard they were praying for him, and that Willmac and Bennelong were not discussed.

Stephen Hales ran the Brethren's pro-Howard campaign in Bennelong in 2004, the report said.

A private detective in New Zealand claimed last year that he was hired by the Exclusive Brethren to dig dirt on Labour MPs including Prime Minister Helen Clark, and her husband.

Miss Clark said at the time that she had been told the Exclusive Brethren religious sect had hired a private detective to follow the couple.

"The Brethren stand condemned for this activity and frankly if the (Opposition) National Party does not now renounce any support either now or in the future from the Brethren then its credibility goes down the gurgler with them," she said.

Federal Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd has branded the Exclusive Brethren Christian sect a cult and criticised Prime Minister John Howard for meeting with the group's world leader.

Earlier this month, Mr Howard met with Bruce Hales, the "Elect Vessel" of the Exclusive Brethren, and with other leading members of the reclusive sect.

Australian Federal Police (AFP) are investigating the expenditure before the 2004 election of $370,000 on pro-Liberal and anti-Greens advertising by Willmac Enterprises, a company with links to the Exclusive Brethren.

The Brethren has been accused of running a smear campaign against New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark and hiring a private detective to investigate leading members of the New Zealand Labour Party.

Sect members are prohibited from voting, attending university, having TVs, radios, personal computers or mobile phones or contact with family members who leave the church.

Mr Rudd today said he had real concerns about the impact of the Brethren on Australian communities and, unlike Mr Howard, he refused to meet with its members.

"I believe this is an extremist cult and sect," he told reporters.

"I also believe that it breaks up families, I also believe that there are real problems with the provision of modern education to kids under their system where they, for example, are not given full range of access to information technology."

Mr Howard said he had done nothing wrong by meeting with representatives of the Exclusive Brethren.

"They're Australian citizens, its a lawful organisation and as prime minister I have met an enormous number of organisations," he told reporters.

"It's my job and I find it quite astonishing that people think its odd I have met representatives of a lawful organisation."

Mr Rudd said Mr Howard should reveal how much money the Brethren had donated to the Liberal Party and what undertakings had been given at the meeting with Mr Howard.

Exclusive Brethren spokesman Tony McCorkell said the delegation had not discussed anything political with Mr Howard at the meeting.

He said they had told Mr Howard they would pray for him and discussed the economy.

Mr McCorkell rejected Mr Rudd's claim the group was a cult.

"They are a Christian denomination which believes broadly the same as most other Christian denominations," he said.

Mr McCorkell said some Exclusive Brethren members had become politically active during the last election campaign because they had been concerned about then Labor leader Mark Latham's policies on private school funding.

He said he did not think members would be as involved in political campaigns at the upcoming election.

"Obviously, I don't speak on behalf of every member of the Brethren because they're free to do what they wish, but as a general rule I don't think you'd see what you saw last time," Mr McCorkell said.

Health Minister Tony Abbott said Mr Rudd was playing political games by refusing to meet with the Brethren.

"I don't see why he should ostracise them," Mr Abbott told AAP.

"They're perfectly good citizens.

"He's playing favourites among religious groups. Their theology is not my theology but they live perfectly respectable lives, they pay their taxes, they obey the law of the land.

"I don't know why Kevin Rudd has allowed himself to be spooked by them."

PRIME Minister John Howard has met privately with senior members of the Exclusive Brethren religious sect, including a man under police scrutiny for his spending on Mr Howard's 2004 election campaign.

Fairfax today reported that two weeks ago in his parliamentary office, Mr Howard met Mark Mackenzie, a Sydney pump salesman whose company, Willmac, channelled $270,000 into advertising for the 2004 election that supported Mr Howard.

The Australian Electoral Commission later investigated the Willmac money, while an Australian Federal Police investigation is continuing, the report said.

The sect's world leader, Bruce D. Hales, Hales' brother Stephen and another elder, Warwick John, also attended the August 8 meeting, a sect spokesman told Fairfax.

But the spokesman denied the group asked for Mr Howard's help on the police probe or offered the PM assistance in his battle to retain his Sydney seat, Bennelong, against star Labor candidate Maxine McKew.

The spokesman said the elders assured Mr Howard they were praying for him, and that Willmac and Bennelong were not discussed.

