A recent controversy has emerged in Cumberland, Sydney, where a local council debate has sparked international attention due to the involvement of a Chinese community organization known as the Fuqing Association. The group, which claims to represent 10,000
Chinese-Australians, mobilized to oppose a motion that would have recognized “World Falun Dafa Day” in the council’s annual cultural program.
The motion, identified as Item No: C07/25-155, sought to acknowledge May 13 – the birthday of Falun Dafa’s founder Li Hongzhi – as part of the council’s celebrations. Falun Dafa, also called Falun Gong, is a spiritual practice established in China in 1992 that emphasizes truthfulness, compassion, and tolerance, along with meditation exercises.
While the motion failed to pass, questions have arisen about the Fuqing Association’s motivations and connections. Named after a city of 1.4 million people in China’s Fujian Province, the organization has demonstrated strong ties to Chinese Communist Party (CCP) activities. In 2024, its members organized thousands to welcome CCP Premier Li Qiang during his Australian visit, where they attempted to block human rights demonstrators.
Former Beijing Capital Normal University professor Li Yuanhua, now based in Sydney, explains that while hometown associations originally served benign purposes for immigrants sharing common origins, many have been co-opted by the CCP. He estimates that over 90 percent of such associations must now register with Chinese consulates despite being Australian organizations.
The association’s activities align with what experts call
“transnational repression,” recently condemned by G7 nations as a form of foreign interference used to intimidate and harass communities outside national borders. The Australian Strategic Policy Institute has specifically warned about such United Front tactics in its 2020 report titled “The party speaks for you.”
The Fuqing Association’s involvement in the Cumberland Council matter follows a pattern of similar hometown associations’ political engagement in Australia. The Hubei Association, for instance, is under investigation for its role in recent Melbourne electoral activities and its alleged connections to the CCP’s United Front Work Department.
Councillor Helen Hughes, who supported the Falun Dafa motion, expressed concern about the Fuqing Association’s opposition, noting their submission lacked substantive reasoning. She was particularly moved by testimony from a Falun Dafa practitioner who could not return to China after her parents’ deaths due to ongoing persecution.
The situation highlights the complex relationship between Chinese community organizations in Australia and the CCP’s influence operations. The Fuqing Association’s celebration of the motion’s defeat, marked by photos taken in front of the Cumberland council building, has raised further questions about foreign influence in local Australian politics.
The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) has maintained its policy of not commenting on specific groups or individuals when asked about the matter. Attempts to contact the Sydney branch of the Fuqing Association were unsuccessful, as no official website or public contact information could be located.
This incident occurs against the backdrop of increasing scrutiny of Chinese influence operations in Western democracies, particularly through community organizations that claim to represent local Chinese populations while maintaining strong ties to Beijing’s political apparatus.