High Court: School Chaplancy Program invalid

The Federal Government's school chaplaincy program has this morning been declared invalid by the High Court.

The court has also said in its two-page decision this morning that payments made to the Queensland scripture body by the Government were not in line with the constitution.

The case was bought before the court by Queensland father Ronald Williams, whose four children were enrolled at a state school in Toowoomba where a chaplain had been employed under the scheme for four years.

"The High Court unanimously held that Mr Williams had standing to challenge the validity of the Funding Agreement," the judgment said. The court said in its decision that the Government's executive power "extends to the execution and maintenance of this constitution and of the laws of the Commonwealth" and that this didn't authorise them to make the payments to Scripture Union Queensland.

Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said in a statement released just after the judgment that "the Government is carefully reviewing the reasoning of the High Court to determine what, if any, wider implications the decision may hold.''
............

The Howard government introduced the scheme in 2007, offering schools up to $20,000 a year to introduce or extend chaplaincy services.

One of Australia's leading constitutional lawyers George Williams said the implications of the case were massive and could potentially affect any program directly funded by the federal government.

This would include the local government Roads Recovery program and even direct funding of private schools.

''This sets down very significant limits on the ability of the Commonwealth to spend money,'' Professor Williams said.

''I suspect this decision will embolden people to challenge Commonwealth expenditure in other areas.''

Professor Williams said that, while the Commonwealth could still provide funding, it may have to be through the states, rather than funding programs directly, which had been its preference.

''This may lead the Commonwealth to engage in a major rethink of its budgetary processes - what it spends money on and how it does that,'' he said.

"This is very likely to be the biggest High Court case of the year."