Ged Kearney (Cooper, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to the Religious Discrimination Bill 2022 and related legislation. I'd like to thank my colleagues who have spoken before me for their contributions to this debate, in particular the member for Whitlam, who shared such a personal, tragic story about his nephew and a very beautiful story about his own son. The member for Whitlam shared a lovely TikTok with us, a TikTok that his son posted showing how proud he was of his dad, with a message to all of his own community, saying, 'There are people here who are fighting for us kids.' The member's son's message was clear: 'Don't despair,' he said, 'there are good people here who are fighting for kids to be themselves, to be safe in their own skins.' And that is true; very, very true. We are here, absolutely fighting for them.

I know there are people who have, I think, incorrectly interpreted our strategy with this bill, so let me be clear from the outset. I do not support this bill. Labor does not support this bill as it stands. The government has, at the last minute, created a wedge pitting some faith communities against other faith communities and pitting some faith communities against our LGBTI communities. It is a wedge that is weaponising antidiscrimination legislation in the most appalling way. Labor is proposing important amendments that will break that wedge and help bring communities together, addressing concerns of people of faith without driving a sword into the hearts of others. If our amendments are not passed, Labor will support the bill going into the Senate where there is a good chance the bill will be amended with our important changes.

I stand here as a representative of an incredibly diverse community. I have one of the largest mosques in Melbourne, in Cooper, and a fabulously vibrant Muslim community. I represent people of many faiths with different belief systems and from different cultures, and we thrive in Cooper. I want them to feel free from discrimination. I want them to be happy and accepted. But this bill actually does not promise that. It does not protect them, for example, because it has no anti-vilification measures. That is something we will fix.

I also have many proud members of the LGBTI community in my electorate. I have one of the largest lesbian communities in Melbourne, so many wonderful rainbow families and proud gay men. I also proudly have a fabulous trans clinic and health centre just up the road from my office in Bell Street, doing amazingly good work. They're all quite rightly wary of what this bill means for them and they're scared of what this means for LGBTI kids. I share their fears. I think of the gender-diverse kids who I've met within this job and in my personal life, and I wonder whether the Prime Minister and those opposite have met with the kids this bill fails to protect when they were considering this legislation. I wonder if they think about these kids when they hear stories like the member for Whitlam's. Not only has this government failed to protect them but they've actively carved them out of protections. They've actively, politically, disgracefully weaponised them—children—in the debate on this bill. Their behaviour in all of this, I think, has been disgusting. It has haunted me. They who are supporting this bill as it is should be ashamed.

I grew up in a large Irish Catholic family. I completely understand the importance of having the freedom to practise your religion and to express your religious views. My grandmother, an old Irish Catholic lady, told us the same stories over and over again of the troubles she faced finding a job as a young woman as a result of her culture and religion. She used to tell us there was only one department store hiring Catholics in Melbourne. I even remember the name of it, although it doesn't exist now; we heard the story so often. She used to tell us it was Foy & Gibson. For many Irish Catholic young women, employment options were scarce back at the turn of the century. Add to that religious discrimination—it must have been terrible.

As a young nurse and unmarried, I fell pregnant with twins. At the time, I was nursing at a Catholic hospital run by nuns. I was absolutely terrified that I would be fired. I knew I could be viewed as sinful, or even unworthy of having a job there. So terrified was I that I brought my mum with me to meet with the head nun, a fearsome nun, to plead my case to be allowed to stay. And I have a lovely young son-in-law, a smart Jewish man who is a teacher in a Catholic school. Under these laws it could be legal for him to never be promoted, no matter how good a teacher he is, on the basis of his faith. I have a very young and much-loved family member who is currently transitioning their gender at 14 years of age, facing all the trauma and prejudice that brings with it.

What does this bill do for them and all those situations? Will it actually mean that all these discriminatory experiences will be swept away? No, it will not. It actually enshrines the ability for schools to discriminate against teachers. It could allow a faith based hospital to sack a pregnant single woman. It allows people to tell young kids on the street, in the workplace or at school that, based on their faith, they are living a sin, that their true self is evil and wrong. Surely this is not the best we can do in parliament, as a parliament. Surely Australians—all Australians—can ask for better than what this bill provides.

It's worth remembering that this is a debate on what is supposed to be anti-discrimination law, a part of the law that all of us in this chamber should approach carefully, with serious consideration. In fact, it's a great privilege that we are able to come into this place with the power to make laws that can end discrimination—think of the sex, racial, disability and age discrimination acts. What power these great pillars of anti-discrimination laws have had in this country—the great change they created, how vital they have been to our progress towards creating a more equal, fairer society. The power of these laws and of this chamber in creating those laws should not be lost on any of us. This should weigh heavily upon us. I know it does me.

