Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Treasury and Finance) Share this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to contribute to this debate on the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Removing Discrimination Against Students) Bill 2018. In doing so, I might begin by responding briefly to some of the claims that were made by Senator Keneally in her contribution. In relation to what Senator Stoker had to say, Senator Keneally made a pretty dishonest contribution in claiming Senator Stoker somehow didn't understand these issues. Senator Stoker's contribution showed a much greater understanding than Senator Keneally or anyone else in this debate. But I'd go to Senator Keneally's claim that all of the schools are on board and that they don't see any issue with this. That is simply not true. I'll go through the senior leadership of some of our biggest school providers who have said, time and time again, that they don't expel students simply because they're gay. They've said that, despite the clumsiness of some of these exemptions—in fact, that's the exact words that Anglican leadership used—they said:

The current exemptions, however clumsy, in the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 are really the only significant legal protections available to schools to maintain their ethos and values with regards to core issues of faith.

So Senator Keneally can dismiss the Anglicans, and she can dismiss the Catholics, but just yesterday Peter Comensoli, on behalf of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference, said:

Catholic schools do not use these exemptions to expel students simply on the grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity.

…   …   …

… schools want to maintain the capacity to teach a Christian understanding of sexual ethics and marriage according to our faith tradition. Our right to continue to teach Catholic beliefs is threatened by proposals to repeal existing faith-based exemptions for religious schools and institutions.

We've got senior Anglican leaders, we've got senior Catholic leaders, and we've got Islamic leaders. Adel Salman of the Islamic Schools Association of Australia makes a similar point, saying:

… with students, the association is not calling for students to be discriminated against or in fact to be expelled from the school because of their particular sexuality, but by the same token the students and their families need to understand that the school will be teaching the particular values and principles of the religion.

There were a number of other contributions, including from the Australian Association of Christian Schools. They said:

Proposals to remove the ability to access exemptions is effectively the removal of the ability of the institution to define its character, goals and imperatives. It is the removal of the ability to control the unique voice of the institution to the wider society. It is actually the removal of the identity of the institution.

Proposals to remove exemptions from educational institutions gives rise to some chilling possibilities.

Christian Schools Australia, another large faith-based educator in this country, also apparently dismissed by Senator Keneally and the Labor Party as not knowing anything about schooling, said:

We are concerned that if changes are made to the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 … without creating adequate positive protections for our schools—

that's the important point—

the effect would be to profoundly compromise the ability of our schools to act in accordance with their beliefs and convictions.

…   …   …

… no changes should be made to legislation affecting our schools, until there is also adequate protection in place for schools to maintain their beliefs and character as faith-based schools.

Christian schools need legislation that gives us much clearer assurance that schools can continue to:

In further testimony, the Australian Association of Christian Schools said:

… if they are removed and adequate protection isn't given to schools to hold a commonly held biblical view of sexuality and relationships in what is taught and in managing school life and in who the school employs, you'll be carving out an area of faith and deeming it impermissible. You'll be deciding that those long-held beliefs of many Christians can't be expressed in education at all—and that's a serious step for a government to take.

They are concerned that, without adequate protection, schools could be forced—

…to teach in ways that contradict what they genuinely believe, to act against their conscience and beliefs in the way they handle behaviour, and to employ staff who don't share in and meaningfully uphold the beliefs of the school.

Debate interrupted.