The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church has rejected allegations that it secretly funded individuals to interfere with Labor’s re-election campaign last year as part of a coordinated operation involving far-right influencers and efforts to track political candidates.
Nine Newspapers reported that members of the wealthy religious organisation, previously known as the Exclusive Brethren, were involved with figures including influencer Laurence McIntyre, who confronted Prime Minister Anthony Albanese by yelling at him on the opening day of the election campaign.
Several candidates also reported unusually high numbers of Liberal volunteers at pre-polling locations in key marginal electorates during the campaign, with some believing the volunteers had been mobilised by members of the Brethren.
Both the Coalition and the church denied at the time that any formal arrangement existed to provide campaign support.
Appearing before a Senate inquiry, Lloyd Grimshaw, a director of the church, said members of the organisation had instead been subjected to “extraordinary attacks” at polling locations.
“Much was made of the fact that some individuals in the church volunteered during the election, and that was used to justify it becoming open season on the Christian brethren,” he said.
Mr Grimshaw dismissed the allegations as a “complete lie” and denied that the church had provided donations to political parties or third-party organisations.
“The story makes not one specific allegation about a specific member of our church,” he said.
“Without names, it doesn’t even make a threshold for gossip. It’s a tale.”
He told the inquiry that volunteering was deeply embedded in the church’s culture and said members had “normal reasons” for taking part, such as supporting a preferred candidate or helping at an election-day barbecue.
“Not every person in a blue shirt, with a side part, or with a bow in their hair was a member of the Brethren church,” he said.
Mr Grimshaw further distinguished between the administration of the church and its wider community, arguing that there was no formal direction of members’ political activities.
“There’s no institutional coordination, if I can put it that way,” he said.
“No church in this country would be held responsible for what parishioners did in their private time.”
Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke told the inquiry that Australia’s democratic system needed to “draw a line” in relation to the alleged conduct, particularly claims involving physical intimidation.
“There are countries throughout the world where people get paid to engage in physical intimidation around election time, and the thought that Australia has been added to that list should send a chill among everyone who loves this country,” he said.
Mr Burke said he had been devoting an “increasing” amount of time to dealing with threats directed at people working at or connected to the federal parliament, in conjunction with the Australian Federal Police.
“We need to draw a line under this,” he said.
He also urged the Liberal Party to clarify what it knew about the Brethren’s activities during the campaign and said One Nation needed to “explain if they are welcoming these same individuals”.
Nationals MP and former deputy prime minister Michael McCormack said the allegations should be examined, but argued that harassment at polling booths had also involved the union movement.
Although he did not cite a particular incident, Mr McCormack said he had previously been “pushed and heckled and spat on” and described such incidents as an “unfortunate part” of being a Coalition politician.
“People from the unions turn up to polling booths. It’s been happening since the year dot, and if anyone denies that they are just kidding themselves,” he said.
“I think the very far right and the very far left of politics are both dangerous, frankly.
“It should be investigated, and it doesn’t need to happen.”
Mr Grimshaw also told the inquiry that comments made by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese during the election campaign, in which he alleged the church was a “cult”, prompted more members to volunteer at polling places.
“Not only is it offensive, it’s completely untrue,” he said.
“It did probably contribute to a strong showing of members because quite a few of them referenced the fact that they were outraged by the comments, and that alone spurred them to come out and volunteer.”
The Melbourne electorate of Kooyong was among the seats where large numbers of Brethren volunteers were alleged to have appeared during the election. Independent Monique Ryan ultimately retained the seat.
Questioned about whether volunteers in Kooyong had been coordinated, Mr Grimshaw said the church had “no input” into the organisation of volunteers. He said he “assumed” those taking part would have received instructions from the political party they were supporting.
“I really can’t enlighten you on it. The church had no input on it,” he said, again stressing that not everyone wearing a blue shirt was necessarily a member of the Brethren.
Dr Ryan challenged that assertion, telling the inquiry that women campaigning in her electorate appeared to be readily identifiable because they wore black skirts and leggings and repeatedly used the same slogan, “Make Australia happy again”.
“They clearly had a script from which they were speaking at pre-pol,” she said.
Dr Ryan also questioned Mr Grimshaw about a report in The Age alleging that Brethren members had made more than one million telephone calls on behalf of the Liberal Party during the election campaign.
“That’s really for the Liberal Party to answer,” he said.
“The church certainly doesn’t know anything about it.”
Earlier in his evidence, Mr Grimshaw acknowledged that many church members were likely to hold conservative political views because of their occupations and religious beliefs.
“They’re small business owners, and they’re of a conservative Christian faith. I don’t think it’s unexpected that their bent and leaning, for most of them, is towards conservative politics,” he said.
Former members of the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church have previously spoken about what they described as a highly controlling environment, including strict attitudes towards gender roles and strong opposition to homosexuality.
Some members also choose not to vote because of their religious beliefs.