So, to see this government weaponise and politicise discrimination in this way has been utterly offensive—to see them weaponise sexuality, gender identity and faith. It is a last-ditch, desperate attempt at political traction from a government that simply doesn't know how to govern. They've had years to get this right, yet they failed to consult properly with key stakeholders, with those of us on this side of the House and even with their own members. As Ian Thorpe said yesterday, this is a bill with no friends. It's failed to please faith groups, it's failed to please LGBTI groups and it's failed to please human rights groups, and the disability sector has been completely forgotten. So we find ourselves, in one of the last sitting weeks of this parliamentary term, debating an anti-discrimination bill that is better known in the community for the discrimination it enshrines rather than the discrimination it prevents. We've said all along that we're happy to engage on this, because we on this side of the House understand how strongly people of faith feel about it and that they do indeed need protections. We could have made this right. We could have helped get the balance right. But the government didn't work with us.

Yesterday we heard the Hindu Council speak at a press conference about the fears Hindu Australians have for their jobs. They're afraid that, under this legislation, they could be sacked or excluded from work for being practising followers of their faith. We heard from the ACTU that this bill in its current form undermines decades of work by unions, their members and Labor governments who have brought into place enterprise bargaining agreements and workplace codes which protect workers from discrimination in the workplace, including discrimination on the basis of religion. This is legislation which has the potential to walk back all that terrific progress that we have made. Of course, we've all heard the story of Citipointe in Queensland, where they had a contract forcing prospective students and their families to denounce LGBTI communities. Are these the kind of statements that this government is looking to protect with this bill? Really?

It is with this section of the bill, clause 12, that deals with statements of belief that we have particular concern, as many of my colleagues have iterated here. This clause makes it legal to express a statement of belief even if it would be considered discriminatory under Australian antidiscrimination law. This inherently privileges the right to express one's religious belief above the rights of others to live their lives free of discrimination, whether that's on the basis of sexuality, gender, age, race, disability or another characteristic covered by law. This is wrong. Not only is it wrong; it is in conflict with human rights law and it's likely to be unconstitutional. But, most of all, it drives hate and division where we need love, embracement, acceptance and protection. This is, to put it simply, the most broken part of this bill, and one which law reform and human rights groups have taken particular issue with and which we will fix.

The previous clause in the bill, clause 11, is also problematic. It allows for state and territory laws to be overridden with respect to employment decisions. This is not limited to hiring; it includes promotions and levels of pay. This will effectively mean that one teacher who is of a certain faith and a teacher who is of another faith could legally have their respective pays determined based purely on those respective faiths. This doesn't sit well with me. It doesn't sit well with many people, I'm sure. And this is leaving to one side the fact that, again, this clause is likely to be unconstitutional.

In considering these bills, we in Labor used three key principles to determine whether we could support them. Firstly, we recognise that people of faith must have a clear right to act in accordance with their beliefs, subject to limitations on the grounds of public safety, order, health, morals and the rights and freedoms of others. This is outlined clearly in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Secondly, Labor supports the extension of the federal antidiscrimination framework to ensure Australians are not discriminated against because of their religious beliefs. But, finally and crucially, extending the protection of the antidiscrimination network to religion should not come at the cost of the protections that already exist in the law for other characteristics, such as gender, race, age, sexuality and so on. These principles are important. They make it clear that our party is committed to protecting the rights of people of faith, but that, importantly, this commitment is equally held to the rights of people protected by existing antidiscrimination law. As I've said throughout my remarks here today, antidiscrimination law is a very important yet sensitive area of the law, and providing its protection to one section of society cannot—cannot—come at the expense of another.

It's with these principles in mind that Labor is seeking to amend this bill. Firstly, we will move to amend the Sex Discrimination Act to ensure that students cannot be discriminated against for their sexuality or gender identity. This is vital. The government actively carved gender diverse kids out of protections, and Labor is making sure these kids cannot be discriminated against. Secondly, we will move to amend clause 12 of the Religious Discrimination Bill to ensure that statements of belief are not protected if they contravene existing antidiscrimination law. Thirdly, we will be looking at ways to protect teachers from discrimination. Fourthly, by moving amendments that prohibit religious vilification we will make sure that the bill does actually protect people of faith, making it illegal to do things like yelling abuse out of a car window at a woman in a hijab or to a group of worshippers leaving a synagogue. This is a glaring omission from the current bill which makes you question what on earth the government's intent actually was.

Labor will also be moving amendments to ensure that in-home aged-care service providers are not able to discriminate on the basis of religion and importantly there will be protections for people with disability. These are sensible amendments moved in good faith. They are amendments that would fix the significant errors and omissions in the bill and go a long way to ensuring the bill is inclusive and not divisive. I would like to conclude with the remarks made today by the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Grayndler. He said:

This is an opportunity to advance unity of this nation, not to pit people against each other. This bill as it stands right now, if it is not amended by either the House or the Senate, will only succeed in driving us apart. Ours is a wonderful country, but there is an even better Australia almost within our grasp. This bill in its present form will push it further out of reach. That is not our instinct as a people. It is not who we are. Let's put aside divisiveness and this pointless, petty partisanship. This is a moment for leadership; this is an opportunity for the Prime Minister to show some. It's an opportunity for unity of purpose. We must change this bill.

(Time expired.)

See this speech in context