Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes:

(a) it has now been more than two months since the Member for Bowman said he would step down from all of his parliamentary positions;

(b) the Member for Bowman remains the Chair of the Standing Committee on Education, Employment and Training, a role for which he is paid an additional amount in the order of $23,000 per annum;

(c) the Prime Minister and his government have repeatedly voted to protect the Member for Bowman's position despite the Prime Minister's acknowledgement that the Member for Bowman's conduct had been inappropriate; and

(d) that by protecting the Member for Bowman, the Prime Minister is tacitly endorsing his inappropriate conduct, and the Prime Minster is also putting his own political interests ahead of his responsibility to show leadership; and

(2) calls on the Prime Minister to unequivocally reject the Member for Bowman's conduct by ensuring his removal from his lucrative committee chair role.

A number of women have given separate accounts of online abuse from the member for Bowman. One woman told Nine News that the member for Bowman had subjected her to false claims and social media abuse. In one of his online posts the member for Bowman said to the woman: 'You got nasty, threatened self-harm. Unfortunately for you, I make the rules and you follow them'—that's a quote. The woman said the member's online claims against her were baseless and the allegations left her suicidal. The same report said that the member for Bowman had targeted another woman with online abuse for six years.

The member for Bowman has also made comments directed to Ms Kim Richards MP, the state member for Redlands. He posted a photograph of her taken from a distance without her knowledge. He offered a $100 reward to anyone who could identify the people she was meeting with at 6 pm on Valentine's Day. A 29-year-old woman came forward and said the member for Bowman took a photo of her while she was at work and bent over exposing her underwear beneath denim shorts. A female professor talked about the member's conduct towards her on a flight that had made her uncomfortable. That conduct included making a comment about her figure and trying to get her to come out to an art gallery event 'for lots of cocktails'. A Labor Party official spoke of the member's conduct on a delegation overseas during which a delegate alleged the member's persistent requests for the phone numbers of female staffers caused concern. A hospitality worker, who was 19 years old at the time, spoke of the member approaching her to be her friend on Facebook and obtaining her name from her name badge for that purpose. She said: 'If it was any other person, I would've thought that was a bit weird for a middle-aged man to ask a 19-year-old to add them on Facebook. It wasn't a very comfortable situation. It just felt very forced and I sort of had to engage with it. I feel like you shouldn't have to agree to someone just because you felt obliged to do it because he's a high person in parliament or a high person in your community.' Another woman, an academic, said the member approached her by a direct message on Facebook. They had an exchange in which he eventually asked her if she was a skateboarder. She said that he then messaged her as follows: 'I'm happy just to meet skaties one at a time—starting with you'—followed by a wink emoji. She said: 'That is when I began to feel very uncomfortable.'

In addition to these examples it has been reported that the member for Bowman has operated more than 30 Facebook pages and profiles, some under the guise of community groups, which he used to promote political material. This is very strange behaviour.

The member for Bowman has offered some specific apologies to some of the women I've referred to. In addition, he has also made an apology at large to 'any person who has received correspondence from me which fell short of what they expect from an MP. I intend to own that behaviour and apologise without hesitation.' He has also attributed his conduct to recently diagnosed ADHD, though he himself has said that is not an excuse. He has obtained empathy training and clinical counselling. Despite those things, and despite the apologies that he has made, some of his other comments and conduct have thrown doubt on whether he is genuinely apologetic or remorseful, such as interjecting during this debate and at one point claiming not to know what it was he was apologising for.

The member has not made good on a commitment he made in respect of parliamentary roles. It's been reported that on 27 March he said he would step down from all parliamentary roles effective immediately. When parliament returned in May, Labor and the Australian people were surprised to learn that the member for Bowman had not stepped down from his role as Chair of the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training.

What has been even more surprising, though, has been the Prime Minister's decision to protect the member for Bowman against calls to resign from that role. The Prime Minister has previously described the member for Bowman's online behaviour as 'disgraceful'. Female Liberal MPs have said the conduct was 'outrageous' or that they weren't 'comfortable' with it. Nonetheless, the Prime Minister and his government have voted over and over and over again to protect the member for Bowman's position as the chair of that committee—a position that yields additional salary in the order of $23,000 per year. Even the LNP in Queensland showed more leadership on this issue than the Prime Minister and federal government when they disendorsed the current member for Bowman for the forthcoming election.