Stephen Hales ran the Brethren's pro-Howard campaign in Bennelong in 2004, the report said.

He authorised some of the group's controversial print ads, using the address of the Brethren school, and helped find Brethren members to campaign for Mr Howard.

A Greens campaigner in Bennelong, Matthew Henderson, told Fairfax he knew members of the sect were working on Mr Howard's campaign.

Greens senator Bob Brown said Mr Howard should reveal the nature of the August 8 talks and his relationship with the Exclusive Brethren

The Prime Minister has met in private the most senior leaders of the Exclusive Brethren, including a man who is being investigated by police over his huge spending on Mr Howard's election campaign in 2004.

In his parliamentary office two weeks ago Mr Howard met Mark Mackenzie, a Sydney pump salesman whose former company Willmac funnelled $370,000 into pro-Howard advertising at the last election. Willmac's spending was subsequently investigated by the Australian Electoral Commission and then referred to the Australian Federal Police for a criminal investigation, which is continuing.

Also at the August 8 meeting were the secretive sect's world leader, or "Elect Vessel", Bruce Hales, his brother Stephen, and elder Warwick John. A Brethren spokesman confirmed yesterday that the meeting with Mr Howard had taken place, but denied they had asked for Mr Howard's help on the police investigation, or offered support for his campaign in Bennelong.

Mr Howard's office said he had met members of the Brethren, as he did with a wide range of groups. The Brethren spokesman said: "There was absolutely no dialogue concerning Willmac, just as there was no discussion about … Bennelong.

"The members of the church primarily assured Prime Minister Howard that they were praying for him, as the leader of the Government, and then went on to discuss the economy.

"This was a last-minute opportunity that presented itself. There was no agenda or pre-arranged discussion topics."

A Greens campaigner in Bennelong, Matthew Henderson, said the sect was already working on Mr Howard's campaign. At the Prime Minister's recent walk-through at the Eastwood Plaza shopping centre in his electorate, "there were a bunch of people I went to school with, and who I recognise as Brethren, and they appeared to be more than familiar with the Liberal Party supporters' group".

Prime Minister John Howard has met privately with senior members of the Exclusive Brethren religious sect, including a man under police scrutiny for his spending on Mr Howard's 2004 election campaign.

Fairfax today reported that two weeks ago in his parliamentary office, Mr Howard met Mark Mackenzie, a Sydney pump salesman whose company, Willmac, channelled $270,000 into advertising for the 2004 election that supported Mr Howard.

The Australian Electoral Commission later investigated the Willmac money, while an Australian Federal Police investigation is continuing, the report said.

The sect's world leader, Bruce D. Hales, Hales' brother Stephen and another elder, Warwick John, also attended the August 8 meeting, a sect spokesman told Fairfax.

But the spokesman denied the group asked for Mr Howard's help on the police probe or offered the PM assistance in his battle to retain his Sydney seat, Bennelong, against star Labor candidate Maxine McKew.

The spokesman said the elders assured Mr Howard they were praying for him, and that Willmac and Bennelong were not discussed.

Stephen Hales ran the Brethren's pro-Howard campaign in Bennelong in 2004, the report said.

He authorised some of the group's controversial print ads, using the address of the Brethren school, and helped find Brethren members to campaign for Mr Howard.

A Greens campaigner in Bennelong, Matthew Henderson, told Fairfax he knew members of the sect were working on Mr Howard's campaign.

Greens senator Bob Brown said Mr Howard should reveal the nature of the August 8 talks and his relationship with the Exclusive Brethren.

John Howard has held a private meeting with the most senior leaders of the Exclusive Brethren, including a man under investigation by police over his massive spending on the Prime Minister's 2004 election campaign.

In his parliamentary office two weeks ago, Mr Howard met Sydney pump salesman Mark Mackenzie, whose former company, Willmac, funnelled $370,000 into pro-Howard advertising at the last election.

Willmac's spending was later investigated by the Australian Electoral Commission's disclosure arm, and then referred to the Australian Federal Police for a criminal investigation, which is continuing.

Also at the August 8 meeting were the secretive sect's world leader, or "Elect Vessel", Bruce D. Hales, his brother Stephen and elder Warwick John.

A Brethren spokesman confirmed to The Age yesterday that the meeting had taken place, but emphatically denied they had asked for Mr Howard's help on the police investigation or offered him support for his campaign against Maxine McKew in Bennelong.

