Anne Aly (Cowan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that:

(a) 12 March 2021 is the 100th anniversary of Edith Cowan's election to the seat of West Perth in the Western Australian Legislative Assembly, making her the first woman elected to any Australian parliament;

(b) Edith Cowan was an extraordinary and tireless advocate for the rights of women and children, and she sought and won election to the Legislative Assembly in an effort to strengthen those rights; and

(c) in addition to her elected office, she was also a campaigner for women's suffrage, a major contributor to many social welfare organisations and a noted jurist;

(2) recognises Edith Cowan's remarkable legacy, which is commemorated in the names of Edith Cowan University and the federal electoral division of Cowan, as well as in artistic works such as the play, With Fire in her Heart: The Edith Cowan Story, a retelling of her life which premiered at the 2021 Perth Fringe Festival; and

(3) commits to upholding Edith Cowan's contributions to Australian civil society by working to further the rights of women and children in all spheres of Australian life.

I'm really happy to stand here and put forward this motion to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the election of Edith Cowan, the first woman to be elected to any parliament in Australia.

Edith Cowan was born on Glengarry Station in 1861. Her mother died at a very, very early age, and she grew up in a boarding school. At the age of 15, she was orphaned when her father was sent to the gallows and hung for the crime of shooting her stepmother in a drunken rage after having squandered the family's finances on alcohol. Edith Cowan was married at the age of 18, and she became prominent in the women's suffrage movement throughout Western Australia. She was an advocate for public education and the rights of women and children, including children born to single mothers. She was the first woman to serve on the board of education. She founded the Children's Protection Society in 1906, which helped establish the Children's Court. She later became a justice of the Children's Court in 1915. She co-founded the women's service guild in 1909. She established the state branch of the National Council of Women in 1911. She helped establish the King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women and was a member of their advisory board in 1916. She became a justice of the peace in 1920. Her legacy is long. She did so much in the cause of women and children throughout her life.

In 1921, she decided to run for the Western Australian Legislative Assembly. It was a big undertaking for her, and it wasn't well received by many of the members of the Western Australian public, Mr Deputy Speaker, I can tell you that. They argued that she should be at home looking after her children, despite the fact that her youngest of five children was 35 years old. She won her seat in West Perth running for the Nationalist Party in 1921, where she, ironically, defeated the incumbent Attorney-General, Thomas Draper, who was the one who actually introduced the legislation that allowed women to stand for parliament in the first place. Edith Cowan's legacy cannot be understated. Her portrait appears on the $50 note. She has a university named after her, Edith Cowan University, of which I am a proud three-time graduate, and, of course, the electorate of Cowan named after her, and it is an absolute honour to represent an electorate that is named after such a formidable woman.

I had the pleasure, during the couple of weeks of the Perth fringe festival, to attend a play called With Fire in her Heart, which was written by Trevor Todd about the life of Edith Cowan. That play was written at the Peter Cowan Writers Centre, which is housed in Edith Cowan House at the Edith Cowan University campus in Joondalup and is named after Edith's grandson, Peter Cowan. The play With Fire in her Heart tells the story of Edith Cowan through the eyes of her grandson, Peter Cowan. Watching the play brought many, many emotions for me. It not only portrayed Edith as an incredible and remarkable humanitarian, a champion of the rights of those less fortunate than her, but also portrayed her own struggles in her life, particularly her personal life, with the death of her mother at such an early age, being sent to boarding school, the death of her father under such tragic circumstances and the kinds of challenges that she had to face becoming a member of parliament. When she first got elected, she won by a very, very small margin, and I cried at that bit, because I know exactly how that feels. Even my husband, who was sitting next to me, had a little something in his eye during the times of the play where her husband was portrayed. He was such a wonderful support for her and for her aspirations to enter parliament as well.

I note that Edith Cowan served only one term. She lost her seat in 1924 and ran unsuccessfully in 1927. I think there's something to be learned in that. How interesting it is that such a trailblazer of a woman, such a trailblazer for women's rights and for women's position in parliament, lost her seat after only one term, because today women on all sides of politics are overwhelmingly represented in marginal seats and have to fight really hard to keep their seats. We tend to say we'll give winnable seats to women, but those winnable seats are often the marginal seats. So perhaps on this day we could recognise and remind ourselves that it's a good thing for all political parties to nominate women in seats that they can hold for a little bit longer than just one term.

