|
senate vote 2018-11-13#1
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-06-09 07:11:05
|
Title
Business — Consideration of Legislation- Business - Consideration of Legislation - Let another vote happen
Description
<p class="speaker">Richard Di Natale</p><p>I seek leave to move a motion to provide for consideration of the Discrimination Free Schools Bill 2018.</p>-
- The majority voted against a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2018-11-13.4.11) introduced by Victorian Senator [Richard Di Natale](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/victoria/richard_di_natale) (Greens), which means it failed. The motion would have suspended the usual procedural rules - known as [standing orders](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/parliament-at-work/standing-orders/) - in order to let another vote take place.
- ### Motion text
- > *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](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=s1147).*
<p>Leave not granted.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>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?</p> <p class="speaker">Barry O'Sullivan</p><p>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.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>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?</p> <p class="speaker">Peter Whish-Wilson</p><p>My point of order is on the lapels. That might encourage us all to wear 1970s suits!</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>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.</p> <p class="speaker">Richard Di Natale</p><p>Pursuant to contingent notice, I move:</p><p class="italic">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.</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p><p class="italic">Senator Pratt interjecting—</p><p>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.</p> <p class="speaker">Janet Rice</p><p>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.</p><p>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.'</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p> <p class="speaker">Don Farrell</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>-
-
|