Mr Howard's office said only that he had met members of the Brethren, as he did with a "wide range of groups", and would "continue to do so".

The Brethren spokesman said the elders had "assured the Prime Minister that they were praying for him".

"There was absolutely no dialogue concerning Willmac, just as there was no discussion about … Bennelong," he said.

"The members of the church primarily assured Prime Minister Howard that they were praying for him, as the leader of the Government, and then went on to discuss the economy.

"This was a last-minute opportunity that presented itself. There was no agenda or pre-arranged discussion topics, simply an opportunity to greet Prime Minister Howard.

"These mysterious campaign plans being suggested are wild speculation and the reality is they aren't there."

The spokesman also said that the Brethren's private schools, which benefit from millions of dollars of federal funding, were not discussed, nor was the Government's policy to exclude unions from Brethren workplaces.

The spokesman added that, in the context of Mr Howard and Kevin Rudd addressing Christians across Australia the following day, "the particular meeting with the Brethren church group seems very unremarkable".

The Age believes the Brethren are likely to be substantial donors to the Liberal Party in the lead-up to this year's election, and that some donations will help fund the Bennelong campaign.

Stephen Hales ran the Brethren's pro-Howard drive in Bennelong at the last election, authorising a number of the group's controversial print advertisements using the address of the Brethren school and helping find Brethren members to campaign for Mr Howard.

One Greens campaigner in Bennelong, Matthew Henderson, told The Age the sect was already working on Mr Howard's campaign. At the Prime Minister's recent walk-through at the Eastwood Plaza shopping centre in his electorate, "there were a bunch of people I went to school with … I recognise them as Brethren — and they appeared to be more than familiar with the Liberal Party supporters' group".

Greens senator Bob Brown said yesterday that Mr Howard should reveal the "full nature of not just these discussions but his whole ongoing relationship with the murkily mysterious Mr Hales and the Exclusive Brethren".

"I am concerned that the Prime Minister should be so guileless and desperate that the access to potential money from this cashed-up sect should be so important him," he said.

Speech Presented by Dads on the Air
To the Lone Fathers Conference
Commonwealth Parliament House
Canberra, Australia
9 August 2007


Have Howard's family law and child support reforms been a success?

As the media outlet which has followed these issues closer than anyone else in the country, Dads On The Air is very sad to report: the answer is a resounding no. Absolutely not.

To understand why an air of decay and deceit has adhered to a dying Howard government, you need look no further than the Howard government's treatment of separated dads and their families.

It is a case study of how this government has dealt with social issues, with the electorate; and yes, with their once staunch supporters.

And why they are now on the nose from coast to coast.

By flirting with the separated father vote and then discarding it, by holding in front of grieving and distressed men who have had their children arbitrarily ripped off them the possibility that they could get to see their kids again, by promising and promoting family law reform and then failing to deliver, John Howard and his government have committed emotional abuse on a massive scale.

Flirting with the separated dad vote - and don't forget this includes aunts, uncles, grandmothers, grandfathers and second wives - was one of the worst things the Howard government has ever done.

Despite all the evidence from both Australian and international sources justifying the desperately overdue need for reform of family law and child support and the introduction of equal and shared parenting as the most sensible solution to the morass Howard failed to act; instead he blinded people with smoke and mirrors.

Instead of listening to the people, to the massive support for joint custody aka shared parenting as the norm post divorce, instead of listening to the massive support in the media for ending the rotten debacle of family law and remedying the massive harm being done to this country's children, the Howard government chose instead to listen to the elite opinion of the so-called experts. He blew an historic opportunity to fix this problem once and for all.

Elite so-called "liberal" opinion in this country, including the mandarins responsible for the Family Court and the Child Support Agency, have long regarded the father as an unnecessary element in the modern family.

The Family Court's maladministration, its arbitrary judgements and overwhelming ideological bias against fathers, had become a major embarrassment to the Howard government. It is regarded with contempt by lawyers in all other jurisdictions. But instead of fixing the outrageous conduct of this lunar left the court, Howard has wasted hundreds of millions of dollars setting up so-called Relationship Centres. They will operate under the same draconian secrecy laws that protect the Family Court from proper journalistic exposure and will perpetuate the same anti-father bias and the same discrimination as the Family Court itself.

