Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to identify with all the remarks of the member for Moreton, in the first instance, and secondly say that the world has changed for the better. As you said, in 1987 we passed legislation in this House that made sure that we could not expel a member inappropriately from this House. The great losers in the Hugh Mahon case, in my opinion, were the electors of Kalgoorlie. It is very important that we as a nation have respect for the decisions taken by the Australian people. The decision taken by the Australian people all those years, more than 90 years, ago was that they elected Hugh Mahon to this House.

You had to get into the mind of Hugh Mahon to understand why he made the remarks that he made then, but in this day we would say he had the right to make them, through freedom of speech. We have the rule of law. We have the opportunities for free association. Can I go on? I think every member in this room understands exactly what I am talking about. The fact that, even after he was expelled from the parliament and the word 'sedition' was mentioned as to his remarks, it was never taken to court, it was never tested in a courtroom, probably proved more the case that it may have been political manoeuvring at the time rather than the remarks that somebody made at an Irish Ireland League event.

It was an Irish league event. We do not understand—although I spoke to an old priest one time. The member for Menzies will enjoy this. It was at the time when the republic was being discussed in Australia. I was talking to this priest, and it became very clear out of our conversation that he did not have a high regard for the English or their government.

I say to you today that Hugh Mahon came out here as virtually a refugee. He came out here under another name so he would not be rearrested in Ireland for the actions that he had taken in protest there. He came out as a refugee to get away from the persecution that he felt that the English government were perpetrating on the Irish people. Isn't it right, then, that in this new, free nation, Australia, which he was in, he could express those opinions and express them as a member of parliament at an Irish league function after the death of somebody who had been on a 74-day fast protesting against the English tyranny over the Irish, as they saw it at that time?

Isn't it right that he, Hugh Mahon, would be so offended that he would, from Australia, use the strongest language to condemn those that he saw as oppressing his people?

And Australia was so important at that time. When you read what happened around that time, the women, and many of the men, who were deported to this country were activists—many of them Irish activists. That is why we are like we are as a nation, because of our roots that go back to those activists. And remembering that for many of the women who were deported out here in those days, the laws were such—this may be irrelevant—that the man owned all of the goods and chattels of the woman, and if the woman ran out of money and the man moved onto another woman with money that first woman was left in dire straits. These women probably had two options: prostitution or theft. Australia received the benefit of these educated, talented women in those tragic times.

Having said that, we recognise that in this day and age, Hugh Mahon would never be removed from this House. It would not happen because now, as a matter of privilege, we have a committee, which I chair. There has to be a reference to that committee from the parliament, and then there is time for reasonable discussion and consideration of what may be a member's inappropriate actions. We respect the people of Kalgoorlie and the family and descendants of Hugh Mahon, and we hope that this motion today brings them some pleasure.

See this speech in context