Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion to provide for consideration of the Discrimination Free Schools Bill 2018.

Leave not granted.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I believe I've got Senator O'Sullivan on a point order, Senator Di Natale. I'll take the point of order then come back to you. Senator O'Sullivan, do you have a point of order?

Barry O'Sullivan (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, I do. It's about this issue of wearing artefacts into the chamber. We've been pulled up on scarves, coats, hats and all sorts of things. The Greens are wearing badges that have '$75' on them. I personally don't believe any of them are worth $75, but, nonetheless, I think that they ought to be told to remove them, otherwise we'll set a precedent. I've got plenty of stuff I want to wear in here if that's the case.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I come back with a formal ruling, we have previously prohibited the wearing of a jersey or a shirt that had a senator's name on it by, I believe, the mining industry. We have not finally settled upon what badges are allowed or what paraphernalia is allowed. We know that slogans on shirts are not allowed. I was going to start with the principle that any badge wider than a lapel is probably going to be inappropriate, and that would facilitate people wearing ribbons, as I know they do for certain notable days. Before I come back with a ruling, I will ask senators with badges that are wider than about an inch or two to take them off to be consistent with past rulings. Otherwise, I'll come back to the chamber with a ruling. I am trying to be reasonable to facilitate people wearing ribbons on special days and for commemorative events but at the same time be consistent, because, if those badges were on a T-shirt, I would suggest that they would not be allowed in the chamber. Senator Whish-Wilson, are you rising on a point of order?

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My point of order is on the lapels. That might encourage us all to wear 1970s suits!

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's an obvious consequence! Can I just, with a touch of seriousness, note that the Senate operates on the basis of a degree of comity amongst colleagues. The slogan on the shirt that was ruled out of order in the past that had someone's name and an industry on it was smaller than that badge. I note Senator Di Natale has a small badge, which I wouldn't consider to be out of order, consistent with my view of ribbons and the like. I ask senators who are wearing the large ones to take them off. I'll come back to the chamber with a formal ruling. I'll check the precedent on it. I thank senators for assisting with that. I trust that suffices on the point of order.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pursuant to contingent notice, I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Senator Di Natale moving a motion relating to the conduct of business of the Senate, namely a motion to provide for the consideration of the Discrimination Free Schools Bill 2018.

There is every chance that, with an impending election, we may not come back to parliament next year. The Liberal Party are in chaos. They are ripping each other apart over so many issues. Obviously, it is a party that has no climate policy and no energy policy. Now there's a rip-roaring debate inside the Liberal Party around the Ruddock review and around the freedom to openly discriminate against LGBTIQ communities.

We believe that right now—by supporting the passage of Greens legislation in this parliament—is the best opportunity to end discrimination once and for all. We know that this government can't be trusted to bring on legislation. We know that they can't be trusted not to leak documents to the media. They can't be trusted to keep their word. We've become accustomed to a government that says one thing and does another.

We are here to ensure that this parliament ends discrimination once and for all in our schools and in educational settings. We don't think it's acceptable in any area of the community. We don't believe there's any place for a school to tell a young person who may be gay or lesbian or struggling with their sexuality or gender identity that they're not welcome. We don't think there's any place for a school to tell a teacher who might be in a same-sex relationship, 'We don't think we can offer you a place in our school.' That's not what a country that supports every member of its community does. That's not what a country that recognises that that form of discrimination should be consigned to the 1950s does.

Now is the time when we should be able to work across party lines, with the Labor Party and the crossbench, to actually deliver legislation that will end discrimination once and for all. The Prime Minister came out and said he doesn't support religious schools being able to expel students based on their sexuality. That was a welcome announcement. I note that he was silent on the issue of teachers. The Leader of the Opposition also came out and said that he'll work to ensure that no child is denied human dignity. Well, here's your opportunity to ensure that every child—indeed, every person in this country—is afforded human dignity and that no child is expelled simply on the basis of their sexuality or gender identity. We have an opportunity now to protect young people and to protect teachers so that they continue in their learning environment or in their employment without the fear of being expelled simply because of who they are.

