Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Senator Payne) to a question without notice asked by Senator McCarthy today relating to the Member for Chisholm (Ms Banks).

I want to commence my remarks by acknowledging that Senator Payne is one of the few women on the front bench of the Liberal Party. Despite the fact that she's a childhood friend of my husband, I am very disappointed in the minister's answer today. The question that she was asked, which really was a test of her capacity in the role that she holds in this place representing the Minister for Defence, was a question which went to the matter as put:

Yesterday the Minister for Defence warned the now Independent member for Chisholm, Julia Banks, that she would 'face the consequences of her actions'.

And the question was:

Will the minister rule out retaliations against the now Independent member for Chisholm?

The minister should have been prepared for that very important question. She represents the Minister for Defence in this place. She should have been prepared—prepared to stand up for the women in her party, prepared for a question about the great shame of what's happening to women in the Liberal Party and the people whom they should be representing here in the government. The great shame is that she was not prepared, and her answer was:

I'm not aware of those statements.

What a joke! 'I'm not aware of those statements,' she said. How could she not be aware that the member for Chisholm walked away from the Liberal Party yesterday and took a spot on the crossbench because, as a woman, she says it's intolerable to remain within the Liberal Party?

They are a divided, dysfunctional government. Whatever they're doing when they show up for work here, there's no way you could characterise it as governing. In fact, for women in the Liberal Party—who found a small, quiet voice for a day in the words of Julia Banks yesterday—they are doing anything other than governing. They're not interested in looking after the Australian people. They've broken promises left, right and centre. They're more interested in their preselection games. They are a model of disunity. You can have the division between the Right and the Left or the pro-Morrison group and the anti-Morrison group. Pick a team. Or there is the pro-Dutton group and the anti-Dutton group, the pro-Turnbull group and the anti-Turnbull group, or the pro-Abbott group and the anti-Abbott group. But do you know what the biggest group they've got is? It is 'every man for himself, and let's leave the women behind', and that's what they're doing to create a culture of fear and intimidation that was so well articulated by Ms Banks yesterday.

This is what she said:

The gift of time and reflection has provided some clarity regarding the brutal blow against the leadership. Led by members of the reactionary right wing, the coup was aided by many MPs trading their vote for a leadership change in exchange for their individual promotion, preselection endorsements or silence. Their actions were undeniably for themselves—for their position in the party, their power, their personal ambition—not for the Australian people who we represent; not for what people voted for in the 2016 election; not for stability, and disregarding that teamwork and unity deliver success.

Do you know what Mr Pyne, the member for Sturt, said? He was reported in an article by Katharine Murphy in which she describes what he said. This is what he said about a woman he calls his friend—so God help us for what he says about people he doesn't like, like the rest of us! This is what he said, and it was described as 'caustic':

He said she would have to "take the opprobrium"—

that's the word he used—

associated with her decision and "bear the consequences of her decision".

If you've got enough time, Google the word 'opprobrium' and see what it means—the shame, the vilification, the attacks. That is what the Minister for Defence of the nation of Australia said about a woman in his own party: 'She should get ready to take the vilification.' That is why Julia Banks took a spot on the crossbench—because this Liberal Party, which seeks to govern the nation, cannot govern itself and certainly is not supporting women. In fact, it's doing the exact opposite. It's ditching them and it's pushing them under water, as they all scramble for their own success at the cost of the country. There's one picture I want to celebrate today: the picture by Alex Ellinghausen, which shows— (Time expired)

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

I reject the assertions made by Senator O'Neill in her five-minute contribution, for a number of reasons. She started by denigrating the women on our front bench, the outstanding women we have on our front bench.

Senator Wong interjecting—

She did. She said there are so few. To my left and right, we have absolutely outstanding contributors on our front bench, male and female. Some of those outstanding female contributors include, of course, Minister Payne, who the question was directed to, and Minister Cash, who cops nothing but abuse from Senator Cameron and others every time she gets up. He has a history of abusing her. The Labor Party never does or says anything about that. The Labor Party tolerates that kind of abuse. It also comes from Senator McKim, from the Greens. We heard it again today—the constant abuse of and yelling at the outstanding Minister Cash, Minister Ruston, Minister McKenzie and Minister Reynolds.

We have some outstanding contributors, and they do a great job advocating for the cause of our nation. They are doing an outstanding job and they often do it despite the abuse that is hurled at them by members of the Labor Senate team and by members of the Greens Senate team. We don't hear leaders within the Labor Party or the Greens doing anything about that. We've seen some of the disgraceful behaviour, particularly from Senator Cameron, in that regard.

We get lectured by the Labor Party, who get so much of their funding from that aggressive, misogynist organisation, the CFMEU, whose treatment of woman is disgraceful. Senator Pratt smiles, but we don't smile at some of the disgraceful behaviour that has been conducted in the name of senior CFMEU officials—for example, Luke Collier, who was defended so strongly, with many questions asked on his behalf by Labor senators, such as Doug Cameron. But the Labor Party takes money from that disgraceful organisation, despite their abuse of women, despite their aggressive behaviour towards women, despite the violence that has occurred to women by some of the senior officials, including those who have been convicted for that behaviour.