No father can expect to be treated fairly in these Relationship Centres. Those tendering for the running of these centres, including Relationships Australia, have all put in submissions opposing shared parenting; and have therefore declared their bias up front.

Predictably these centres have instantly turned into yet another bureaucratic layer that separated parents have to negotiate.

Just the other day a story came to DOTA of a father, recently separated and desperate to see his kids, who couldn't get any sense out of his local centre whatsoever.

Privacy legislation, he was told, forbade them from telling him whether or not his ex-wife had agreed to his request for mediation. Meanwhile, the "status quo", used to such devastating effect by lawyers against fathers, was settling in. As the days turned into weeks and the relationship centre continued to refuse to tell him whether his wife had agreed to mediation or not, he was becoming just another bloke who would barely if ever get to see his kids again and stood little chance of changing the situation.

Next thing in his life, as night follows day, will be the loss of most if not all of his assets; the court can and often enough does make orders for 90% of the couple's assets to go to the wife; and then the loss of most of his income through child support.

If he dares to protest against the operations of the Family Court or the despised Child Support Agency he will likely find himself an unfashionable, socially isolated, figure, that modern embarrassment, the angry separated dad.

If he complains to the media; radio, print, or television, his entreaty to journalists that his abuse at the hands of these institutions makes a good story will be entirely ignored. Letters arriving at news outlets around Australia, into which so many fathers have poured so much distress and outrage, are almost invariably placed straight into the bin. Equally, our father's letters to politicians will be entirely ignored; if he gets some non-committal acknowledgement he can count himself lucky.

If he attempts a legal solution to his problem, he will find himself battling an immensely complex jurisdiction on his own; and if he manages the enormously complex process of an appeal, he will find himself in front of three Family Court judges instead of one; and discover what many have discovered before him; there is no sense at all at any level in family law. If he takes up his option of going to the High Court, the chances of the court deigning to hear his case are almost zero.

Hey presto, he will have become that saddest of phenomenon, a dad who doesn't get to see his kids; a direct result of government policy promoting the fatherless family.

Dads On The Air has always maintained that apart from death the single worst act the state can perpetrate against its citizenry is the removal of children from perfectly good loving parents. And that is exactly what this government has been doing.

This week hundreds of kids will have their relationships with their fathers destroyed by a multi-billion dollar bureaucratic and judicial juggernaut which makes its living off ripping kids away from their dads and creating that modern social artifice - the single mother.

Just like every other week in the 11 long years the Howard government has been in power.

Hundreds of thousands of the nation's children have suffered the dreadful abuse of being denied a proper relationship with their fathers while a gutless Parliament has looked on, too afraid they might lose a few women's votes if they stood up for dads.

The Howard government has badly misread the politics around separated dads and their families.

Instead of listening to the people, they have listened to a few angry single mother lobby groups. What they forget is that most women love the men in their lives, including the separated fathers. For every woman who's supposedly advantaged by the blatant bias of our family law system, other women; grandparents, aunts,and friends, are hurt by the outdated and draconian implementation of the court's sole custody regime.

For every single mother there's a desperate dad who would love to be able to care for his kids. The Howard government has assisted in the perpetration of the myth of the single mother as somehow an heroic figure. In reality the bloody minded and selfish refusal of many solo mothers to let their children have a proper relationship with their dad, often purely for financial reasons, has been re-entrenched by Howard's so called reforms.

Although no proper study has ever been done on the subject, it is often estimated there are about a million votes in the separated dad lobby.

With the polls indicating the government faces annihilation at the coming election, I bet Howard wishes he had a million votes in his pocket. I bet about now he's wishing he hadn't double crossed the dads; their kids, their grandparents and all those people in separated and blended families who's views, experiences and presentations to government he has ignored.

Dads would have died in the ditch for Johnnie Howard in September 2003; when he publicly stated he was drawn to shared parenting as the norm, post-divorce and would be initiating a wide ranging inquiry into child custody.

He brought great hope to hundreds of thousands of desperately sad separated parents who thought that for the first time ever we had a Prime Minister in power who understood their heart ache and was going to do something about the country's most despised, dysfunctional, discredited and destructive institutions, the Family Court and the Child Support Agency.