It's especially fitting that I speak on this motion today and that the 100th anniversary of Edith Cowan's election fell on Friday, as we have tens of thousands of women today marching to demand justice, fairness and an end to discrimination, harassment and violence in their workplaces, in public spaces and in their homes. I think about Edith Cowan and what she would have done. What would Edith Cowan have done if she were here today? I think she would have been there. She would have been right here in this place, right there raising her voice in a collective shout, demanding to be heard.

It's also fitting that Edith Cowan's 100th anniversary of being elected came at the end of the week of International Women's Day, where the theme was 'Choose to Challenge'. We no longer have the luxury of choice, if ever indeed we had the luxury of choosing to challenge. Today we are compelled to challenge, as Edith was. We are compelled to speak out, as Edith was. We don't get to choose anymore. It is no longer a choice. We cannot stay silent, just as Edith could not. She had no choice but to run for politics, to see the change that she wanted to see for the rights of women and children.

Today we have a moment and an opportunity to honour the legacy of Edith Cowan, to honour the legacy of a woman who stood against all odds—a remarkable and formidable woman who would not be silenced, who did not see challenges, but saw a responsibility to be there, to be at that table, to speak, and who refused to stay silent, not for herself but for those who did not have a voice.

We have a moment. We have a moment today, right here, in this place. Let's not squander that moment. Let none of us walk out of here today feeling that we had squandered the opportunity to challenge. Let none of us walk out of here today feeling that we did not take up that responsibility to challenge, because we can no longer stay silent—enough is enough. We are compelled to speak out. We are compelled to join the voices of tens of thousands of women across Australia to speak out against discrimination, against harassment and against violence towards women and children. Edith would have wanted that. Edith would have wanted us to be here today and to speak out against these injustices. Let's do it for Edith.

Trent Zimmerman (North Sydney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Is the motion seconded?

Celia Hammond (Curtin, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion. I thank the member for Cowan for moving this important motion. I also thank her for extending the hand of friendship, particularly over the last four weeks. It may not be apparent to those who look on to the political world, but it is quite possible for people who have different political views to actually be friends and like each other.

Last Friday, I had the honour of commemorating Edith Cowan at a roll call of organisations which Edith had either founded or was actively involved with throughout her life. As I stood at the memorial clock which was built in her honour at the entrance to Kings Park, I saw and met with representatives from organisations that continue to do so much good in our community—organisations like the RSPCA, Ngala, the Red Cross, the National Council of Women, the Karrakatta Club and Girl Guides. Edith Cowan's legacy is not confined to history; she does not sit silently on the back of the $50 note. Her story does not start and end with being the first woman elected to an Australian parliament. Edith's achievements, her voice and what she strove for continue to echo in our community today. We see it in women serving in parliaments across Australia. We see it in generations of children who were born safely at King Edward Memorial Hospital, and we see it in the women, like me, who were able to enter professions because of the passage of the Women's Legal Status Act.

One hundred years ago, Western Australia was still recovering from the effects of the First World War. Women had been granted the right to sit in parliament only in 1920. Edith's decision to run for the seat of West Perth was made only a month prior to the election. She faced harsh criticism for running for parliament, with many in the community viewing parliamentary representation as a man's job. Winning by just 46 votes, Edith put her success down to the support of women. In an interview two days after her election, she said:

I did not want to contest the election, and certainly would not have come out if it had not been for the earnestness with which the women asked me to. It was the loyalty of women to a woman that won the election for me, and it is in no way a personal success. It is a victory for them.

It would be four months following her election before Edith would deliver her maiden speech. The usual decorum and silence observed when a member delivers their maiden speech was dispensed with for Edith, with many of the male members in the House rudely interjecting throughout. Edith said in that speech:

It is a great responsibility to be the only woman here, and I want to emphasise the necessity which exists for other women being here.

