Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this motion on equality for all Australians. I believe Australians see themselves, rightly, as an egalitarian society and it is vital that we affirm and continue to reaffirm our commitment to equal rights for all in this nation. But in this debate it is equally vital that we ask ourselves what is it exactly that creates and most importantly maintains and protects equal rights. While legislation is important, unless a society is able to adapt and be flexible in the face of changing circumstances, equal rights can become questionable, questioned and challenged. There is no doubt that Australia has made a very successful commitment to human rights. I think we have been one of the most successful countries in the entire world. I cannot think of another nation that has done better in this area than us. But it is imperative that we continue to remind ourselves, and others, of the need for and positive benefits of equal rights. Changes in legislation are important—no-one can deny that—but legislation alone does not ensure equal rights. As we have seen through the debate on section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, legislation can be changed, undermining equal rights at the drop of a hat. Unless the wider community is convinced of the importance of defending equal rights, these rights will remain vulnerable.

It is our job as policy and law makers to ensure that we make a strong case for the protection of equal rights. My electorate of Hindmarsh is a very diverse community. As I have said many times in this place, approximately 200 languages are spoken in my electorate. People have settled there from every corner of the world, from the traditional postwar migrants to the new emerging communities. Every language that you can possibly think of, every nation you can possibly think of is represented within my electorate.

In 2016, the ABS estimated almost 27 per cent of Hindmarsh residents were born overseas. Since postwar migration began, Australia has been taking in approximately one million immigrants each decade from every region of the world, and today 15 per cent of the population report that they speak a language other than English at home. I am so proud of the cultural diversity within our nation, and within my electorate of course, because, as I said, I do not think there is any nation in the world that has done it better than us.

I have always been a fighter to protect this great cultural diversity, and our multiculturalism, and I will continue to do so, as I know many others in this place will do so, because I believe that our successful multicultural society is truly one of the greatest assets that we have in this nation. Multiculturalism has been an important element in the making of modern Australia, and has been critical to fostering social cohesion and inclusion. It has underpinned cohesion and inclusion, and, through multiculturalism, the Australian experience has shown that diversity can absolutely go hand in hand with stronger social cohesion. This is undoubtedly thanks to successive governments on both sides who have supported multiculturalism and, of course, the broader labour movement.

Official racial discrimination, in the form of the Immigration Restriction Act 1901—more commonly known as the White Australia policy—was not removed until the 1970s when the policies around multiculturalism emerged. It was the Whitlam Labor government that set about addressing many of these inequalities, followed by the Fraser and Hawke governments. I remember as a teenager, back in the seventies, attending one of my community's annual functions, the Greek Orthodox ball. This particular night we had some very honoured guests—I will never forget it—and the whole community with just astounded by the attendance of Gough Whitlam and Don Dunstan. It was the first time we had ever seen people of that calibre attend one of our functions. I remember how excited everyone was—and that memory is still vivid in my mind, which could have been something that threw me into politics. To have this great man there, the Prime Minister of Australia, giving a speech and telling us how he valued our community, how he saw the contribution that our community had made, was something that we had never witnessed before. From that moment onwards, I recall feeling equal to everyone else. Any inadequacies that I had about being from a different background or perhaps my parents speaking a different language, being different, was thrown out the window that night because we felt equal. I remember it very well. We still talk about that night in my community in South Australia.

Let us not forget that immigration to Australia was closely tied to labour market needs. My parents came here after World War II, from a nation that had been absolutely decimated by war. They came here with very little English. They worked in the lowest paid jobs, but they managed to carve out a life for themselves. They did that because of the labour laws that existed in this country. There was a debate after World War II, when we decided to open up immigration—if you look at the Hansards, you will see the debates—where, on the one hand, there was a group within this place, and outside in industry, that agreed with bringing in migrant workers, but wanted to have them on lower pay rates than Australian workers. On the other hand, there was the view of the labour movement that staunchly said, no, they would be on the same pay rates as everyone else if they come out here. And you can imagine how life would have been so different had that not prevailed back then. So in addressing equality, we need to also address inequality in the workplace. We see today many people coming out on different types of visas. I say this: if we have a shortage in particular areas, bring them out as migrants to settle in this nation, to be part of our community, to fill the gaps that are required and to become Australians. Like all of us have. That is really important.

In addressing equality, the workplace is fundamental. In 1973, the then Labor government ratified ILO convention 111. This required a commitment to remove discrimination in employment on the basis of race, colour, gender, political opinion, national extraction or social origin. Importantly, however, it also involved taking positive action to promote real equality of opportunity in employment. In 1973, the government's position was fully supported by business, the ACTU and the state governments. As a result of this commitment, the first federal antidiscrimination law, the Racial Discrimination Act 1975, was enacted, making it unlawful to take certain actions by reason of race, colour, religion or national or ethnic origin of a person or a relative or associate of that person.

However, before the bill was introduced into parliament, the conservative then Liberal-National Party coalition government came to power in 1975. It took another nine years and a Labor Party victory before this legislation was finally passed. During this period, those states which had Labor Party governments put in place their own antidiscrimination legislation. They took matters into their own hands, enabling citizens to make formal complaints in the face of discrimination based on gender, race, ethnic origin, religion and physical disability.

So, while Australia today can be very proud of its equality, it clearly has not always been the case. We only need to recall our treatment of Indigenous Australians, the White Australia policy, the Cronulla riot and our growing mistrust of certain nationalities. Today sometimes I despair when I hear language that is being used in reference to diversity, inclusion and multiculturalism. More and more I hear words of fear, of exclusion, calls for the building of walls and fortresses, calls for the banning of certain clothing, calls for the banning of certain foods and even calls for the banning of certain groups from entering the country. These voices are very, very few, but they are very loud. We must remember that: they are very few but unfortunately very loud.

There is no doubt that the recent demonisation of refugees has contributed to the language of fear, and it is contaminating the way we view our cultural diversity. But I am certain that in this place, if we take a moment to see this within a global context, we know that there are over 60 million refugees seeking refuge. I support united, equal rights for all, not just for some but for everyone. (Time expired)

See this speech in context