Julian McGauran (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

As the Senate would be only too aware, every morning at the opening of the parliament the President commences with the Lord’s Prayer, also known as the Our Father. The Christian prayer said at the opening of each day of parliament is a long-held tradition of the Australian parliament. It is also practised in all of the state parliaments. It is a recognition of our Judaeo-Christian traditions and foundations and it is also a moment for personal reflection. The prayer does not interfere in any secular judgments of the legislative program or process.

It is worth noting that the Lord’s Prayer is the most exalted prayer of the Christian faith. The reason for its exalted status is that the very words of the prayer were given by Jesus Christ to his apostles and subsequently passed down through the ages. There have been many attempts over the years to have this prayer abolished from the daily opening of parliament. One particular occasion I recall was in 1988 when the parliament was moving from the Old Parliament House to the new Parliament House. There was what was strong enough to be a movement to do away with the tradition of saying the Lord’s Prayer in the new Parliament House. However, it failed; the two major parties did not succumb to the pressure of the minorities.

I particularly recall a question, whilst we were still down at the Old Parliament House, to the then Leader of the Government in the Senate, John Button, on this very matter of abolishing the prayer. As he rose to answer the question there was silence in anticipation of his answer. The silence was broken by a witty interjection, ‘Remember who’s listening, John!’ Then he stood up and gave an emphatic ‘no’ to the abolition of the prayer and sat down. Former Senator Button’s strength of leadership and his understanding of the gravity of the matter put paid to any move that it be abolished. Fast forward to 2010, and that same status and protection, given to the Lord’s Prayer in every other parliament prior to this one, is not the case in this 43rd Parliament.

I raise the issue now as enough time has elapsed for me to see and assess the new protocol of the Senate of saying the Lord’s Prayer with a welcome to country reading. I believe the intent of introducing the welcome to country reading has not worked and that, consequently, the respect for the Lord’s Prayer has been watered down. What has occurred is that the prayer is immediately followed by the welcome to country virtually all in the same breath and given the same reverence. In a sense, the welcome to country has been placed on the same plane as the Lord’s Prayer. This is something I do not believe the Indigenous people would even want to see.

The welcome to country is not prayer or a religious rite. Rather, it is a respectful acknowledgement of traditional owners. It ought to be distanced from the greater tradition and meaning of saying the Lord’s Prayer; however, the President is required to give the prayer and the welcome to country equivalent status. It certainly looks like that every morning, to the point that it is not out of place to say ‘Amen’ after the welcome to country.