Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2015-2016 and the related bill.

A lot has been said about the Safe Schools program that was funded by the previous Labor government. I will take this opportunity today to say why I am opposed to its continued funding. I note that there is a story on ABC Online about the views of my colleagues and what our opponents say about those views, so to start with I will use the quote from Premier Andrews of Victoria, who was reported as saying:

… let’s be honest here: I don’t think these extreme Liberals are actually offended by the structure of the program, or the teachers who lead it.

I just think they’re offended by the kids who need it.

That is absolutely wrong in every element of that statement, right from the start where he says, 'let's be honest'. But I do say that this is a country where there is free speech, so he has the right to say these things. Clearly, he does not tolerate alternative opinions, but I will offer a glimpse into how things are done in Victoria. With my example it appears to me that bullying is alive and well in such schools, but not in the way that is suggested in the Safe Schools program.

I will get to that soon, but it would be true to say that many people have contacted me about this issue. It was even raised with me during my door knocking. The concerns are legitimate and therefore it is not just my colleagues here on the government benches who are raising these concerns. I know that one of my neighbours in Darch raised it with me as well, and so I then asked about the experience his daughter had in the Victorian and Western Australian school systems. I thank her for helping me out with what actually happened. I emphasise that this was not something that I got out of the paper or off a website, but I know them and I know that this information is no exaggeration. Here is what this year 12 student in Cowan told me about her time in a Victorian school. I have provided the name of the school to the minister's office, but I will not use it in this speech.

She told me:

I am originally from a provincial city in Victoria. I went to the city High School from year 7 to the first term of year 10. The high school was very forthright about their beliefs on gay rights. From year 7 the classroom had posters about accepting gay and lesbian people and being aware of them. Then in year 9 there was a gay pride day.

When I was in year 9 my year cohort spent a day learning about health issues that we would face in the future. For an example what to do if someone passed out at a party, STDs H1Vs etc. One of the classes was about gay pride and legalising Gay marriage. The teacher mocked Islam and Christianity for persecuting gay people and saying that they are wrong and held aged old ideas. Then the teacher got the class to participate in an activity that involved the room being split into three columns — 'yes', `no' and 'on the fence'.

He asked questions on of the questions was: Do you think we should legalise Gay Marriage in Australia?

I disagreed with the question but all my class mates were standing in the yes column, I didn't want to get yelled at by the teacher or even worse get picked on by my class mates. So I got peer pressured into standing with my class mates in the yes column.

One of friends, who was in another class, also disagreed with the idea of gay marriage. She stood up for herself and her beliefs and stood in the No column. She was the only one, the teacher told her off in front of the whole class trying to put her to shame.

This is an example of bullying and intimidation of students, and I ask: are browbeating, bullying and intimidation part of creating a safe school?

All this was done without seeking parental permission, so I say to Premier Andrews that I am not offended by gay or lesbian teenagers but I am offended by a program and teachers that will not tolerate alternative views and will use the very methods they sermonise against to impose a view in schools. When my colleagues say that this program is indoctrination, I would agree. The definition of indoctrination is to teach someone to fully accept the ideas, opinions and beliefs of a particular group and not to consider other ideas.

I will read again the last part of what the year 12 student told me of what happened in Victoria:

One of friends, who was in another class, also disagreed with the idea of gay marriage. She stood up for herself and her beliefs and stood in the No column. She was the only one, the teacher told her off in front of the whole class trying to put her to shame.

I say that, in using this so-called Safe Schools program, young people are being indoctrinated. I am concerned that young people are being harassed and belittled in Australian schools, that their parents have had no say in this process and that, worst of all, the children have no protection.

There have also been reports that at Burwood Girls High School in Sydney students were pressured into signing a mural and, if they did not do so, they were abused and bullied. How sad it is that, in institutions of learning, doctrine and dogma reign so strongly. I am sure freedom of speech is allowed. Just make sure you say what is acceptable; otherwise, be prepared to be bullied by the teachers. If people on the Labor side of politics want to endorse what happened in that school and what appears to still be happening in those schools then they endorse the belittling of a young person by a person in authority. I condemn that completely and utterly.

