Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Hansard source

I too would like to thank Senator Bernardi for proposing this matter to be discussed today. Following Senator Macdonald, as I am, can I reflect on a couple of elements of his contributions as well. We are indeed in the lucky country, so I thank him for adding that element of perspective to this discussion about reports of increasing attacks on Australia's traditional freedoms. I think we should take pause as to the sensationalising of these matters in the way in which some people have done. I am not at all suggesting that Senator Macdonald is one of those. I think his points about us being in the lucky country are very important for us all to reflect upon.

Senator Macdonald also raised the matter that occurred here earlier today. As a sidenote more than anything else, to ensure that this is on the record, I should highlight—as indeed did Senator Macdonald, if I recall correctly—that Senator O'Sullivan had the opportunity to seek leave to make a personal explanation. He didn't do so, but he did then cover the matters concerned during the suspension debate. So it's not that Senator O'Sullivan did not have an opportunity to defend his circumstances, but I think we would all do well to reflect on how formal business in the Senate is currently being conducted and, indeed, how it is considered by those outside of the parliament observing our behaviour.

That said, I would like to concentrate my remarks now on the issue of religious freedom, which is one of those things that I think many would regard as traditional freedoms. In Australia, of course, we've had a fairly unique heritage in how we reflect religious freedom, which in recent times has been highlighted as inadequate if you look at international standards and conventions on how we should protect religious liberty. With that background, it's useful to note some of the reporting today that a clear majority of Australians, both Liberal and Labor voters, back new laws to prevent individual schools and companies from being discriminated against because of their religious beliefs and practices. The front page of The Australian today reports a Newspoll that shows 59 per cent of those surveyed were in favour of new laws to protect people with religious beliefs, compared with 26 per cent of those who oppose them. Even Greens voters overwhelmingly support strengthening protections, with 63 per cent saying they favoured change, compared with 50 per cent of One Nation voters—supporters, I should say.

What does this Newspoll tell us in the context of this debate? It shows that the support among all key political parties is running in favour of legislating stronger protections for religious freedoms. While respecting and supporting the importance of people's religious beliefs, Australians do not support discrimination. We are, as Senator Macdonald said, the lucky country. We have this ethos of a fair go. That is why this parliament supports the recommendations of the Senate inquiry into discrimination-free schools and associated matters, in its report tabled yesterday, to remove the exemption in section 38(3) of the Sex Discrimination Act, which currently allows faith based schools to discriminate against students on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Although this has not been used for this purpose by faith based schools, times have changed, and it's appropriate and right that the laws are updated to reflect those changes.

I can understand why some religious organisations are concerned at changes which still occur without the broader issues relating to religious liberty being addressed. One of the reasons for that, I suppose, is that this government kicked down the road the issue of religious freedom when the parliament dealt with same-sex marriage. Senators will recall that former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, when confronted with difficult issues over how that legislation should deal with religious freedom, kicked those issues down the road with the Ruddock review. Those senators, particularly in the coalition, who might have been inclined to act at the time on those matters essentially removed their support, and there was going to be no change. Of course, we're still waiting for the Ruddock review report quite some time later. Now we have other issues because of a leaked report of the Ruddock review's recommendations, without the considerations or the discussion that might have led to those recommendations. So we have a second issue that Australians are being asked to address in relation to discrimination issues in schools but still no Ruddock report to help guide us in how we should adequately cover religious freedom in Australia.

Whilst I think most faith based schools say they think the historical exemptions are not really the way to proceed in dealing with these issues, they are obviously reluctant to have the exemptions removed, and quite fairly so. The Ruddock review has not been disclosed—the government hasn't dealt with those issues—and these schools are being asked to operate without the exemptions and without other arrangements to address that void. This is why I say these Newspoll figures that I highlighted are particularly interesting. The Australian public at large is saying: 'Fix it. Act on it. Do it.'

This is the particular problem that the current government faces just now. The stagnation at a federal level with respect to dealing with policy across a broad range of areas is creating a lot of harm. It's creating harm and uncertainty in our schools at the moment. This is why Labor calls on the government to release the Ruddock report and to respond to the public call for change and reform here. The type of posturing that's occurred from some in the coalition on these issues, I regret to say, was once again reflected in the dissenting report, which was tabled yesterday. The dissenting report, at point 3 on page 57 says:

This committee has not been established to undertake an examination of the substantial issues raised by this question in good faith. It has been hurried in a way that exposes its true purpose: to provide a platform for some Labor and Greens Senators to project their pre-determined views onto a larger stage, for their own political advantage. Those involved should be condemned for doing so.

I sat in the Senate in that last sitting week and watched government senators join the Greens and limit the time frame of this inquiry. I questioned them in the chamber at the time: 'Why are you doing this?' I got no satisfactory answer there, and now I think it deserves to be exposed that those very same senators are saying in their report that this inquiry was rushed. It was rushed because they voted for it to be rushed, and to suggest that this is on Labor's head is simply outrageous. This is once again posturing by some members of the coalition, thinking that they can delude members of the community on something the front page of The Australian tells us, 'They know what they want, and it's time we got our act together to do it.'

Labor's platform has, for many, many years, indicated that we should act to reinforce religious freedom in Australia. That is Labor's platform position, and that is the position that is represented in the majority report of the committee, which was tabled yesterday. Recommendation 5 says:

The committee recommends that consideration be given to inserting in law a positive affirmation and protection of religious freedom in Australia that is appropriately balanced with other rights.

It's about time we did it. Release the Ruddock Report and stop stalling.