Of course, the message this sends to young people right across our community in the wake of that hateful and divisive plebiscite is: 'The way you feel is wrong. You as a person are not valued. There's something wrong with you.' We as a nation shouldn't stand for that. We should never accept that. We should be striving to end discrimination in all its forms wherever it is. That's why we are very proud to introduce a bill that says to every single child and teacher in the country: 'We stand with you. We value you. We love you for who you are.' Yet, what we have in this place so far are two parties who made hollow promises only a few short weeks ago and won't back it up with legislation.

Senator Pratt interjecting—

I'll take that interjection from Senator Pratt. If you support ending discrimination towards students and teachers, support this suspension motion so that we can debate the bill. It's no good to go out in front of the cameras and mouth empty words. Those words aren't given the force of law. That's what we're debating here right now: whether we will give every child and every teacher in Australia the comfort to know that they will be respected and loved and treated equally simply because of who they are, not because of some outdated legislation that sends a message—not just to them but to all people—that somehow the way they feel is wrong, or different. So I say to all of you in this chamber: support this suspension.

Janet Rice (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just on a month ago, the Australian public learnt that religious schools could expel lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender children and fire LGBTQ-plus teachers and other staff members simply on the basis of who they are, simply on the basis of their sexuality or their gender identity. And they were horrified. An opinion poll showed that 74 per cent of voters oppose these laws that allow religious schools to select students and teachers on the basis of their sexual orientation, their gender identity or their relationship status. So, it is urgent that we continue to debate and, in fact, to vote on our private senator's bill to remove these discriminations today. Even the Prime Minister admits that removing discrimination against students is urgent. Last month he said that we need to act now. Well, we can act, and we must. People have suffered for too long. We can pass this bill through the Senate today. Our amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act to remove these discriminations are simple and straightforward, and the Australian community and the LGBTIQ community will celebrate when they are passed. Right now these exemptions to Australia's antidiscrimination laws serve only to harm and to threaten LGBTQ people who attend or work at religious schools or who wish to do so.

Yesterday I launched a call for LGBTQ-plus people who are attending or working at religious schools or who did so in the past to share their stories with us, and the stories have started to flow in. I received a letter yesterday from someone who has asked that they remain anonymous. They said: 'For weeks I and many like me have been nervously watching the headlines wondering what, if any, changes will be made to the Sex Discrimination Act. Why do I care? Because I'm a teacher at a Christian school, and I'm gay. I go to work each day eager to impart knowledge on my pupils, but each day I am terrified. Currently, if my employers found out that I was in a same-sex relationship, they could legally fire me. I know you're wondering why I don't just leave and teach at a school where I am welcome. At the end of the day I am still a Christian and I want to be here. My Christianity is a choice; my sexuality is not. Some people, including my own father, have said, "Just keep your head down and pretend you're single." Just imagine for a minute that the people you are with nine hours a day, five days a week, do not know that the person you love even exists.'

The Greens have fought for years to change our laws and end this damaging discrimination. Our bill removes exemptions for students, teachers and staff members at religious schools and protects them not just on the basis of their sexuality but on the basis of their gender identity, because trans and gender-diverse people have hardly been mentioned in the public debate other than the very identity of trans students being under constant attack, including during the current Victorian election campaign. Trans and gender-diverse students, along with lesbian and gay students, must not be able to be expelled, and staff members must not be able to be fired.

Before the Wentworth by-election, the Labor Party said that they supported ending this discrimination towards students and teachers and the Prime Minister committed to stopping religious schools from expelling LGBTQ students before the end of October, but so far nothing has changed. The Prime Minister missed his self-imposed deadline, and we are worried that instead of working with the Greens to end this discrimination now the Labor Party wants to delay action, potentially until after the next election.

This week marks one year since the marriage equality postal survey results came in with a resounding yes vote showing that the majority of Australians supported removing discrimination in our marriage laws and making marriage equality a reality. Let us mark this momentous anniversary by taking another step forward in our fight to remove discrimination and to have equality for LGBTIQ Australians. Let's end this discrimination in our laws and in our schools, once and for all. I call on all senators in this place to support this motion and to support the Greens bill today.

