Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Birmingham) and the Minister for Families and Social Services (Senator Ruston) to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.

I doubt that the Prime Minister wanted to spend this week talking about the accusations that were aired in the FourCorners report on Monday night or in the papers today. In political life, however, you only have control over a certain number of things. You do not control the issues you face, but you do control how you respond. The Prime Minister had a choice: to stand up and exercise moral authority or to crouch down and try and duck the issue; to be big or to be small. In his press conference yesterday, the Prime Minister, sadly, chose the latter. The Prime Minister's comments sought to minimise and downplay the stories that have been told about the actions of ministers in his government. We heard that these were examples of 'human frailty', that we are all accountable for our own behaviour. What we didn't hear was a recognition of the bravery of the women who spoke up or a recognition of the importance of the parliament being a safe environment for everyone who works here or a recognition of our capacity to improve the culture of this place. The Prime Minister suggested that these were all matters from the past and so there was nothing further required from him. Yet can anyone believe that the issues about puerile back-stabbing from male party members raised by Liberal women in the WhatsApp group are in the past? I note that only last month other prominent Liberals were again calling for the Liberals to account for their failure to pre-select women.

This is a chance to show leadership. To date, the Prime Minister has not taken up that chance. No-one can pretend that poor behaviour is exclusively the preserve of members of one party. But the examples that are in the public conversation today relate to the Prime Minister's own party. That gives the Prime Minister even more capacity to exercise moral authority, to listen to women and to recognise the harm caused by cultures of bullying, harassment or sexism. Those cultures diminish the institutions that we are all here to protect. The Prime Minister has been willing to speak on accusations of improper conduct made against members of other parties or coalition partners. The greater test is how willing he is to respond to accusations made against those in his own party.

This parliament has an opportunity to work in a bipartisan way to make this workplace better. No matter what side of politics you are on, we can surely agree that staff working here should feel safe and supported. The accusations of bullying that have been made today add to existing complaints about culture that have been put on the record in recent years by Liberal women, and they are serious complaints. If we want this parliament to truly embody the democratic ideals that I believe every senator in this place seeks to uphold then this parliament must be a place where women can work and contribute free from discrimination.

Women's work should be valued on its own terms. Women should not be assessed on how they look or how they behave; it is their contribution at work that should matter. In considering the issues that have been raised, I believe we need to retain focus on women and their right to participate fully in this place. There are other issues that have been raised over the course the week: adherence to family values, the potential for compromise or blackmail and the reputation of the office. These are relevant factors, but we cannot lose sight of the core obligation that we hold to the women who work here. Everyone deserves a safe workplace. This should be the primary matter of concern. We owe it to ourselves, to this institution and to the people we represent to work together to ensure that that is how this place operates.

Susan McDonald (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of this matter. I'm incredibly proud to be part of a party that has sent four female senators out of five senators to the ministry. I'm proud of that because we have been preselected and elected on the basis of being the best people for the job, not on any other attributes. So when we talk about safety and workplace condition standards, I quite agree that they should be applied to all in the workplace and that they are not applicable just to women or just to men; they are applicable to all people who work in all workplaces. We are all responsible in a way, whether it be as men who hold positions of responsibility or, indeed, as women who hold positions of responsibility. Building a culture that enables us to all enjoy where we are and enables us to contribute in a fulsome way is important.

I think the Prime Minister has been very clear on this matter. He has a very strong ministerial staff code of conduct, and he holds both his ministers and all staff in this place to that high standard. The Prime Minister said:

It is important that everyone should feel safe in their workplace. That everyone should have proper channels through which they can deal with any issue about which they are uncomfortable. I think that is incredibly important. I think the change in ministerial standards introduced by my predecessor were important.

…   …   …

What is important is there are standards and the standards are adhered to and under my administration, under my government, I take that code very seriously and my ministers are in no doubt about what my expectations are of them, absolutely no doubt, about my expectations, and I expect them to be lived up to.