Opposition senators interjecting—

They're female public servants seeking to do their jobs, whom the CFMEU treats with absolute disdain; with absolutely no respect. So the Labor Party should be looking in the mirror when it comes to some of these issues.

Senator O'Neill also claims that we're not getting on with the job and delivering. Well, nothing could be further from the truth. We need only look at the Australian economy, with a 3.5 per cent growth rate and with the over one million jobs that have been created under this Liberal-National government's watch. We have created the conditions so that business, small and large, in this country can get on and employ more people, become more profitable and invest more in their businesses. More than a million more Australians today have the opportunity for work than they did when Labor left office, and they left us a failing economy and a failing budget.

We're bringing the budget back to surplus, despite the opposition of the Labor Party and the Greens, and we're doing it whilst delivering record investments—not just in health, not just in education, not just in infrastructure but also, of course, in the important defence of our nation. That mob over there not only threw open the borders when it came to border protection but also ran down the defence budget in the most reckless way to the lowest level of spending since the Second World War. That was under the Labor Party. We've restored it. We've increased it year on year with a defence construction program, with defence infrastructure, with a defence build that will set this nation up. We're doing it, delivering for the economy and getting people into work. Under this government we have the lowest proportion of Australians of working age on welfare in a generation. We are very, very proud of that record. It stands in contrast to the Labor Party's record. If they were to come back we know that their $200 billion tax hit, their hit on the family home with everyone's values going down and their hit on renters through the negative gearing policy would destroy our economy. That's what we'll be arguing for right up until the election next year, whenever that is held.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Environment and Water (Senate)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As debate in the nation's parliament and around the country has shown, this government has not a woman problem but a man problem. In rising to take note of the answers to the questions asked by Senator McCarthy, I note that the kind of chaos that besets this government is very, very clear. As Julia Banks characterised it:

My sensible, centrist values, belief in economic responsibility and focus on always putting the people first and acting in the nation's interest have not changed. The Liberal Party has changed, largely due to the actions of the reactionary and regressive right wing, who talk about and to themselves rather than listening to the people.

When I look at those people in the coalition and in the government, it shouldn't surprise anyone to see that, at the core of those debates, perhaps with the exception of Senator Fierravanti-Wells, are the reactionary right in the men of the Liberal Party. You are creating chaos in your own government and across the nation. The problems you beset this nation with are vast, deep and important to the nation's wellbeing. The question I asked in the Senate this afternoon was about the National Energy Guarantee and about policy. But, because of the climate change deniers among you, you are unable, as a party, to land simple policy propositions in the national interest. You've changed your minds, I don't know how many times, in trying to come up with a climate change and energy policy. Why? Because your internal processes and your leadership are absolute chaos. Why is that the case? You sacked one prime minister in Malcolm Turnbull, who had to sack Tony Abbott before that, and now we've got Scott Morrison. Why? Because you cannot put together a coherent and substantial agenda for this nation in the national interest. You have no coherence as a government or as a party anymore. As Senator McCarthy's questions to Senator Payne rightly went to, when will Mr Morrison do this nation a favour, do his MPs a favour—as one coalition MP purportedly put it to Patricia Karvelas—and put you out of your misery and have an election?

What this nation needs is a plan to fix our schools and hospitals, to ease pressure on household budgets, to stand up for workers, to invest in cheaper, cleaner energy and to build a strong economy that works for all. Yet, on all of these questions, all those opposite can do is to send us into a quagmire of inattention to the real needs of the Australian people. This government is so self-absorbed and so out of touch that it cannot land a real punch on any major policy initiative that this nation needs in terms of leadership and governance. Take a look at what's happening in our nation's schools. You haven't delivered fair funding to the public school sector in Australia. You have absolutely failed, in your inaction on climate change policy and energy policy in this nation, to do anything that is easing pressure on household budgets. You've been in government for five years, and still you've changed your policy minds some five times on this question. So, senators—through you, Madam Deputy President—we have a government that is divided, out of touch and only working on behalf of very narrow vested interests, including those inside its own party, as Julia Banks's remarks to the lower house yesterday made clear. We cannot stand for any more of this chaos—

Sue Lines (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Pratt, your time has expired, and I remind you to refer to those in the other place by their correct titles.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too would like to make a contribution to the take-note debate on the question asked by Senator McCarthy of Senator Payne. I don't quite know where to start today; it's an unusual one to be taking note of. I will perhaps go to the middle of Senator Pratt's contribution, where she talked about the very important issues of health, education, a strong economy and creating jobs—the things I know Senator Payne did refer to in answer to the question asked. It is important for those listening to the debate, those who are here today, to understand exactly what was asked—questions, again, about internal party politics, reports in papers and unsourced comments by MPs—something one coalition MP apparently said. Senator Pratt pointed to, rightly, a number of things that are important to Australian voters—things like funding our hospitals appropriately through our state governments and ensuring schools are appropriately resourced to educate our children so they can read and write. Something I've made mention of in this place many times before is that the functional literacy rate of adults in Tasmania is woefully low. It's these things that are important—not the things that we are taking note of today, not the question that we are spending half an hour of the Senate's time reflecting on.

