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

Senators, when parliament resumed in August this year, we discussed certain events in June and committed to reflecting our better selves in this place, and the aspirations of those we represent rather than sliding into abuse. One of the things I said at the time was:

It is far better that positive attention is attracted by our words and contributions to debate. On several occasions in recent times, this has not been the case.

As a chamber, we did not meet this standard yesterday. I state again, unparliamentary offensive epithets and abuse have no place in this chamber. This is rightly a place of vigorous debate, but personal abuse has no place, particularly if it targets personal attributes, such as race or gender—nor does the use of abusive epithets or labels.

I will use every authority granted to me by the Senate when I personally hear such abuse, or when it is brought to my attention. But this is not just a matter of rules. This is a matter of respect. Of each other, of the institution and of those who elected us and in whose interests and names we act.

I reiterate what I said yesterday, and it's a simple principle of decency that we should all aspire to reflect. Every senator should reflect not just on what they think they're saying but on how it may be received or interpreted by another with a different life experience or perspective than yourself. We need to lead by example. For if we cannot debate and act civilly in this chamber then how can we expect people outside the chamber to debate and argue and disagree in a respectful manner as well.

But I will make this important point to all Australians, that while none of us here are perfect—I certainly am not—the overwhelming majority of time in this Senate does meet this test. The overwhelming majority of senators always aspire to represent the best interests and act accordingly.

Now, to the specific matter of conducting Senate business. A number of proposals have been considered to deal with what has become, frankly, the most unedifying period of the Senate day, general business. What was once a time to deal with matters that didn't require debate or amendment has become a pseudodebate where senators are required to vote on matters without an opportunity for discussion. What was once non-contentious is now the most combative business period. It isn't serving its purpose and is rapidly cascading into farce.

As a means of dealing with this, I have asked the Deputy President and Procedure Committee to bring forward a temporary order that would remove the ability to debate a proposed suspension of standing orders to enable the Senate to deal with a motion if leave to do so is denied. The effect of this is simply that if formality for a motion is denied, and a suspension of standing orders is moved to ensure the motion can be dealt with, there will be no debate on that procedural motion. Obviously whether this is adopted is of course a matter for the chamber itself.

I thank senators.

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

Mr President, the government supports your statement and your actions in the chamber yesterday. In supporting your statement let me also reflect that ours is a chamber in which of course we engage in the battle of ideas on behalf of the communities, states and people we represent, and at times that debate can become quite robust, but there is always a requirement and a responsibility on all of us to engage in the debate in a way that is appropriately robust but also appropriately respectful. It is true that in recent times we're getting to that point of the cycle where tensions increase somewhat in the natural course of events, but it is very important for all of us to remind ourselves of the standards that people expect us to observe as we engage in important business as an important part of our parliamentary democracy. My point of view is that I have always sought to engage willingly but also very respectfully in the debates that we inevitably enter into, and I think it is incumbent on all senators to engage in those debates in the same spirit. From the government's point of view we also will consider any proposals that will come forward through the Procedure Committee to improve what has become an increasingly contentious part of Senate business during the day, and I think that the proposition that you've put forward has a lot of merit.

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

by leave—Ultimately this debate is about what sort of place we want this Senate to be. This is a great institution of the Australian democracy and it is incumbent upon all of us to live up to that standard. The approach Labor took yesterday is very clear: we will not tolerate sexist and abusive behaviour. We will not tolerate it in the Senate and we will not tolerate it anywhere. We also believe parliament cannot function without the respect for the presiding officers and the rules that parliament has agreed to regarding appropriate behaviour. But I make this point: 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. The people of Australia who elect us want to see us interacting with each other as adult human beings. We on this side of the chamber recognise that this is a place of robust debate. We have a battle of ideas in this chamber. The battle of ideas can be robust, but it can be respectful of each other and of this place. There must be a distinction drawn between what is acceptable argument and what are personal smears and innuendo.

We saw those expectations trashed yesterday by Senator O'Sullivan—and he is not the first person in this chamber to do so—by his engaging in deliberately offensive personal remarks. The community rightly expects a higher standard of debate than to make insinuations of a personal character. Such personal comments, including references—oblique or otherwise—to people's personal lives, should always be off limits. This has been long recognised not only in our standing orders but also in the standards of behaviour we expect of each other.