Don Farrell (SA, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to indicate that the Labor Party will not be supporting the Greens in respect of this matter today and to reject the comments by Senator Rice about the Labor Party's position in respect of this matter. The matter arose, of course, in the lead-up to the Wentworth by-election, where individuals sought to release sections of the so-called Ruddock report into religious freedoms. There was speculation about what the contents of that report said, and, in particular, sections of that report were leaked to the media. As a result of that, there was significant debate in the lead-up to the Wentworth by-election about the responses of the various political parties to that report. I think it's very clear that, in relation to the first of those so-called leaks, the Labor Party, the Liberals and the Greens all made it very clear that they didn't support discrimination against LGBTI students in religious schools and that those current discrimination provisions that are in the law should be removed as a matter of priority. It's the removal of that discrimination that continues to be the priority of the Labor Party, and that's what we are focused on. We don't believe, especially in the lead-up to the Victorian elections next week, that the Greens should be playing games with such an important issue as discrimination against LGBTI students.

Labor has made it absolutely clear that we will work co-operatively with the government, as we like to do on so many occasions, and with everyone in this place to remove discrimination against students as a matter of priority. While Labor is also committed to removing discrimination against staff, I note that many of the religious schools that this current provision, as an exemption to the Sex Discrimination Act, applies to say that they do not use these provisions. But we recognise that there is an obligation, especially on the Labor Party, to consult further with the schools about a change to this legislation and the best way to achieve the result that we all want—that is, a discrimination-free society and, in particular, a discrimination-free society in religious schools. That's why we're seeking to progress this matter through the appropriate course, which we believe is a review by a committee. Labor's inquiry will progress the issue of discrimination against students by examining the government's proposed bill, and we are proposing that that should be done as a matter of priority.

The Labor Party does want to get this done by the end of the year, and we do note that the government had also indicated, especially in relation to the situation in regard to students, that they also wanted to get this legislation through the parliament. I do note that Christmas is heading towards us like a steam train at the moment and there are only a limited number of days left to deal with this issue. We are committed to removing discrimination against staff. We are going to examine the issue as part of our inquiry. What's become very clear is that the issue is complex and there will be some consequential amendments to other legislation required, but we've got a process to sensibly work through this issue to get the result that we seek, which is an end to these discriminatory clauses in the Sex Discrimination Act.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have just a very brief contribution. Firstly, the government of course will not be supporting this suspension motion. We think it's important that we get on with the important business of the government—namely, to legislate the government's plan to deliver a fairer share of the GST to Western Australia in a way that leaves every other state in Australia better off. That is an important item of business that the Senate should be dealing with forthwith. But, given some of the statements that have been made by Senator Rice and now also by Senator Farrell, I thought I would again put on the record that, as the Prime Minister announced some weeks ago, the government is committed to moving amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 to ensure no student of a non-state school can be expelled on the basis of their sexuality. We did engage in consultations with the opposition, through the shadow Attorney-General, to reach a relevant consensus in relation to these matters.

As I advised the chamber on behalf of the Prime Minister during the last sitting fortnight, subject to agreement between the government and the opposition in relation to our proposed amendments, we would be in a position to introduce those amendments as soon as possible during the most recent sitting fortnight. The government stands ready. But the Labor Party has not been prepared to come onboard with the very sensible amendments, consistent with what the Prime Minister has publicly indicated we would do. We remain available, in the first instance, where there is broad consensus, to make improvements to the relevant legislation. We can have a longer conversation in relation to the matters where there is a diversity of views. That is the government's position. We encourage all senators of goodwill to come together and move forward in relation to the areas of reform where there is a broad consensus—namely, ensuring that no student of a non-state school can be expelled on the basis of their sexuality—and then we will leave other matters for the broader processes that have been flagged by others.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I congratulate both the opposition and the government in their rejection of this attempt to hijack this place to pursue another element of the Greens' extreme agenda. The Greens, of course, are a party where hypocrisy is not unknown, because they stand to be the defenders of the marginalised and yet they marginalise many people and they refuse to deal with some of the serious, egregious breaches of public trust within their own ranks. As a point, Senator Farrell mentioned the Victorian election campaign in his response, and the Greens have someone who, on their Facebook page, endorses shoplifting as a legitimate pastime—one of their candidates. And, importantly, today it was revealed the Greens also have a person who has an alter ego as a rapper and, in his rap contributions, decides it's okay to drug women and rape them and violently abuse them. It is an appalling, shameful indictment on the selection of this motley bunch of Green zealots.

