Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Hansard source

I'll make some comments in the time left. One, we don't support the suspension, because we have a program to get to, and there are many other ways, forms and times in the program where senators can raise issues, like the one Senator Hanson is raising today. We would like to get back to our housing bill, which this Senate debated all day yesterday. We have a small window of time today to debate that, so that's the first point.

Two, we did take the rare step of not agreeing with the first reading. It is a rare step. In my time in this place, we have used it one other time, in response to a bill that Senator Anning tried to introduce. For us on this side of the chamber, the reason we took that decision—and we did think about it carefully—was the debate that would happen in this place if a bill like that was introduced. I think the performance from Senator Roberts just confirmed that the decision we took last week was right. Senator Roberts called for a rational debate and then gave a speech like that. There is no rational debate, Senator Roberts, on this. There are many other places Senator Hanson and you can speak about the matters that are contained in a bill that Senator Hanson seeks to introduce. But we draw the line at that bill being the subject of debate in this chamber, where we are leaders in our communities and leaders of the country.

And you may scoff, and you may put it on your social media so that we get inundated with all the hate and abuse that comes with that. That's fine. We disagree on bills all the time in this place. They're on policy, and that's fine. This is a vibrant democracy. But when you have bills that seek to harm people, including young people, we will draw the line. That is a red line for us. We do not apologise. We know how vulnerable the gender-diverse community is. We know how they struggle. We do not think the Senate is a qualified place for that debate. That debate should be had at home, with friends and with health professionals that seek to guide some of those difficult decisions for young people in this country. They are qualified. An irrational debate in this place that seeks to hurt and undermine young people—we will draw the line there.

This is not about disallowing free speech or shutting down democracy. People introduce bills in this place all the time. For every private member's bill that comes in, if it isn't from our side we will disagree with it. That's what they're being pulled in for. We have to draw a line in this chamber that says, 'No, we're not going to let this parliament and everybody in it share their views on your personal choice.' That is the reason why we took this decision.

We agree with many of the comments from Senator Birmingham about the rights, policy and practice, convention, Odgers' and all the rest. Indeed we agree with almost everything he said. We allow bills to come into this place all the time, many of which we would disagree with. But when it concerns people, and when it's such a deeply personal and divisive debate that you seek to bring into this chamber, don't pretend it's otherwise and don't pretend that it's just a matter of policy interest for you; it's not. That's not how the debate about the gender diverse community goes in this country—we know that. The parliament should protect the communities that we represent. Every person should be protected in this place, and that's why we took the decision that we took last week. That's why we have denied leave for it today.

But we are not trying to stop Senator Hanson from speaking or raising issues. She is a senator and a leader. You have the forms of this place in which to do that, and you do it. You represent the interests that you seek to bring into this chamber. You seek to bring in a bill and have that bill debated—have it open for hours of discussion in this place—and we say no. We say that's not right. We think that, for young people in particular, the Senate should stand up on something like this and say no—and we have to win a majority of votes. It's not as though you're being shut down without the will of the chamber; the chamber has to support that. They did last week, and I hope the chamber will oppose the suspension this morning and oppose the bill being brought on.