When it comes to the treatment of women in this place there are some who should particularly reflect on their actions and words. I ask them to consider whether their partners, wives or daughters would permit themselves to be treated in such an offensive way. The shaming of women has been used for decades, even centuries, as a tool of control by those in power. It is odious behaviour. It has never been appropriate and it is not acceptable in this place. To use a sporting analogy: play the ball, not the man or woman. There are some people in this place who I believe need to find a map and compass about how to conduct themselves in a debate—and in other fora, including committee hearings—without going after women personally. Our colleagues and our daughters deserve no less. Mr President, I indicate the opposition's support of the approach you have flagged in relation to the discovery process.

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

by leave—It is not my intention to disrespect the Senate or its processes. I have great respect for this institution. It is one of the honours of my life to be standing here representing the people of my home state and leading the Australian Greens. It is a privilege and an honour to do it, and I reflect on that every day. This is a place where all of us can help shape the nature of our society. Indeed, we can be a force for good. Mr President, that's why I couldn't withdraw my statement yesterday—because the repeated shaming and innuendo directed not just across at this side of the chamber but directed right across the Senate is reinforcing a culture of workplace harassment and the open harassment of women in our society.

Australia does have a deep and disturbing problem of violence against women. I remember Malcolm Turnbull the former Prime Minister saying that not all disrespect towards women leads to violence but that's where all violence against women starts. We in this place should be setting an example for the nation, and yet this, one of the most powerful institutions of the country, allows men to openly and brazenly shame, insult and harass female members of parliament, and it reinforces that culture that will lead to 72 women being murdered by their partners this year.

Abuse against women is everyone's business. All of us have a role to play in that. There is a great reckoning going on in our society, where all of us are reflecting on our behaviours in the past and are trying to do what we can to help lead the change we need to see in our society. As men, we have been perpetrators. We have been responsible for creating that culture, and that's why it is up to men to make a stand and to call it out. We must no longer tolerate workplace harassment in this chamber. It must stop. There has been a repeated pattern from a small number of men in this chamber who, either through whispers or, sometimes, on the record, make the most demeaning and insulting comments directed against many of my colleagues.

When this was raised some time ago and you made your statement, Mr President, I had a conversation with Senator Sarah Hanson-Young that forced me to reflect on my own role in this—that I'd not stood up, that I'd stayed silent, that I'd assumed this was just part of what it means to be a senator in this place. I apologised to Senator Hanson-Young and I said that I would now stand up and call it out whenever I heard it, that she would not be alone. And yet, despite your statement—a very welcome statement, Mr President—this behaviour continues. They do it over and over and over again. Sometimes you don't hear it, but we do. Sometimes they put it on the record—it's deliberate; it's calculated—then they withdraw it. But those words can never be taken back. They hurt and they damage. That's why yesterday I made the statement I did.

I also want to give some context to what happened yesterday. The day before, I approached the Deputy President of the Senate because that behaviour that occurred yesterday had occurred the day before and on the back of months of a pattern of behaviour. I indicated to the Deputy President that I would be writing to you, Mr President, to inform you that, when a senator yells across the chamber to a female colleague, 'Go and have a cry,' because they don't like what they're hearing, that's unacceptable. It would be unacceptable in a classroom, it would be unacceptable on the factory floor, it would be unacceptable in a business and it's unacceptable in the Senate. Yesterday Senator O'Sullivan used words that were designed to hurt and humiliate a fellow colleague. The day before, other senators in this place used words that were aggressive and threatening. I want to thank Senator O'Neill for standing up and calling them out when she heard them.

The question for us now as a chamber is: are words enough? Is a call to people in this place to lift the standard of behaviour enough? I don't think it is, Mr President, because we've heard it time and time again. When in September 2017 Senator Hanson wore a burqa into this Senate I sought for the Senate to adopt a code of conduct that would prevent this offensive and harmful behaviour. In August this year, following a horrific first speech, again I sought to have a code of conduct adopted, and it was rejected by both the government and the opposition.

The current rules are not working. We are allowing harassment and we are allowing women to be demeaned in this chamber. They stand on all sides of the chamber, but predominantly they are those people who are walking out right now. They aren't strong enough. They simply cannot hear the truth. They are the cowards here. It's very clear that, despite your words this morning, Mr President, they take no heed of the call to all of us to improve the standards in this place. The men who use sexism to belittle or intimidate women should not be tolerated in any society and they most certainly should not be tolerated in the Australian Senate.

Mr President, we accept your recommendation in terms of the way we will handle the discovery of formal business, but we need to do more than that. We need to ensure that there are strong rules and a strong code of conduct that does not allow this offensive behaviour to continue.

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

I thank senators.