…   …   …

… it has been fairly proved in this House to-day that women can and do stand by women, and will stand by women in the future …

Edith would go on to say:

The views of both sides are more than ever needed in Parliament to-day. If men and women can work for the State side by side and represent all the different sections of the community, and if the male members of the House would be satisfied to allow women to help them and would accept their suggestions when they are offered, I cannot doubt that we should do very much better work in the community than was ever done before.

Edith was determined that she was not going to be a momentary parliamentary novelty; she was there to get things done. Her contributions throughout her three years in parliament would be many and varied, from advocating for mandatory registration and training for nurses, to supporting taxation incentives to create employment in the south-west. But Edith's time in parliament was also marked by constant derision by many in the parliament. In fact, the WA government didn't even want to undertake the work to put in a female bathroom at Parliament House because of the cost. This meant Edith would walk to her home nearby to use the bathroom. Yet Edith strove on as a strong voice and as a strong representative for her community. Edith was not afraid to call out the government when she thought they were getting a policy wrong or to make her voice heard on matters of importance.

In 1921, Edith was the only woman in the chamber, a sole voice in that place seeking to change how society saw the role of women in society. The job was tough, but so was she. She had to be. One hundred years later, the job of being a member of parliament is still tough, as are plenty of other jobs and professions. But surely the product of 100 years of progress should not see us still asking the question as to whether women are strong enough to do this job or, indeed, any other job. Surely what we should be questioning is whether the so-called toughness we are being called on to exhibit is justifiable, whether it is right or whether it serves any legitimate purpose at all. To want respect in a workplace, to want to be free from harassment or assault in your workplace—or in the world more generally—has nothing to do with whether you are tough enough. This is simply a prerequisite for a just and humane society.

Over the past few weeks, I have reflected, as I think many of us here have reflected, on the culture of this place and society more broadly. I have listened to the views and stories of many people from this place and others and I, like many, have been distressed, angered, despondent and conflicted. I have been reminded of the girl and young woman I once was. The one who was smart but wanted to be smarter; the one who had friends but wanted to be a cool girl; the one who spent years suffering from anorexia and depression because she wanted to be perfect and have full control; the one who did things, allowed things to be done to her and had things done to her that, quite simply, made her feel the shame that so many victims-survivors talk about.

One hundred years ago, as Edith fought to have the Women's Legal Status Bill passed, the question before parliamentarians was whether women should be allowed in the professions. Today the question must be: why is it that we still have workplaces where sexual harassment and assault exists? And why do we have workplaces where women still have to adapt their behaviour and adapt their mode of operating to get their work done and their voices heard? It is clear that there is a need for cultural change in society and in parliament. Women and men marching across Australia today are rightly demanding changes: changes that ensure people feel safe reporting incidents of sexual assault and harassment; changes that empower and ensure bystanders call out inappropriate behaviour when they see it; and changes to our processes and systems and even—dare I suggest it—to our criminal justice system, because it is clear that the status quo is inadequate in dealing with complaints and crimes of sexual assault and harassment. We must preserve the pillar of our justice system that a person is innocent until proven guilty, but we need to ensure that in so doing we do not re-traumatise victims-survivors and that we do not send mixed messages about whether they should come forward with their stories. There is a vacuum at the moment, one which is being filled in the most vile and unsatisfactory way, one which neither helps victims-survivors nor those who have been accused. Most importantly, we must change the types of behaviour and attitudes that lead to harassment and assault.

I recognise that in workplaces, particularly in politics, where the power hierarchies are so deeply embedded, it may be easier said than done to change the culture. This is why we as members in this place have to lead by example and reflect on our own behaviour. It is why we must listen to the voices of others, put aside our own inherent biases and prejudices and ways of thinking and engage in a truly genuine nonpartisan process, not one that is carried out via a polemical tit-for-tat or the vile anonymous sewer that inhabits vast portions of social media. We must refuse to accept that just because it has always been this way it should continue that way. Personally, I refuse to accept that an acceptable response to all of this is to suck it up, toughen up, move on. That may have been the way that I and others learnt to deal with things but, while this may work for some and on some issues, it does not serve everyone and it certainly doesn't lead to the change we need. To the next person who thinks about telling me or someone else to toughen up, suck it up or move on, I say: just don't. It's a special honour to serve in this place. As we go forward, let us do so with Edith Cowan's voice ringing in our ears and spurring us on to make real change.

Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's an absolute pleasure to follow both the member for Cowan and member for Curtin today—two great friends from Western Australia and two great women. I want to echo the things that they have said, but I will take this debate into a different direction, if I may.

I'd like first to pay tribute to the suffragette movement in Australia that not only led change in this country but then travelled to the UK and led change around the world. It is the centenary of Edith Cowan's election, and that was only possible because of the work of Australian women. It's a week since International Women's Day. I stand here with many sisters around the parliament, with independents, with Labor colleagues, with a female minister at the table this morning. I want to help celebrate the women that are in this parliament and mark how women came to be in this parliament. I want to do so on the back of International Women's Day and on the back of that hashtag, #ChooseToChallenge. I want to challenge the women who are in this chamber today to continue to challenge, as I asked young people in my electorate to do last week on International Women's Day. I reminded them of the suffragettes' journey, I reminded them of Edith Cowan's election 100 years ago, but I also reminded them of the things that need to be in place to continue to ensure that we increase women's representation in this parliament.

Of course, I followed the former member for Lalor, former Prime Minister Julia Gillard, into this place. I reminded those young people last week that there was a brave decision made by the Labor Party in Victoria to ensure that two safe seats in Melbourne's western suburbs went to women; that only women would stand for preselection in those seats. That decision delivered to this parliament both Julia Gillard as the member for Lalor and Nicola Roxon as the member for Gellibrand—the first female Prime Minister in this country and the first female Attorney-General in this country, a very proud history for women in the western suburbs of Melbourne. I said to the young girls that I was talking to last week: 'You must continue. You must take up that gavel and choose to challenge. You have to get into this fight.'

It is an important day. A hundred years since Edith Cowan was elected to parliament, we have the March 4 Justice happening here today. It is an important moment. I believe it is a moment that will bring further change to ensure gender equity. I believe women will unite to say that we want this gauge to move further than it has already moved, particularly in the areas around sexual harassment and sexual assault. There is not a woman in this building that has not thought about these issues deeply. I firmly believe that, but I also want to draw the House's attention to something absolutely pivotal. I speak of Julia Gillard and her entry into this parliament and the history of that and the decisions it took to get that momentum. I look at this side of the chamber, and I see us bringing more and more women into the parliament. Proudly, I see two sisters sitting to my right. This can't stop. And, I have to say on this important day that, while I have been in this place, I have watched the number of women in the government in this chamber reduce. They have gone backwards.

Today of all days, everyone and every woman in this building needs to pick up that fight and say that we need more women, not fewer women, in this place. So I call on members opposite—not just the women, but also the men, who sit on the benches opposite—to think long and deeply about how they can change the face of this parliament. It's through your preselection processes. I firmly believe that we're marching for justice today because although women may sit on the benches in this place, they need to feel safe so that they can speak out. They need to know that they are safe in their position and that their position in a ministry is safe, regardless of what they say about gender equity, sexual harassment and assault.

Fiona Martin (Reid, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We stand at a critical point in our nation's history. As thousands gather not far from where we are right now, the message being sent is loud and clear: we are not doing enough. When one in six women experience physical and/or sexual violence from a live-in partner from the age of 15, we must ask ourselves: what are we doing wrong? When 25 per cent of women experience emotional abuse from a current or previous partner, we must ask ourselves: what are we doing wrong? When one woman is killed every nine days at the hands of a partner, we must ask ourselves: what are we doing wrong? Clearly, we are doing something wrong.

Living free of violence is everyone's right, and reducing violence is everyone's business. We must continue to make reducing violence a priority. All forms of violence against women and children are unacceptable in any community and in any culture. Just over 100 years ago, women were not allowed to be parliamentarians. That was until, after much campaigning, a change to the law and a successful election in 1921, Edith Cowan became the first woman elected to any parliament across Australia. It is so important that women are represented at all levels of government because women can bring a broader range of issues to the table and research suggests that women use different methods to problem-solve. That can only make us stronger. As Ruth Bader Ginsburg said:

As women achieve power, the barriers will fall. As society sees what women can do, as women see what women can do, there will be more women out there doing things, and we'll all be better off for it.