Why should we think that this might just be a single aberration? It's not, because the former senator Lee Rhiannon—may she return to this place, because her replacement is far, far worse—belled the cat on the abuse, the pawing and the sexual harassment that is endemic in the New South Wales Greens, which Senator Di Natale and his crew refuse to deal with. They come in here all pious, defending the marginalised, and yet they will not stand up to the freaks and the creeps in their own ranks who are molesting women in New South Wales. There are complaints and you're refusing to deal with them. But why would we expect anything different from you, Senator McKim? Why would we expect that? We know exactly what has been going on, because Senator Lee Rhiannon has published it. Senator Rhiannon, your former colleague, the one that you marginalised because she was prepared to speak up against your freaky, outrageous agenda.

You come in here and you try to hijack the agenda that the Australian people want dealt with. They want to see the GST fixed. They want to see you concentrate on the important issues. If you want to go through the contributions from those on the Greens, on every single occasion it's about finding some ism, some failure or some victim in this country. We've had enough of it. The Australian people have had enough of it. Get on with mainstream things. We need to protect people's jobs. We need to arrest the debt and deficit. How many times have the Greens spoken about debt and deficit in this place? Next to none, is my suggestion. The only thing they talk about is how everyone's apparently racist. Everyone's apparently racist in this country. Everyone's a bigot. Everyone's some sort of ism or some foe. Yet we know that the sexual harassers lurk within the New South Wales Greens party. We also know that they endorse people who say—or rap or sing or whatever it is they want to call it—it's okay to drug women and sexually abuse them. They defend that and say: 'Oh, it was just a song. It was done in their youth.' Well, that doesn't cut the mustard. Anyone who thinks it's okay to say, 'Yes, we should be drugging women and raping them or abusing them'—or whatever they say in their rap lyrics—is on another planet.

The Australian people have had a gutful of the Greens and their freaky agenda. The Australian people want this parliament to concentrate on things that are important to them. It is about building stronger families. It is about making sure our economy is better. It's about lowering taxes. It is about easing the cost of living. It is about providing practical, sensible and commonsense solutions to the ills that have failed to be dealt with because this place has been controlled by a bunch of people who are completely outside the mainstream. We can't allow this to happen anymore. I congratulate the major parties today for rejecting the extreme agenda of the Greens, which is trying to manifest itself by hijacking the business of this Senate again and again and again. Not only will they not deal with the issues confronting the Australian people; they refuse to deal with the issues that are endemic within their own party. They are a closed shop of misogynists, heterophobes and reverse bigots. They are the most disgraceful political party in the history of this country. Well done to the major parties for closing them down.

Kimberley Kitching (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to oppose the suspension of standing orders. Labor believes that nobody should be discriminated against because of who they are or whom they love. It was the Labor leader, Bill Shorten, who first called for action to address discrimination against LGBTI schoolchildren when the religious freedom report was leaked several weeks ago. Labor's sole focus since then has been to work constructively to pass a bill to remove unjust discrimination against LGBTI schoolchildren and staff. It is disappointing that the Morrison government broke its promise to remove discrimination against LGBTI school students in the last parliamentary sitting fortnight, but it is equally disappointing that the Greens political party is now trying to use this important issue as ammunition for a cheap political stunt designed to rescue its faltering election campaign in Victoria. That is why this suspension must be opposed.

I have an important message for the Greens and their leader, Senator Richard Di Natale: if you want to rescue your faltering Victorian election campaign, then you need to start with your shocking candidates. Just today, the Herald Sun reported that Greens candidate for Footscray, Angus McAlpine, who goes by the pseudonym 'FatGut', is guilty of making vile homophobic and violently sexist slurs, and he even trivialised sexual assault. This Greens candidate has also reportedly joked about stealing a police car, ramraiding stores and being arrested for being drunk and disorderly. The Greens have refused to disendorse him. By allowing Angus McAlpine to continue to stand under the Greens banner, the Greens and their leader, Senator Di Natale, are telling voters in Victoria that they endorse his vile homophobic and violently sexist statements. Former Greens leader Bob Brown, may he rest in peace, would never tolerate sexism and homophobia—

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He's not dead!

Kimberley Kitching (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know that. But he's not here and, boy, do you miss him! Boy, could you use some judgement from him!

