Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise to talk about the Civil Law and Justice Legislation Amendment Bill 2017. As a Liberal, I know that all of us on this side of the chamber share and value the freedoms of thought, worship, speech and association. They are absolutely fundamental to our own democracy and absolutely foundation principles of our party. But so, too, is equality of opportunity. On this side of the chamber we do believe—all of us, as a core value—in the equality of opportunity for all Australians. Listening to Senator Bernardi tonight I was, unfortunately, in the chair and it would have been highly inappropriate for me to make any comment. Now that I can, I want to say to Senator Bernardi: shame on you! Shame on you for your comments this evening. To come into this place in this day and age, when we have over 400 women serving overseas, and say what you did shames us all, and it is certainly not in line with our fundamental principle of equality of opportunity. For a senator and somebody who was a member of the Liberal Party to come in here and argue for keeping entrenched discrimination in the Sex Discrimination Act, simply for the fact of someone's gender, is a complete and utter disgrace.

I'd like to share with this place why I think it is so appalling. The senator may have been somewhat flippant in his comments but he could not have chosen a topic more insulting or demeaning not only to all of our women who now serve in uniform but to all those young women who want to put their hand up. They have a look at the women who've now graduated as fighter pilots. They look at the women who are putting themselves forward to serve in combat roles. Senator Bernardi, I'd say this to you: yes, men and women are different, but hallelujah for that! Throughout all of my career I've had to fight to show—as, I'm sure, has every woman in this place—that difference is not less; to demonstrate the fact that as women we can do things just as well as any man. We do things just as well because we're women, Senator Bernardi, not in spite of the fact that we are women.

Again, you seem to think that service in our military is all about brute force. I can tell you that the men and women that I have had the pleasure and the honour to serve with and friends of mine who are still serving, as well as some of the young women I've had the pleasure of meeting in this job, do not deserve your comments this evening. They are some of our brightest and most capable. Service for men and women is not just about brute strength, as you said. It is about courage. It is about loyalty. It is about team work. It is about leadership. And all of those qualities are equally held by women as they are by men. As Senator Bernardi said, it is not about breaking men or women. For him to come in here and say that and trot out some claptrap from unnamed sources degrades us all. I want to share some statistics with Senator Bernardi in particular and anybody else who might want to trot out his—I was going to say 'unconscious bias' but I think it was very deliberate—bias. Fifty-one per cent of our population are women; 51 per cent of our talent are women. For the future of our Defence Force and the security of our nation, we need more women to bring the depth and breadth of their talents into the Defence Force. Yes, we might do it a bit differently than men sometimes but, again, that is a good thing, Senator Bernardi; it is not something to be ridiculed in this chamber.

So let's have a look at some of the facts. Last year, 17 per cent of the ADF was comprised of women. There is a lot more talent out there to be had, and I think the defence forces are increasing that percentage in a very considered and a very sensible way. Entry standards have not been reduced. It is still about the quality of a person's intellect and their character, their merit and their ability to serve. Last year, 95 per cent of applicants for combat roles were men but five per cent were women and this year, I understand, it's eight per cent who are women. So far from what Senator Bernardi said—that women can't do combat roles or they don't want to do combat roles—of course women can do and are doing combat roles. Women will keep putting their hands up for combat roles, maybe never in exactly the same numbers as men, and we should be applauding and congratulating those who give it a go and those who get there, and not ridicule them. The Defence Force and, I know, the minister have a very sound policy of not highlighting women in these roles for very good reasons. I think Senator Bernardi tonight has shown us exactly why their privacy is protected from those people in the community, and sadly here in the Senate today, who would say to them, 'You are not good enough because you are a woman.' So I congratulate all of those women whose names, faces and identities we will probably never know. It is for all of those women that this has to be repealed, and the words of Senator Bernardi cannot go unanswered.

Lieutenant General Angus Campbell, the Chief of Army, was quoted as saying he wanted to see more women, more culturally and linguistically diverse people and more Indigenous Australians serving in our Army. It was not for any quota or politically correct reason that Senator Bernardi seemed to suggest but because he wants the best and most talented Australians to serve their nation in the Army. I couldn't agree more with the Chief of Army. I also agree with the previous Chief of Army, David Morrison, who said, 'The standard you walk past is the standard you accept.' Today in the Senate I heard words and a standard that I could not possibly walk past or ignore in this place. Too many women for too long in the military and in the Army have had to put up with people expressing opinions like that not just in the workplace, maybe in their families, but also from politicians. As I said, it may have been somewhat flippant but it should not have been said, and I just hope that his comments tonight do not go much further than this because it is just wrong.