The PM's lack of leadership sends a terrible message to the women of the Liberal Party, the women of Australia, the workplaces of Australia and victims of abuse who are considering whether to speak out. I ask the member for Bowman to show the character that the Prime Minister is unwilling to show and resign from his committee chair position. That would show genuine remorse and would assist in providing some support to the parliamentary concerns that have been raised in respect of his conduct over a number of years.

Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion. Which bit of 'I will step down from all parliamentary roles effective immediately' isn't clear? That's what I asked myself and that's what Labor's asked—especially the women of Labor—for the last two months following the member for Bowman's announcement after being exposed for unacceptable behaviour directed at women. It wasn't 'I will step down from all parliamentary roles effective immediately provided I don't lose any pay.' It was a very clear statement, yet it hasn't happened. The member for Bowman is still Chair of the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training and, in spite of the Prime Minister describing the behaviour as 'disgraceful' and endorsing the course of action that the member had outlined, it hasn't happened. In spite of Labor giving the government 41 opportunities to sanction the member for Bowman for his failure to keep his word and to do the right thing for once, it hasn't happened. The $23,000 a year additional amount that he receives he continues to receive.

Earlier this month opposition members of the committee that he chairs expressed deep concern about his conduct and said that maintaining his role diminishes the committee, the House and the parliament. But this is the sort of person the Prime Minister supports to stay in a committee chair role: someone who created Facebook pages purporting to be community pages, it's reported; someone who is alleged to have trolled women online, and they have spoken at length about it—not just a comment here or there but over many years. There was certainly a commentary about this behaviour from women at the women of Macquarie forum that I held last night via Zoom with the member for Sydney. There was fury at the lack of action. 'No consequences' was how one woman described it. Another said it was a 'total demonstration of incapacity to listen, to care or to take responsibility'. As another pointed out, the Prime Minister won't move against the member for Bowman, because it's too much risk having a minority government.

But it isn't just the member for Bowman whose role weighed heavily on the nearly 200 women I met with last night and whose actions they took as a sign of deep disrespect for women by this government. It was the decision by the Nationals to re-elect the member for New England as their leader. Let's think about the Deputy Prime Minister and what women from his own side of politics say. Pauline McAllister, New South Wales trustee of the party and a member of more than two decades described it as a 'backwards step'. She said:

I think there are a lot of women who feel a bit disenfranchised. I think there will be a lot of women who will be totally disappointed.

Well, no wonder they're disappointed, because the eight-month investigation by the New South Wales Nationals was unable to reach a conclusion about sexual harassment allegations made about the member for Armidale, which preceded his resignation in 2018.

But it isn't just that. It's the discussion reported about the attitude to families accessing early learning for their children—comments that women who use professional childcare services are somehow outsourcing their parental responsibilities. There are so many things wrong with that point of view. It takes us back to the 1950s. There's no recognition from the people who made those comments that it's hard enough to balance working and parenting, but the government members think parents need more judgement about how they do it. It isn't even just that. It's the lack of women who sit on the government benches. It's the fact that, when two ministers rose to speak on a question in question time today, and one was a woman and one was a man, it was the more junior male minister who prevailed. That said it all.

But it isn't just that. It's the way the Prime Minister has to be reluctantly dragged into action when it's anything to do with women, like taking action to investigate what happened to Britney Higgins. You know what women told me last night? They said they were tired, physically and mentally—exhausted, some of them—from the endless fight to be treated with respect, from juggling responsibilities and from the pressures that they face. They're also tired and dispirited when they see men like the ones who sit opposite us in parliament, the born to rule, believing that a woman's place is in the home, not the House or the Senate. Making some token promises in a budget is not going to change who they are. Even the member for Bowman agreeing to step down, or being forced to step down, as committee chair won't change who they are. Until they actually change, it's all just an act. They know it, we know it, the women on the other side know it and the women of Australia certainly know it.

