David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to address the Natural Heritage Trust of Australia report for 2008-09. The National Trust definition of 'heritage' is 'all that we as a society wish to pass on to future generations'. That is a really important thing to understand: there are certain things that we need to pass on to future generations so that they understand why the world is as it is and why they are where they are at. Another definition of 'heritage' is 'the background from which one comes'. We teach history because it is important that our young people understand what has occurred in history. I was fascinated while here in the parliament some years ago to be talking to a group of young people who were here for a leadership forum. The topic of the Iraq War came up. One of them—and these were all well-educated young people in their twenties at university—said: 'What has Saddam Hussein ever done wrong? He has never hurt anyone. He has never invaded another country.' I must confess that I sat back in amazement as others in the group started echoing similar sentiments. When I asked them if they had heard of the first Gulf War and the invasion of Kuwait, I was largely met by blank looks. I suddenly realised that most of these people were only 10 or 12 years old when that occurred. They were judging events that were occurring in the current day without any understanding of the world events and the personalities that had led to that. That was leading them to make a number of quite unsound judgments about why Australia was involved and why the world was taking action. My point is that our history curriculum therefore must cover and give people appropriate context of why the world is as it is. So I am deeply disturbed to see that the new national curriculum that is going to come into effect in 2013 is actually looking to remove the terms BC and AD, which have forever in our modern history set our calendars. BC, before Christ, or AD, in the year of our Lord, determines how we measure time. More importantly, it describes the background of our culture. When you are looking at heritage and the things that have led to the world being as it is, it is important that people understand that the Christian faith and the person of Christ, whether or not you believe that faith, have had a significant impact in the world. It informs you as you look around at different countries and try to understand why our culture is different—why some cultures value freedom, why some cultures value individual lives and rights and others do not.

Just this week we passed a motion here in the Senate looking, for example, at the actress Marzieh Vafamehr, who is getting 90 lashes and a year in jail for her role in a film. There is a pastor in the same country on death row because he has decided to change his religion. We have to ask the question: why is it that some cultures celebrate freedom, give people choices and options, and others do not? I believe it is important that, rather than writing out our cultural roots and our heritage, our national curriculum should be helping young people to understand the background of the world. I think it is political correctness gone mad and I for one would certainly welcome any opportunity we have in this place to change the national curriculum to make sure we accurately reflect the cultural heritage that we here in Australia have. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.