While Cowan's time in parliament was short, her contributions still benefit women today, for it was Edith Cowan who pushed legislation allowing women to be involved in the legal profession. She was one of the first people to promote sex education in schools, and she succeeded in placing mothers and fathers equal in the eyes of the law in relation to wills.

I entered parliament to make a difference. I gave up a successful career as a psychologist, with a small business and a healthy work-life balance, to be in this place. I am away from my four children more often than I want to be. I did not come to Canberra to protest. I came to Canberra to legislate. I came to advocate, but, ultimately, I came to improve the lives of people. Since being elected, I have been advocating strongly for the issues affecting women. As co-chair of the parliamentary friends group for ending violence against women, I understand that we must be having these conversations, not just with adults but with young children too.

Edith Cowan was the first to push for sex education to be taught in schools, and she was right to do so. However, 100 years on we must keep going. Children should be taught about protective behaviours in preschool. It should be compulsory. Consent, relationship skills and awareness of coercive control should be taught to school-age children. Just over 100 years ago, women could not even be members of parliament. Now our parliament, government, ministry and cabinet are richer because women who stand in this place are contributing to our nation. Only recently Senator Payne achieved a significant milestone as the longest continuously serving female senator, a milestone I am sure Edith Cowan knew to be possible but certainly a long way off when she entered the parliament. Today the gender pay gap is at a record low and female participation is at a record high. Sixty per cent of all jobs recovered, after being lost during the lockdowns at the height of the pandemic, have gone to women.

I sometimes wonder what Cowan would make of today's parliament. Would she be critical? Would she have suggestions on how to do things better? I'm sure she would. But there is no doubt we have come a long way. Today, girls can grow up knowing they can be anything, because Edith Cowan was told she couldn't but she did anyway. As Margaret Thatcher said, don't follow the crowd; let the crowd follow you. It's time we got moving.

Anika Wells (Lilley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is serendipitous that the first speech I give in this chamber upon my return from parental leave, after the birth of my twins, is a speech about Edith Cowan, who was elected 100 years ago on the weekend, and that I give it on the day of the March 4 Justice in Canberra. I know many if not all of us on this side of the House will be marching down to the grass as soon as we take our leave from this chamber. I think Edith Cowan would want to know that, 100 years on, we still fight for and advance her legacy. If anything, it's disappointing that we have only gotten this far. Let's take stock of where we are.

Edith Cowan was a trailblazer. She dedicated her life to promoting and advancing the rights and welfare of women and children, guided by her belief that economic independence and higher education were an avenue of hope, something we still fight for, day in and day out, in this place. She also argued for the need for women in leadership, rather than just their right to see it—a debate we continue to have today, 100 years on. When she stood as a Nationalist candidate for the Legislative Assembly in West Perth, her election pamphlet, in accordance with the practice of the day, referred to her as Mrs James Cowan, after her husband. At least we've got rid of that! Despite being endorsed by the conservative party of the day, Edith Cowan felt that domestic and social issues were not being given enough attention. She campaigned on her impressive community service record and said that we all needed to 'nag a little' on social problems. Here we are, 100 years on, nagging still.

Cowan won a surprise victory, winning by 46 votes. She defeated the Attorney-General, who had actually introduced the legislation that enabled her to stand. That's politics! In 1921, at the age of 60, she became the first woman elected to an Australian parliament. The fact that her presence in the chamber was uncomfortable for some members was evident in their refusal to even accord her the tradition of silence for her maiden speech, even when she emphasised the necessity for more women in the chamber. And yet, here we are today, still talking about the culture of this place and what needs to be done for more women to feel more welcome.