Libby Coker (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I strongly support this motion and thank the member for Griffith for bringing it to the House. Three months ago, the Prime Minister labelled the conduct of the member for Bowman as disgraceful, but, despite this, the member for Bowman remains. He's still a Liberal Party representative and chair of the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training. The coalition continues to vote to keep the member for Bowman in the parliamentary role he promised to stand down from.

The member for Bowman's behaviour and attitude towards women have proven to be unacceptable, yet he continues to receive the support of the Prime Minister and his government. What the women of Australia and the women in my electorate want is a Prime Minister who shows leadership, a Prime Minister who stands up for women and a Prime Minister who respects and supports women and will condemn others who do not. Unfortunately, this Prime Minister is always prepared to put politics before principles.

We're aware of the disturbing stories that establish beyond question a character unfit to represent the people of Bowman in this House. As is so often the case, there were warnings about the kind of person the member for Bowman was long before he entered the House. The former chair of the Bowman branch had warned a senior Queensland LNP state executive about the member for Bowman. He said: 'We took a two-page document in and said we had a major problem with this bloke. He popped it in the safe and said, "Leave it with me." I never followed it up and we never heard anything more about it.' Unsurprisingly, the member has continued to behave inappropriately since that warning was issued.

The member for Bowman has viciously attacked female constituents from behind his computer screen. The Prime Minister requested that the member for Bowman apologise for these attacks, which the member for Bowman did, before undermining his own apology piece by piece. The member for Bowman used the first day back in parliament to claim he had been misrepresented, revealing through his words his complete contempt for the women he had mistreated.

The list of women who have reported untoward contact with the member for Bowman is growing by the day. A co-passenger on a flight reported:

I was deeply uncomfortable. I felt like I was trapped next to someone who was just being completely inappropriate, irrespective of their job, being completely inappropriate.

A colleague on an official trip said:

When we when we met a new group or went to a new location, it was only the young women he asked for phone numbers … not the men.

A teenager working at Taco Bell was asked by the member for Bowman to be added on Facebook. The girl said:

It wasn't a very comfortable situation. It just felt very forced and I sort of had to engage with it.

  …   …   …

I felt very creeped out.

And then the member for Bowman took a photo of a Brisbane woman's backside without her consent while she was on her knees stacking a bar fridge. That woman has since filed a formal complaint. Today the member for Bowman sits in this House, a community leader in Australia's Liberal government, at the insistence of the Prime Minister, and the Prime Minister defends the member's chairmanship on the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training.

Beyond the member for Bowman's disgraceful behaviour, this story exposes for all to see the character failings of the Prime Minister. On the alleged sexual assault of Brittany Higgins, metres from his office, the Prime Minister said he didn't know about it. On the allegations of sexual assault against the former Attorney-General, the Prime Minister said he didn't read them. In the wake of public violence against women, the Prime Minister refused to get up from his desk and meet the organisers of the March4Justice rally here in Canberra. These actions speak louder than words. The standard you walk past is the standard you accept, and the Prime Minister is prepared to ignore disgraceful behaviour because he needs the numbers in the House. What these actions reveal is a Prime Minister and Liberal and National parties that do not care enough about women. They do not respect women, and they are always prepared to put politics before principles. Now is the time for redemption, Prime Minister. Step up, do what is right by the women of Australia and by the women of my electorate and dismiss the member for Bowman.

Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Corangamite said something insightful, then, about the standards you walk past. The standards you sit beside say a lot about you too. The member for Ryan is often on his feet in the parliament talking about cyberbullying, talking about the eSafety Commissioner—

An opposition member: Protecting families.

Protecting families. And yet this evening he unfortunately finds himself in the whip's chair, having to sit through this motion. My sympathy and empathy go to the member for Ryan for having to sit beside the member for Bowman while his history in this place and in his electorate is dragged through this Chamber. It is a really unfortunate thing that we are here tonight, because we don't need to be here.

The Prime Minister said he was going to fix this problem. I stand here, surrounded by women from the Labor Party who are in this Chamber tonight to make sure that our voices are heard. I stand here as a member of the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training with the member for Cooper, who is also a member of that committee, to put on the record into Hansard exactly how we feel. We've written to the Prime Minister. We've asked him to dismiss or replace the member for Bowman as chair of that committee, and it is not too much to ask. I'm going to say what I've said in that committee room before: the member for Bowman's presence as chair of that committee threatens the integrity of that committee. It threatens its work.