I note that none of the schools in Cowan appear to have officially taken up the Safe Schools program; however, I would like to also offer the perspective of this year 12 student who moved to Western Australia with her family. Here is what she said about her experience in her new school:

When I moved to Western Australia I noticed that my new school wasn't so public about their stance on gay and lesbian rights.

There wasn't a Gay Day like in Victoria or a teacher pushing their ideas of gay right onto you. I've only had two problems with my year 11 English teacher. She passively gave us a feature article called 'Guy Pride' written by a gay man sarcastically talking about a straight guy coming out as a straight guy; foreshadowing what it is like for homosexuals to come out to their parents.

The article was pushed on us as we had to discuss what it was about.

My class mates said the article felt like it was pushing an agenda.

Then the second time was when she pulled out a movie. Our class was working on the theme 'odd balls and outcasts of society'; we had looked at refugees and disabled people.

The movie 'Priscilla Queen of the Desert' was about trans-sexual's and drag queens. The movie depicted them being pushed out of society. The movie had foul language and it had many sexual references. One scene depicted a boy getting molested at a young age. I remember turning away in horror.

I remember thinking, "Where was the note that told my parents about the movie and asking for their approval."

Labor Senator Wong is quoted as saying in the media, 'We all want our children to be safe and this program is about that.' I say that our children and freedom of speech are not safe from this program.

Premier Andrews said, 'I'm sick of Liberal politicians telling our kids that there's something wrong with them.' What rubbish that is from the Premier. I am telling him that there is a lot wrong with this program and that his institutionalising of bullying and doctrine onto students, without any parental involvement, is more like a human rights breach. He can hide behind the classic lines of homophobia and other moral trump words, but in the end this sort of activity is wrong in every regard.

The Leader of the Opposition has of course weighed in on this issue. He is quoted as saying it is 'disgraceful that an Australian child may fall victim to Malcolm Turnbull's failure to stand up to the right wing of his party.' What about those young people that are belittled in Australian schools because of this program and the agenda of those that advance it? Who stands up for them? The answer, of course, is that we do, and I am proud of it. Mr Shorten also said:

Life is already difficult enough for young people — they shouldn't have to put up with the added stress of bullying and intimidation in the schoolyard.

My question then is: what about the bullying in the classroom, Mr Shorten? What about the teacher standing over students, belittling, isolating and bullying them into accepting the doctrine advanced? It is a disgrace.

I acknowledge that the Foundation for Young Australians was funded by the previous government over four years from 2013 with the purpose of delivering the Safe Schools Coalition Australia program. I understand that in Queensland no one admits to using it in their schools and in Victoria it is compulsory—or it will be—but I am very pleased that the federal minister has contacted his state counterparts, saying that he expects that schools choosing to take part in the program will do so in consultation with parents and the school community and also that all material is age-appropriate and that parents have confidence in any resources used in a school to support the right of all students, staff and families to feel safe at school.

That being said, I still believe that the material and the delivery are so fundamentally flawed that they must be scrapped. Antibullying action is a core responsibility of schools and should be addressed without some narrow focus that tries to bring this agenda into every aspect of the curriculum. A program for bullying should get the balance right. What are the main reasons for bullying? Body image is at the top, then school results, then cultural or racial backgrounds, then language and gender after that.

I know that much has already been made of the political position of Marxist activist Roz Ward, who is also the co-author of so much of the material in this program, but I do worry about someone who appears to state that the Safe Schools program is step one but it is through Marxism that there is a hope and a strategy needed to create a new world regarding human sexuality and gender change. Marxism, socialism and communism are well and truly failed political systems, and it is amazing that Senator Wong wasted so much of the taxpayers' money on such a program, although some of the teaching methods, as I have quoted, do seem to be somewhat akin to Orwell's Animal Farm.

Fortunately, fringe dweller political groups such as the Socialist Alliance do little damage to society apart from vandalism during protests—until now, that is. Yes, I acknowledge that talk of socialism is useful in some Labor Party preselection fights, but ultimately the nation and the world have come to realise that socialism and communism have failed and left the people worse off than they were before.

See this speech in context