To illustrate just how far the Howard government has fallen in moral stature and in public standing, it's worth remembering back to the immediate aftermath of that 2003 announcement. There were positive front page headlines around the country and talk back radio ran hot in support, with call after call detailing the devastation being felt by separated parents.

In short, Howard won astonishingly strong support from within the nation's media; widespread and excellent coverage and kudos for his government and praise for having the gumption to take on the entrenched interests of the judiciary and the bureaucracy.

It's a long time now since Howard has seen wall to wall positive front page headlines.

Meanwhile he thrashes around trying to re-ignite that sense of coherence and excitement, desperately trying to find something that will work. What did work, but is working no longer; was the government's flirtation with shared parenting or joint custody of children.

Which makes the government's actions even more puzzling: why did they backtrack; why did they double cross the dads when there was so much community and media support for change??

While many people will tell pollsters they are concerned about global warming or funding for public hospitals and schools, there are very few actual vote-changing issues.

But make no mistake, your children ARE a vote changing issue.

If a politician comes along and tells a grieving, heart broken dad who's had his children arbitrarily ripped from him by an arrogant and uncaring judge who told the father that it is in his kids best interests that he only see them occasionally, if at all, if a politician tells that father he will get his children back for him, that man is going to vote for him; no matter what party he's from. No matter what their policies on other issues are.

If a politician tells a deeply upset and distressed grandmother who can't get to see her beloved grandkids that his government is going to tackle the grotesque unfairness of family law and the bureaucratic bastardry of the Child Support Agency which is destroying her beloved family, that is more than enough to sway that grandmother's vote.

In effect, that's what Howard did. By expressing support for the notion of joint custody aka shared parenting, he won the hearts and minds of separated dads around the country, and staunch support from many of the women in those father's lives, mothers, sisters, work colleagues, and of course lovers; the so-called second wives brigade.

Fast forward to 2007; and the end of the story is very sad indeed.

Not only have the judgements coming out of the Family Court and the Federal Magistrates Service demonstrated that they have no intention of reforming their anti-father bias; the hated Child Support Agency is as bad or worse today as it has ever been.

Even in the past fortnight we've seen yet more abusive announcements from the government that it will hunt down all those "rich" dads and make them pay - and pay - and pay. This is a despised bureaucracy at war with taxpayers and who's bureaucratic insanities have destroyed countless thousands of lives; driving men onto the dole queues and literally to suicide; and if the Howard government had a single shred of integrity on the subject, it would have followed the Blair government's example and shut them down long ago.

No such luck. Instead Howard has been prepared to perpetuate the lie that this agency is somehow acting in the "best interests of children"; which it patently is not. And let's not forget; this is the government that, bundled in with a whole lot of other minor amendments, removed any legislative obligation for them to do so.

Depending on his income level, a separated father in this country with four kids can end up paying 84.5 cents in the dollar in tax, child support and medicare levy. And if these loving parents, unable to cope with these insane imposts, fall behind in their payments, then they are whacked with compounding penalties and interest payments. The irony is the average child of a separated family now gets less money in child support than they did prior to the creation of this bureaucratic insanity. If you think it's fair and reasonable to remove a child from a parent and then impose massive financial imposts on them, talk to any non-custodial mother in this country and see how they feel.

Separated fathers who've been to see the Prime Minister John Howard, report back that he treats them with courtesy, and has expressed astonishment at the high levels of taxation and child support they are paying. But Howard's done nothing to abolish this modern day slavery; instead his government routinely and proudly announces yet more crackdowns on separated fathers; blocking them from leaving the country; hunting them down wherever they may be; the almost Gestapo style tactics of the despised Child Support Agency are not only protected, they've been dramatically expanded. For some ludicrous reason separated dad bashing is seen as a vote winner.

Indeed, we recently had yet another politician briefly responsible for the Agency, Joe Hockey, declaring that he and his government would pursue separated fathers who owed child support to the grave.

As Dads On The Air put up on our web site: News flash Joe, you and your government are already doing it.

There was no more disgusting sight in public life than a well fed Joe Hockey, with his massive income and his intact family; boasting about the latest addition to his growing family while vowing he would pursue dads unfortunate enough to have become divorced, "to the grave".

As many separated dads were natural Labor voters who voted Liberal for the first time purely on the issue of family law reform, perhaps the dads will now chase him to his "political grave".