As a stakeholder in the industries of education and training, being asked to come into a room to give evidence to the member for Bowman is now beyond a joke. This is a public scandal. The fact that we have had to come into the Federation Chamber and air this dirty linen again when it has already been reported in the press speaks volumes about the integrity of a couple of people that we work beside in this building. One of those people is in the Chamber tonight. The empathy training as clearly failed. The integrity training may need to follow, because when the member for Bowman was asked a question by women elected to represent people in this building, not just on our side of politics, his interjection earlier talked about his political enemies. I can't put it clearly enough. The parliament is about a contest of ideas, and there isn't a woman on this side that won't do that job with relish. But we spend our time in this building talking to people on the other side respectfully and inclusively. We work on committees.

The first time I saw the member for Bowman was in this Chamber in my first term. The member for Bowman came into the Chamber and delivered a speech just like this, on private member's business. He then took out a container full of corrosive oil of some description, opened the container, spilt it all over the table and was sanctioned by then Speaker Bishop; he was named for his behaviour in this Chamber. So he didn't have empathy then. He has a record of showing an absolute lack of empathy for the people he represents through his behaviour on his own MP Facebook page. There are options. We all know what the options are. We all have social media pages that bear our name and our status. We have ways to set them up automatically so that, if someone swears, their comment is hidden so that it protects other people who want to interact with us on social media.

All of us in this room have been trolled at times. I remember spending one of the first weekends as the member for Lalor having had a comment about somebody's sexism and having to monitor my page for 16 hours a day for four days while I was attacked by men of various ages, some particularly young. We live this. We live it every day. But I don't think the women in the electorate of Bowman, as residents of a community, need to be attacked by their own member, by the person they send here to represent them. And how do the men of Bowman feel? A lot of people have completely forgotten that the world is full of good men—good men who respect women, good men who respect one another, good men with integrity, good men with empathy and good men who would like to see the member for Bowman removed from the committee and removed from this parliament.

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

It is a privilege to be in this great House. It is a privilege. There's not an ounce of me or any of my colleagues here who believe it is an entitlement. To represent your electorate, to have been elected, is one of the greatest honours. I don't want to do anything, and I know my colleagues here tonight well enough to know that they would not want to do anything, to risk any of our constituents saying that we are not here for them, because they put us here. They asked us to be their voices in this House, and we would not sully that. I would not let them down for a moment, I can tell you. At the end of my time in this House—at the end of my life, actually, don't we all want to look back and say to ourselves, 'We made a difference, a small difference, somehow'? Not everybody has the opportunity to be elected to parliament to make an actual, real-life difference to the lives of people of our constituency in this country. We don't treat it as an entitlement. I certainly don't take this for granted any second of any day.

But I look at the behaviour of the member for Bowman, and I wonder, like the rest of the country is wondering, about the litany of events that we've heard about—and we haven't made these up; we are actually repeating the voices of the people that have complained about the member. We are raising and amplifying their voices in this House. We are all wondering about this, along with all those women—and they can't all be very carefully planted enemies of the member. They can't be. Nineteen-year-old girls cannot necessarily be enemies. So we are merely amplifying their voices. We're not making this up. And they are not all political enemies—I cannot believe that. That would be very, very strange.

We are all scratching our heads and we are all saying, 'Why on earth has the Prime Minister not sacked the member for Bowman as the chair of the committee that I and the member for Lalor are on?' What is going on here? This is the question that is not being answered. We all know the facts. We all know what has happened. We all know his character. We all know he apologised to the House then went away for empathy training. Then, between that and the member coming back, something happened—I don't think it was empathy training—that changed his mind. What changed his mind? He was no longer sorry. All of a sudden there were all these excuses—'they are political enemies', 'it was a mistake', 'it wasn't that bad', 'you misread it' and 'they misinterpreted it'. It just doesn't add up. No-one believes that. The question is: why? Is it merely because the member for Bowman thinks he's entitled to be here in this House and that he's entitled to be chair of this committee? He does not represent his constituency—

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 19:10 to 19:35

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:35