A million jobs have been created across the country. That seems to have been lost in the consideration of what we spend our time in the Senate talking about, what the opposition focuses on during its time to interrogate the government about its policies and plans. Instead, we spend our time talking about this. Here we are, on Wednesday, and we have spent most of this week considering these internal political issues—things that matter to the press gallery but not to the people of Wragg Street, Somerset, or Mount Street, Burnie, or Collins Street, Hobart—all those people who actually depend on us governing in their interests.

It is important that we focus on what actually matters to Australians, not insider politics to fill the front pages of our daily papers and fill air time on Sky News, as fun as that might be. We've got to get outside the Canberra bubble. That's why I liked when Senator Payne, in answer to the question asked by Senator McCarthy, outlined some of the great achievements of this government. The rate of growth this economy has experienced under this government is something we don't hear questions about during question time; we talk about unnamed MPs providing quotes to papers.

The tax reforms that we've seen will benefit millions of small to medium businesses. Even though we are not taking note of it, my question was about that. The tax reforms, as Senator Payne referred to, will create thousands of jobs in regional Australia, where they're needed. These are important issues—ensuring Australians can pay the bills they are confronted with every month, making sure they can support their children as they grow up and are ready to leave home, and making sure families are financially capable of looking after themselves into the future. When I go out doorknocking, when I spend time at street stalls or country shows, people aren't asking me about this sort of stuff. They're asking us to just get on with the job and to do the right thing by them. And that means for us to actually focus on these things here in this place, in the Australian Senate—to get on with policy matters that actually matter.

But it is disappointing that we've seen debate degenerate to this level. I take issue with the opening line of Senator Pratt's contribution to this debate on taking note of answers, suggesting, 'It's not a women problem; it's a man problem.' I, as a father of three young boys, want to set an example for them about how to conduct themselves. We have values in our household. I have my own values as a Christian. I want to impart to them the right way to grow up, the right way to conduct themselves with women, with men, with old people, with young people—with people of all sorts of different views and philosophies on life. To characterise all the things Senator Pratt talked about as relating to gender—that it's a 'man problem'—I find offensive. I want us, in this place, to focus on things that actually matter to Australians, that matter to my children, when they take the reins as adults in the next generation, not the issues being asked about. (Time expired)

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We must defend and strengthen our institutions, and we must treat our parliament with more respect.

Unacceptable workplace practices are the responsibility of us all to identify, to stop it, to fix it.

That's not my quote; that actually comes from the former foreign affairs minister, Julie Bishop. It is a statement that came from her not long after she left her role as minister in the coalition government. And I'll add another quote from Julie Bishop:

I've seen and witnessed some appalling behaviour that in a law firm I would never have accepted, but in parliament, it's the norm.

In a magazine article she refers to:

… a much broader debate about workplace culture. This includes allegations of bullying, harassment and coercion and the unequal treatment of women …

Members opposite who've contributed in this last half hour have missed the point completely. The rate of growth of the economy, jobs, tax reform for millions of Australians—everyone wants to see a better life for all Australians. But, if the behaviour that is reflected in this Senate and in the House of Representatives were reflected out there in the broader Australian community, it would be totally unacceptable. The most senior person in the previous Prime Minister's cabinet said exactly that, yet today my question to the foreign affairs minister couldn't be answered.

It is important that we uphold the highest values in the way women in particular are treated in the parliament. Our contribution matters, and we should be able to make it without fear of retribution, without fear of being humiliated, without fear of thinking differently to others. I would like to believe that that is at the core of the values of our country in respecting each other. It is important that we debate all sorts of issues, but we must have fundamental ground rules about the way we relate to each other. We've seen the member for Chisholm drawing her line in the sand and resigning from the Liberal Party because of the way women are treated. The member for Chisholm said in her speech yesterday that, when good women call out or are subjected to bad behaviour, the reprisals and commentary portray them as being bad. It certainly didn't take long for her former colleagues to do exactly that. It didn't take long for them to reinforce the message that the coalition government is hostile to women, calling points of order today instead of addressing the question, and choosing to hide behind questions of procedure rather than address questions about why women in the coalition government are concerned and constrained by fears of reprisal and retribution if they speak out. Bullying and intimidation—it is behaviour out of step with our country. It is behaviour that should not be tolerated here in the parliament.

It's ironic that the timing of the former Liberal, now Independent, member for Chisholm's resignation came on the same day that the new Labor government in Victoria unveiled a 50 per cent female cabinet. In my home in the Northern Territory, women make up the majority in cabinet. Labor is not a political boys club. We are certainly a better party and we reject bullying of any kind. As Senator Wong said today, we will not tolerate sexist and abusive behaviour. We will not tolerate it in the Senate and we will not tolerate it anywhere. The Senate itself will not be respected if the behaviours exhibited in here demean it. That goes not only to rules but also to standards and expectations.

Question agreed to.