Barry O'Sullivan (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Direct your comments through the chair.

Kimberley Kitching (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The truth is that, under the leadership of Senator Di Natale, a culture of sexism and misogyny is growing within the Greens party. But don't take my word for it. Just yesterday former Greens senator Lee Rhiannon posted the following statement on Facebook:

There are big lessons to be learnt from the Luke Foley matter. Once the details were revealed a number of Labor MPs quickly went public with their support for the woman involved. They spelt out how unimpressed they are with Luke Foley’s statements and criticised his defamation threat. Both Michael Daley and Bill Shorten have taken a firm stand.

A very similar allegation of indecent assault has been made by a former staffer against the Greens upper house MP Jeremy Buckingham. Jeremy Buckingham has threatened defamation proceedings against some of those who have discussed the matter.

How very, very nice!—

He has also made public statements that produced media coverage that suggested the former staffer complained for political reasons and that the complaint was false.

When a confidential and independent investigation delivered its findings, Jeremy Buckingham made a public statement falsely claiming he'd been cleared.

Jeremy Buckingham is a Greens candidate in the 2019 state election.

The two alleged incidents are similar but the responses of the Greens and Labor have taken different directions. Luke Foley is no longer leader and will not be contesting the state election in March 2019. My view is that MPs and candidates facing such allegations should stand aside from their positions or be stood aside by their parties.

Similarly action should be taken if the response by the accused to an allegation by a woman of sexual misconduct is to attack the woman and her supporters.

Jeremy Buckingham is resisting calls from within the party to stand aside. Greens members, local groups, office bearers and MPs have a lot to reflect on.

I would say to the Greens—through you, Acting Deputy President—that they should listen to the advice of their former colleague and reflect on their behaviour. Let me tell you something from the Greens forest of virtue signalling that they like to occupy. In politics and in life, if you have principles and values, they must be adhered to not when you want to but especially when those principles and values are inconvenient, embarrassing and expensive. Otherwise, they are not principles. Either you believe in feminism or you don't. (Time expired)

Rex Patrick (SA, Centre Alliance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to oppose the suspension of standing orders. We are of the strong belief that the employment of a teacher is a matter based on merit and merit alone. We also do not support the discrimination of students on the basis of gender or sexuality. Nonetheless, the question being asked here is about whether the issue raised warrants the disruption of the orderly conduct of business in the Senate. We do not believe that the threshold has been met in this particular instance.

Tim Storer (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Cormann stated that he's been having relatively little progress and luck with the opposition on this bill. He also reminded the Senate that the government stands ready to amend the Sex Discrimination Act, subject to reaching agreement with the opposition. If that's possible and he's not making any headway, I stand ready, along with the crossbench, to reach an outcome on your bill. That is my offer. I hope that the government is genuine and that the minister will take me up on it. I look forward to further discussion in regard to that.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the motion moved by Senator Di Natale to suspend standing orders be agreed to.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bernardi, do you have a point of order?

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I'm seeking your ruling. I'm hoping it will emulate the rulings of President Sibraa and President Reid, in which they said that the display of items such as badges with slogans in the chamber was inappropriate. I make the point that some of the Greens are wearing badges with $75 on them. I presume that's not how much Senator Di Natale paid his au pairs! I would ask you to rule them out of order, because it is clearly a political campaign.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bernardi, I'm not sure if you were here earlier. I'm not familiar with those rulings; I will check them. I made the observation before that the wearing of certain ribbons has not been prohibited in this chamber, whether they be in memoriam of certain events or commemorating or celebrating certain days. I did ask senators to take off badges that were larger than a lapel, consistent with rulings. I'll go back and check those rulings, but I have pondered this issue because to prohibit the wearing of any badge on a lapel other than a Senate badge would, I think, be too strict. I asked the senators involved—the Greens senators—and they did remove the larger badges. But I will check those rulings on the smaller badges that are being worn and that I can't read from here.

As a general rule, if a badge can be identified by someone at the other end of the chamber I think it would be inappropriate—if it had words on it. But I do not want to prohibit police day ribbons, Anzac Day or Legacy badges or the like, and I don't think any senator would want me to. But I'll come back to the chamber with your request, Senator Bernardi.