Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Removing Discrimination Against Students) Bill 2018, as moved by Senator Wong. This legislation is very straightforward. The amendment would remove exemptions for religious schools in the Sex Discrimination Act. Those exemptions did, of course, allow religious schools to discriminate with regard to student admission on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and intersex status.

The legislation is not only straightforward but is, or at least it should be, uncontroversial. The leader of the Labor Party, Mr Shorten, and the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Senator Wong, support the amendment and pledge the Labor Party's support. The leader of the Greens, Senator Di Natale, is on the record supporting the removal of these exemptions, and several Green senators, such as Senator Rice, who just spoke in this debate, also have expressed their support for these amendments. The leader of the government, the Prime Minister, Mr Morrison, said before the Wentworth by-election that he supports removing the exemptions that permit religious schools to discriminate against students. Here's what Mr Morrison said on 13 October 2018, a week before the Wentworth by-election:

Our Government does not support expulsion of students from religious non-state schools on the basis of their sexuality.

That is an unambiguous statement from the Prime Minister. He is very clear: 'Our government does not support expulsion of students from religious non-state schools on the basis of their sexuality.' The Prime Minister went on to say:

I will be taking action to ensure amendments are introduced as soon as practicable to make it clear that no student of a non-state school should be expelled on the basis of their sexuality.

I welcome this statement from the Prime Minister. The community welcomed this statement from the Prime Minister. I dare say even the voters of Wentworth, although they did not vote for Mr Morrison's Liberal candidate, nonetheless welcomed the Prime Minister's commitment and took him at his word.

The Labor Party has sought to work with the government to progress these amendments that the Prime Minister himself said he wanted to introduce as soon as practicable. We are willing to work with the government. We would welcome the opportunity to work with the government on this legislative change, but we will not wait for the government. Before us today are straightforward, clear, unambiguous and uncomplicated amendments that achieve the very legislative change the Prime Minister says he wants and will support, and this is the opportunity for the parliament to make this change.

Here in the Senate, we all know that the community supports and wants this change. We know this because the previous Prime Minister, Mr Turnbull, ordered a review into religious freedom, which was conducted by former Liberal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock. A distinguished panel of Australians assisted in that work. That review took some 15,000 submissions and conducted dozens of face-to-face meetings. Despite the fact that that report was handed to the government in May, the government has not yet released it. However, that doesn't mean the Ruddock report isn't already prompting change. It's precisely because somebody leaked sections of the Ruddock report to the media that the community became widely aware that these exemptions that allow discrimination against students on the basis of their very identity still exist in Australian law. In 2018, these exemptions are no longer accepted by the Australian community. The significant and welcome shift in our understanding and acceptance of all Australians, regardless of their gender identity, sexuality or intersex status, was cemented in Australian law just a year ago when the community overwhelmingly voted yes in the marriage equality plebiscite, and this parliament followed suit by passing amendments to the Marriage Act to legalise marriage equality.

We also know that the overwhelming majority of religious schools do not want or see the need for these exemptions. We know this as a result of the recent Senate inquiry, where Catholic and other religious school systems gave evidence that these exemptions are not used or relied upon. We know this because the Prime Minister, Mr Morrison, told us so—again on 13 October, before the Wentworth by-election. When speaking of his government's support for the removal of these exemptions, the Prime Minister said:

I also know this view is widely shared by religious schools and communities across the country

As the mother of two children educated in and now graduated from the Catholic high school system, I know that modern Catholic schools teach their students that everyone is created in God's image and that what sits at the core of the Gospel is a call to love one another as God has loved us. So I agree with the Prime Minister when he says his government doesn't support these exemptions. I agree when he says that religious schools don't support these exemptions. I welcome the religious schools having spoken out in this debate in support of removing these exemptions, and I am pleased that Labor is putting forward this amendment. This legislation can and should have bipartisan support. This legislation can and should be passed by the parliament by the end of this year.

I note that Labor also believes that no employee at a religious school should face discrimination on the basis of their gender identity, relationship status or intersex status. The time has come to remove these exemptions. Relationship status, sexuality and intersex status have no place when it comes to employment law in relation to religious schools. However, Labor also accepts that teachers and staff are employees. They are adults, not children. Additional complexity exists for them where it does not for students—for example, potentially in relation to the Fair Work Act or other areas that cover employment.

Labor respects the decision taken by thousands of Australian parents who, like my husband and me, chose a religious school for their children. Labor also supports religious freedom and supports religious schools in their expectation that their staff will act in ways that uphold the values and ethos of the school and its faith and not act in ways that undermine it.

If I may say so, in listening to some of the Liberal senators who have participated in this debate so far, I have heard them say that no student should be discriminated against because they are same-sex attracted, gay or lesbian, yet they seem to mistake the difference between identity and action. That is, while they give lip-service in this debate to the notion that nobody, of course, should face that discrimination, they then go on and make assertions that this change that is before us will somehow 'gut schools' ability to teach according to their ethos' or 'no longer allow schools to teach according to the tenets of their faith'. They seem to somehow misunderstand the difference between identity and actions.

What Labor is arguing here is that no school should have the basis to discriminate against a student based on their identity. We also believe that no school should have the ability to discriminate against teachers or staff on the basis of their identity. But we understand that religiously affiliated schools need to have the clarity that they are able to require their staff to act in ways that uphold the values and the ethos and the tenets of the faith and not to act in ways that undermine it. It is the distinction between identity and action.

When it comes to students, I listened very carefully to Senator Stoker. What she seems to misunderstand is that right now, today, religious schools, when they enrol a student, have the ability to ask parents to sign up to a set of values and expectations and rules. Already today religious schools can ask parents to agree that their children will attend chapel or that their children will take religious instruction whether they are part of that faith or not, and, in choosing to enrol their child in that school, the parents have to agree to accept that. I feel that Senator Stoker's speech misunderstood the very nature of the debate that we are having.

I could make a tongue-in-cheek observation that, as a female who attended a Catholic school from year 1 through to graduate school, I note that my mere presence in the place did not stop that patriarchal faith that I am a part of from teaching specific gendered identity around women and what our roles could and couldn't be in the church. It's a tongue-in-cheek observation, but my point is this: when we hear claims that removing these exemptions will gut the ability of religiously affiliated schools to teach their faith, there is no evidence that that is the case. There is no evidence that supports this. There is nothing in this legislation that would bar schools from continuing to teach the tenets of their faith to the students who enrol in them.

Labor will work with religious schools and the LGBTIQ community in order to ensure that, when it comes to teachers and staff, we get the balance right to remove those discriminations in employment based on who people are but ensure that the religious values of a school are upheld and protected. But, given the lack of sitting days available to us in this year, we must prioritise what we can achieve legislatively, and we prioritise children.

It is clear that many in the community want to consider how we progress removing exemptions from discrimination that exists for teachers and staff in religious schools. Not only do we know this from the public reaction to the Ruddock review but we know it from evidence given at the recent Senate hearings. We know there is more work to do, and we call on the government to release the Ruddock report. It would aid in this next phase of discussions when it comes to religious schools and the Sex Discrimination Act.

But today we can and we should, as a parliament, make a clear and unambiguous decision. We can and we should take a decision—which enjoys widespread support—that no child in an Australian school, be it a public institution or a religiously affiliated school, should face discrimination based on who he or she is. The public expects us to do this. The government and the opposition have both said they support this. The Greens support it. It is time for all of us in here to keep faith with the community and pass this legislation.