The issue that we are talking about is setting standards, setting a code of conduct and moving forward in that spirit. To have matters raised and discussed in this place and have it act like a kangaroo court is a very dangerous place to be and one that I'm sure no man or woman would like to see—that is, our reputations and actions being examined without due process and consideration.

I was pleased to see comments from Senator Boswell around the Australian flag and the introduction of that into this Senate. It is incredibly important that we unite in our agreement of what it is that unifies us, what brings us together. The Australian flag as the official flag of this country is an important element of that. Others, which were referred to by Senator McCarthy, are symbols—whether it be the symbol of the poppy that we wear today for Remembrance Day or symbols of other flags. Whether they be the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flag or state flags, they are all important flags, but it is the Australian flag, the official flag, that flies over this parliament and in the House of Representatives and this Senate chamber. It is important to find those things that unify us, those things that we can unite underneath, particularly at this time when people are searching for safety and security, for some sense of certainty in the world, when we are faced with a pandemic that is both a health crisis and an economic crisis.

It is with much pride that I reflect on Senator Boswell's comments. He is, again, somebody from the National Party who has provided much leadership and thought around issues that are important to regional and rural Australia. He has not been well of late, and I'm very pleased to see that he is making a terrific recovery. He has provided many years of incredible service and distinction to the party, to the Senate and to the country.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Manufacturing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers given by Senator Ruston this afternoon. Senator Ruston papers over the incredibly difficult situation that jobseekers in Australia find themselves in with now yet another cut to the coronavirus supplement. It's been reduced, again—from $500 to $250 to now $150 a fortnight, another cut of $100. Yet still this government does not commit to a permanent increase to the JobSeeker payment, which, for a long time, has been seen as manifestly inadequate and way below the poverty line.

The minister also failed in the question to even acknowledge the prediction that there will be 1.8 million people reliant on JobSeeker by Christmas. That figure is currently at about 1.7 million; therefore, we can see that it is set to rise. Perhaps more telling is the minister's failure to acknowledge the absolutely disproportionate ratio of the number of unemployed people and underemployed people in our nation compared to the number of jobs available. The minister simply said, 'Oh well, it's too hard; there are too many different ways of measuring it.'

However you measure it, the outcome is bad. There are about 1.7 million people in Australia seeking more work. There are about 926,000 totally unemployed people. The ratio of unemployed people to vacancies, therefore, looks to be about one vacancy for every eight people. If you look at the feedback from people who are applying for entry level jobs, the ratio is much worse. There was one example of a woman who applied for a job in retail to find that she was competing with 790 other applicants. These are extraordinary statistics, by any measure at all.

If we look to other measures, it's worse for young people. It's much worse for young people. They are subject to much higher levels of unemployment, where you can't get a job as a young person because there are more than eight young people for every vacancy. Let's have a look at where we've come in this regard. In January, Business Insider had the statistics of three unemployed people for every one job. In October, they had it as five unemployed people for every single job. But what Business Insider doesn't do is look at the real unemployment rate. When the government says the unemployment rate is higher or lower, it doesn't count people who are doing some work. So, in those October figures from Business Insider, it's five people for every one job. But we know that the levels of unemployment are actually much higher, because there are 1.8 million people who are looking for more work in our nation. (Time expired)

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I deal with the matters which were raised by Senator McAllister. I have a very high regard for Senator McAllister, and I'm not going to question the sincerity with which she raised her matters today. But let me say this. As someone who, in a previous life, before coming to this place had professional responsibility for investigating claims of sexual harassment or bullying in the workplace, and who was responsible for enforcing codes of conduct and dealing with extraordinarily delicate issues, I am firmly of the view—firmly of the view—that such matters should not, in the first instance, be ventilated in the public domain and certainly not on television. I am firmly of the view that appropriate procedures of investigation and serious responses raised in pursuit of complaints should occur, in the first instance, in private. I say this primarily due to the issue of respect. It is respect for the complainant, it is respect for the person who is subject to the complaint and it is respect for their families, for their children and for everyone close to them. These can be extraordinarily delicate matters—they are, typically, highly personal—and have complicated backgrounds. I think it diminishes this place for those matters to be canvassed prior to an appropriate investigation taking place. It shows a lack of respect for the individuals involved, it shows a lack of respect for their families and it shows a lack of respect for due process. I say that as someone who believes passionately that all individuals have a right to a safe workplace where they are free of sexual harassment, workplace bullying and discrimination. In the event that matters are raised privately and have not been given sufficient serious attention—but only after such processes have occurred—then, I think, relevant parties have a right to blow the whistle, to raise issues and to say: 'I raised a complaint behind closed doors. I'm not happy with the seriousness with which it was investigated, and, on that basis, I'm elevating it in good faith.'

