Revelations of expenditure of $400,000 by the Catholic schools authority of the Canberra Goulburn Archdiocese, for the launch of a new strategic plan inevitably raise eyebrows. There are extra costs involved in running a schools network, and indeed an archdiocese, that not only services the city of Canberra, but also a large part of southern NSW.
However, many Catholics would find it difficult to justify the expenditure involved, particularly as it includes a celebratory ball and associated entertainment.
The Catholic schools of the archdiocese are run by Catholic Archdiocese Canberra Goulburn Education Limited (CACGEL), established as a not-for-profit private company, the sole owner of which is the trustees for the archdiocese.
These governance arrangements have only been in place since January 1, 2025.
In announcing the new arrangements Archbishop Prowse said, "this new governance will keep the mission of Catholic Education at the forefront and increase the inclusion of lay people in governance".
It is not surprising therefore that the archbishop when asked to comment on the expenditure, deferred the question to his Vicar-General for Education, who in addition to being a board member of CACGEL is also the Chancellor of the Archdiocese and a designated representative of the trustees.
The archbishop's reference to governance has particular interest as he, along with other senior clerics, have been dragging their feet on such matters for much of the past decade.
This has occurred in ways unbeknown to most Catholics, who if they did know would be appalled, as would be the wider Australian community.
The Royal Commission report into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse spelt out plainly the necessity of proper governance as a safeguarding mechanism, augmented by robust structures that bring informed lay women and men to the table for oversight of management and performance.
In one of its final acts, the commission asked senior metropolitan archbishops to appear before it and insisted they introduce robust diocesan pastoral councils (DPCs) in their archdioceses.
They gave such a commitment publicly. It is scandalous that the main Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra-Goulburn archdioceses (led by Archbishops Anthony Fisher, Peter Comensoli and Christopher Prowse) still do not have such entities in place.
This is not the result of oversight.
It aligns with the decision of the Australian Bishops Conference to effectively discard the report into governance that they themselves commissioned in the wake of the royal commission. Known as the Light from the Southern Cross: Promoting Co- responsible Governance in the Catholic Church in Australia, this 2020 document while put aside by Australian bishops was endorsed by the 2024 Vatican Synod Report as pointing the way to best practice.
It is clear some Australian bishops have a real problem with proper governance, whether mandated by church or state. The Pope Francis initiated Synod on a Synodal Church, presented its report in late 2024.
Francis endorsed it immediately and insisted it be implemented, by making it part of the Magisterium teaching of the church.
A clear element of that report was that dioceses establish properly constituted DPCs, comprised of lay Catholic women and men, along with the relevant bishop.
The archbishops of the three archdioceses that cover much of the south-east of Australia were not great enthusiasts for the church that Francis was trying to build.
They seemed to sit tight until it became clear that Pope Leo intended to pursue the Synod agenda.
Only in the last few months have they each taken some tentative steps towards implementing a DPC. Given their earlier record, many Catholics particularly in this archdiocese, have little confidence that real reform will eventuate, especially as there is a body of evidence that demonstrates the archbishop's lack of enthusiasm for the vision of a synod-inspired church, required to function under a rubric of leadership, decision making and accountability that is transparent and shared with the laity.
The royal commission was clear: DPCs are an essential bulwark against clericalism, critical for the prevention of further sexual abuse and institutional cover up.
Ironically the Synod Report makes a similar point, stressing that the church's mission can only be properly fulfilled if its foundations are built on working with the strengths of the whole church community.
So, it seems we have archbishops who are happy to defy both secular imperatives and church directives.
The disturbing cultural attitude among some bishops manifests in a lack of interest in proper governance structures and their robust functioning. One such example is the failure to ensure compliance with accountability and information requirements the Australian Charities and Not for Profits Commission places on those elements of the church which fall within its remit, which includes most diocesan and parish structures.
For example, elements of the Canberra Goulburn reporting framework still include dead priests, outdated appointments and information that has clearly just been copied from other dioceses, such as Canberra Goulburn having parishes in Queensland.
Certainly, the ACNC needs to be more active in enforcing its own requirements as there is no credible reason for not doing so, especially when the archdiocese was alerted to the errors by concerned Catholics, but they remain uncorrected.
These failures are telling and unacceptable. They also reveal a sense of disdain and disinterest in fulfilling and participating in a civil reporting and accountability framework that aims to inform and protect the community. The bulk of the Catholic community, if they were aware, would support such intervention as a reminder to its leadership that "never again" remains the sentiment and intent of the People of God in Australia.
It is ironic that the education group has got itself into trouble with the launch of a strategic planning document, when it is the lack of such planning in an overall sense by a DPC that hinders proper decision making across the archdiocese.
Lack of an overall archdiocesan plan partly explains the mess and rancour that entwines four inner north Canberra parishes directed to merge into a single entity.
Public exposure of these matters is critical in the overall task of full regulatory compliance and robust governance arrangements. Good governance serves everyone's interest. It is past time to get serious.