Dads On The Air estimates that 12 clients of the Child Support Agency will die today, just as they've done every other day for years. This rate is calculated on information provided by the Agency from freedom of information requests which showed that 6.1 per cent of all cases terminate because of the death of a party. If around 75,000 cases terminate this year; this constitutes a figure of around three times what you would expect in a similarly aged group; and is entirely due to the poor treatment dished out to separated dads by the Family Court, the Child Support Agency; and all their supporting bureaucracies; including Centrelink, who treat men and single dads with complete contempt.

That's heading towards 50,000 deaths of CSA clients since John Howard came to power in 1996 and is a public administration scandal. Every father's group in the country; and MP Alby Schultz who spoke at the this conference yesterday, have long maintained that the high death rate amongst separated men is directly linked to their mistreatment at the hand of government bodies. There are numerous desperately sad stories to back up the argument.

But don't just take my word for it.

Ask the CSA for yourself: how many of your clients have died since John Howard came to power????

This situation has deteriorated disgracefully over the last 11 years. The only government member with enough common decency and courage to speak out on the issue has been maverick Liberal MP Alby Schultz.

Howard's failure to take appropriate action to fix the Family Court and the Child Support Agency, directly affects the lives of millions of people. These hated and discredited relics from the 70s and 80s are still destroying people's lives every day. Add to this Howard's failure to remedy the overwhelming bias of Legal Aid, and the hostility to men regularly displayed by Centrelink officers; who operate on the same dishonest principle as the Family Court that whatever the man says is nothing but the mutterings of the patriarchy and whatever the woman says is, as a member of an oppressed class, the truth.

Perhaps the first clear sign that the Family Court was not going to accept direction from Parliament was the family law conference in Perth last year. Chief Justice Diana Bryant sternly lectured the government on political interference and retiring court stalwart Justice Chisholm, often intensely disliked by the fathers unfortunate enough to come before him, maintained that because the court had always acted "in the best interests of children" the new laws were little more than a bit of "light house keeping".

But there hasn't even been any 'light house keeping', as recent judgements on appeal have clearly demonstrated.

Even the government's own favourite academic, family law insider Patrick Parkinson, has admitted that the appeal judgements are all over the place and failing to fulfil the intent and spirit of the legislation; which allegedly was to improve children's relationships with their fathers post-separation.

"We are getting decisions all over the place, going different ways", Professor Parkinson told a WA newspaper recently.

Federal Attorney General Philip Ruddock said the intent of the reforms was to ensure that both parents are allowed equal access to and responsibility for raising their children after separation. If equal child access was not appropriate, the court must consider an arrangement for substantial time with both parents.

That is not what's happening.

DOTA argued as strongly as we could in numerous broadcasts that the state had no right to arbitrarily remove a child from one perfectly decent loving parent or the other; and that the only way to remove the appalling debacle that is child custody in this country was to implement a rebuttable presumption of 50/50 joint custody for separating parents. No child should be denied a relationship with either its mother or father, without very good reason.

But it was all too simple for the politicians; and of course it would have eaten away at the multi-billion dollar industry of removing children from their fathers. And so, because everyone in government knew better, we've got the current mess.

Shared Parenting Council President Ed Dabrowski was right on the money when he asked recently: "Why would you allow a child to lose a parent and suffer the emotional scars? It's not about the best parent, it's about the best parent being both parents. This whole idea that you have to pick a winner is nonsense. I have seen fathers writhing in agony outside the doors of the Family Court. I will challenge any parent that is having their children wrenched away from them to say that they can remain totally sane and totally dispassionate about what is happening to them."

Dads On The Air did a story just last month, on Des Cochoran, a disabled pensioner jailed twice after he didn't have the money to comply with disgraced magistrate Jennifer Rimmer's orders that he pay $200 a week child support for his two children until they turned 18 in a single lump sum payment. Rimmer also ordered that his humble house in rural Victoria be sold from under him.

That this government is apparently happy to see a disabled pensioner jailed in this manner defies belief. That the Attorney General Phillip Ruddock can wear an Amnesty International badge, thus expressing concern for human rights abuses around the world, while sitting atop a system which routinely perpetuates these types of human rights abuses defies belief.

What made Cochoran's story even more moving was that he became permanently disabled in a car accident while he was on the way to see his