I hope, Senator Bernardi, you have heard my comments here tonight and I will be happy to have a talk to you about them afterwards. But as I said, we on this side of the chamber, like those opposite, do believe in a just and humane society. We all share those values in this place. The importance of family and respect for the rule of law are paramount and must always be maintained, and this omnibus bill that is before the Senate today does just that. As we've heard from many of our colleagues expanding on the brilliance of archives, the way we do our archival activities and the many other things that this bill changes are all very important.

This bill is designed, across a number of bills, to protect the rule of law and ensure that justice is always maintained. Through this bill, I commend the government and also those opposite for their comments and their contributions to this bill this evening because I think it does make the right decisions and take the right steps to ensure that our Commonwealth legislation is coherent, readable and accessible to the widest possible audience so that it can be consistently applied and easily understood. As all of us in this chamber know, it can quite often be very challenging to actually read and see consistency across legislation, and certainly it is not always easily understood.

This omnibus bill will improve the operation and clarity of our civil justice legislation by modifying, simplifying and clarifying existing provisions and, wonderfully, repealing redundant provisions to strengthen and ensure our democracy has all the necessary and appropriate safeguards and legislative instruments to ensure that our country remains equitable and just for all—nothing more so than the move out of the Sex Discrimination Act to remove positive discrimination against women simply for the fact that they are women. I do applaud the government and those opposite for supporting this.

The bill consists of 10 schedules with amendments to 10 separate pieces of Commonwealth legislation that will ensure we have a strong, just and equitable justice system and a legal framework in this country. I note Senator Macdonald's comments earlier this evening about the Senate legal and constitutional affairs committee inquiry into this omnibus bill and its report that it tabled last year. It was pleasing to see that there was support for the bill and that the government has taken up the amendments as recommended by the committee.

Some of the impacts, in addition to the ones where I've been so critical of Senator Bernardi tonight, include amendments to the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 and the Legislation Act 2003. This bill will amend the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 and the Legislation Act 2003 to clarify the validity of ministerial actions and the operation of provisions about the compilations prepared for the Federal Register of Legislation. Probably most people listening to this at this time of night might not exactly find it very exciting. But again, in this place it is important.

I won't go through the Archives Act amendments because Senator Moore has gone through those very well and explained them with her passion for archival activities of this chamber. But I do support the amendments to the Bankruptcy Act 1996 to clarify that the Family Court of Australia has bankruptcy jurisdiction when a trustee applies to have a financial agreement set aside under the Family Law Act—again, something not significant to all Australians. But for those going through that court and being impacted by this decision, it is a good thing for them.

This bill will update the Evidence Act such that the presumption in relation to when postal articles sent by prepaid post are received is in accordance with changes to Australia Post delivery times. Again, it is not necessarily something that those listening will get too excited about. But for those who still do use and rely on Australia Post, you will know that this is actually an important amendment. And others in this chamber tonight, including Senator Griff, have so eloquently talked about the Family Law Act amendments.

I think we all support the fact that this bill strengthens Australia's response to international parental child abduction. Many of us have family members—and I've certainly got a family member—who have been devastated by having a child abducted. Any powers, including this one, that can actually assist the process for those parents of an abducted child are to be applauded. What this one does is clarify the range of persons who may discharge the powers of registry managers in the Family Court and improve the consistency in the application of provisions for de facto married couples.

In addition, this bill will update the arrest, entry and search powers under the act and add additional safeguards for the exercise of those powers. Again, many people listening at this time of night will not get too excited about that, but, as Senator Griff captured so well, for those who are going through this nightmare, having increased powers, protections and processes is of comfort. I note that this bill will also make some minor technical amendments to the Family Law Act to clarify definitions and remove redundant provisions.

I want to conclude where I started. I could not speak any more strongly in my support for the repeal of section 43 of the Sex Discrimination Act. It is not only an anachronism. It is a complete disgrace that it is still there in this day and age. Any young Australian woman can follow whatever profession or pursuit they want to in life, and it is not up to us or anybody else in society to tell them what they cannot do simply because they were born a girl. As I said at the start, women do things just as well as men.

We might do things differently, but quite often—and I see it, time after time, on all sides of the chamber—women in this place do an amazing job. It is not in spite of the fact that we're women; women in this place do an amazing job because we are women. We have a different voice. We have a different perspective on life. Certainly diversity in this chamber is to be celebrated, as it is in the military.

As I said, shame on you, Senator Bernardi! You might not have meant what you said, but the words you used and what you said tonight have a serious impact. I hope you will come in and address those comments.

Debate adjourned.