Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate—

(a)

recognises each senator’s role as community leaders and the collective responsibility to conduct debates on matters of public importance in a respectful and accurate manner, using language that is constructive and appropriate; and

(b)

agrees that all debate on the issue of asylum seekers and border protection is framed within the law, terms and definitions of the:

(a)

United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951);

(b)

Migration Act 1958;

(c)

Criminal Code Act 1995;

(d)

Racial Discrimination Act 1975; and

(e)

Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW).

Question put.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration and Shadow Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Leader in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I seek leave to make a short, two-minute, statement.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration and Shadow Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Leader in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the coalition, I would like to place on the record our position in relation to the motion moved by Senator Hanson-Young and the basis for voting against it. At the outset, I would like to say that we are against the use of intemperate language. This is a difficult area and one where there is a diversity of views. Whilst there may be a divergence of views, it is important that we respect all views and the rights of senators to express those views and that we engage in a rational and orderly debate. However, Senator Hanson-Young’s motion seeks to shut down debate, and we are opposed to this.

The Australian public are concerned about the issue of unauthorised arrivals. Over the past year we have seen the dismantling of the strong immigration and border security framework inherited by Labor from the Howard government. Many are expressing their deep concerns over the policy failures and the government’s inability to manage our borders and maintain an orderly migration system. They are expressing those concerns in correspondence, talkback and in the media. They expect their representatives to articulate those concerns in this place. Hence, any attempt to stifle or shut down debate must be resisted.

We have always sought to address the key issues which frame this debate and do so in a responsible manner. It is a debate over measures to address the abhorrent trade in people smuggling; it is not a debate over semantics. Therefore, we have not supported shutting down debate on this important issue which is at the forefront of current public debate.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I seek leave to make a short statement.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The reason that I moved this motion was that I think we can all agree that some of the language that has been used in this debate over the last few weeks has not been respectful, has not been appropriate and clearly has not been parliamentary. If we are to be honest about the fact that we are obviously going to continue discussing these difficult issues in this chamber then let us agree as a group of senators, as community leaders, that the type of language that we use is important when speaking about people and their motives. It needs to be done delicately. We do not want to see dog whistling. We do not want to see discrimination. We do not want to hear words used that have been used over the past few weeks, like ‘scum’, ‘terrorist’ and ‘illegals’. They are actually not helpful to the debate.

We need a level of maturity in this debate in order for us to come up with real solutions—a level of maturity which is actually much higher than what we have seen of late. If this is a commitment from both the members of the government and the members of the opposition, including Senator Fierravanti-Wells, to act more maturely, to treat people in this debate more respectfully, then I take that in good measure and I take that in goodwill. All I was asking for was a commitment on paper. I will take your word that you will be mature in this debate and that we will see a cessation in the use of words that are used to simply dog whistle hatred and disrespect.