We've seen some episodes in corporate Australia recently where aggrieved complainants have taken those steps of going public and blowing the whistle and there have been consequences for some leaders in corporate Australia as a result of that whistle having been blown. In my view, it was entirely fit and proper that that whistle was blown and that those consequences flowed from the complaints, which were not adequately or appropriately dealt with. But I think it is incumbent upon all of us to respect due process and to respect the legitimate expectation of everyone involved in such personal matters that their rights, including to privacy, will be dealt with respectfully and with sober deliberation so that, where possible, matters can be considered in private and confidentially, giving respect to all parties involved, including their families and their children. I think that is what we should all aspire to.

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

I rise to take note of Minister Birmingham's answer to my question on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags. Within the numerous questions and supplementary questions that I asked, one of the things I noticed was the question around the Australian citizenship test, which includes a section on Australia's flags—the Australian flag, the Aboriginal flag and the Torres Strait Islander flag. There really did not appear to be a substantial response to that. I think it is very curious that people who move to Australia and sit this citizenship test have pointed out to them the importance of these flags, not just the Australian flag but the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags. I spoke about it earlier today on this most sacred day, Remembrance Day, when we stop at 11 o'clock to remember those who fought for our country. I spoke about the importance of First Nations Black Diggers, as they're called, not only in terms of the marches on Anzac Day but also in terms of the work of the Australian War Memorial and its recognition. I must point out that that was under the previous director, Dr Brendan Nelson. I commend the work that he's done, along with others who've worked there, such as Squadron Leader Gary Oakley, who worked at the Australian War Memorial as an Indigenous liaison officer. I commend the importance of that institution reconciling the significance of First Nations soldiers—men and women—who have defended Australia over centuries not just externally in terms of other countries but also internally with the frontier wars.

Symbolism is important. The question in the citizenship test about the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags shows that this government obviously sees it as important. The minister was asked about the Liberal governments in New South Wales, Tasmania and, soon, South Australia flying the Aboriginal flag in their parliaments and whether he would, especially this week, reconsider the motion that was before the Senate in relation to that symbol of respect for First Nations people. That motion was put to the Senate in August. It's not something that came up just because of NAIDOC Week. It was prolonged and that resulted in it being put forward in NAIDOC Week simply because we were being respectful and urging the government to have the dialogue and the discussion. Instead, the prolonging of it clearly meant that it was not a priority.

I'd like to point out that the minister didn't respond to the question about whether the motion would or could be reconsidered here in the Senate, even though the Liberal parliaments in New South Wales, Tasmania and, soon, South Australia will be flying the Aboriginal flag in their parliaments. I think that's really telling, especially as this is the federal parliament, the parliament of the Australian people. If ever there were an opportunity to say, 'Maybe we need to reconsider this,' then it would be this week in particular, NAIDOC Week. It would be an incredibly generous and gracious thing for this Senate to do. It would send the right message of unity—bringing First Nations people and non-Indigenous people together over something as symbolic and sacred as the Aboriginal flag and the Torres Strait Islander flag.

As Senator Pat Dodson said, there are 44 flags flying out the front and most of them are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags. I think that's a really beautiful thing. I certainly call on the Senate and the minister, who didn't answer the supplementary questions, to reconsider putting back to the Senate, and supporting, the motion to fly the First Nations' flags.

Question agreed to.