As a parliamentarian, Cowan admirably pursued her policy objectives without concern for electoral consequences—how novel—or the favour of her party colleagues. She always voted in a way that would benefit, or at least not discriminate against, women and children. That is an absolute credit to her. She fought for the motherhood endowment and she defended the idea of a housewives union. It sounds like she belonged on our side, to be honest. She argued for the right of wives to access the arbitration court. She also pressed for sex education in state schools, a debate we are somehow still having in 2021, and she chastised the minister for railways for the one-shilling pram levy imposed on mothers who were travelling to the city for their shopping. The minister interjected during that debate—it got pretty rowdy—but agreed to withdraw the fee that same day. She successfully introduced and passed without amendment her second private member's bill, the Women's Legal Status Bill. It was radical at the time. It allowed women in Western Australia to practise law and other professions for the first time, and as a lawyer myself, 100 years down the track, I thank her. In introducing the Women's Legal Status Bill, which stated that no person could be disqualified from any public, civil or judicial function by sex, she paved the way for our current sex discrimination laws.

Two years after her death, the Edith Cowan memorial clock was unveiled at the entrance to Perth's Kings Park, believed to be one of the first civic monuments dedicated to Australian women, built in the face of persistent opposition which has been characterised as representative of the gender bias operating at the time. While a memorial clock is nice, the real monument to Edith Cowan's legacy is in this place, right here, with the member for Cowan, the member for Lalor, the member for Warringah, the member for Curtin and the member for Reid. It is only because of the trailblazing work of women like Edith that we all stand here today, and I think we owe it to her, to her legacy, to take our part in that ongoing legacy and fight for those same principles that she fought for a hundred years ago.

It is at the same time horrifying and galvanising that, a hundred years on, we must still fight for those principles—that, today, those principles are still at stake—but they are, so we do. We march on, we march out of this place and we march down to the grass and we stand with women from across the country, who ask us as their elected representatives to speak for them in this place. This isn't a political issue; this is a critical issue, and we are at a moment of reckoning across the country. It is we in this place who must listen to our people and must act to make sure that it actually means something to them back in their homes.

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the only man speaking on this motion I'd like to thank the member for Cowan for moving it today, because it is a significant milestone that deserves to be acknowledged. I'd also like to thank the members for Curtin, Reid, Lilley and Lalor for also speaking on this important motion to honour Edith Cowan's legacy. She was the first woman to be elected, representing West Perth in the Western Australian Legislative Assembly, and a proud Nationalist, which is a wonderful legacy.

When I draw on the Australian political biography of Edith Cowan and her legacy, I make similar remarks to those of the member for Lilley in the fact that she campaigned on her community service record, the need for law and order and for women in parliament 'to nag a little'. Of course, we would never use that term today, and nor should we, because all forms of justice have to be fought for and go against the status quo. It's one of the reasons I'm such a strong supporter of free speech—because you always have to be able to speak truth to power. But, more critically, she fit within the long legacy of Liberal women and was particularly a fan of John Stuart Mill, who, with his wonderful wife, Harriet Taylor Mill, wrote The Subjection of Women as part of the Liberal tradition of advancing equality for all people, including women.

Some of my biggest political heroes are women. Many of them are not household names. It's common to refer to somebody like Margaret Thatcher, who made a considerable contribution. But there are others, like Republican turned Democrat Pauline Sabin, who had the courage to choose principle over partisanship, from her pursuit of addressing violence against women caused by the excessive indulgence in saloons to recognising the shortcomings of the response and leading the charge to repeal prohibition in the United States.

I actually have a distant relative, Katharine Stewart-Murray—again, somebody who may not be well known—who was a Scottish Unionist and member for the electorate of Kinross and West Perthshire. She has a number of legacies, but the one I'm most proud of is her attempt to topple the Chamberlain government, of which she was part, because of his appeasement of Adolf Hitler and because she was a strong supporter of Churchill in the formation before the Second World War. Of course, history proved her right. It was courage that led her to stand up.

The electorate I represent is named after one of Australia's most significant suffragettes, Vida Goldstein. While Vida would have had philosophical differences perhaps from me and my party, her commitment to justice is no different. She fought for the right of women to vote and to stand for parliament, and she was the first to then stand for parliament in the British Empire. She fought for women to buy property and to enter marriages on the same terms as men. She didn't just inspire Australian women; she also inspired international suffragettes, including Emmeline Pankhurst, and the movement in the United Kingdom.

Like many in this place and at this time, I cannot attend the March 4 Justice rally today, as commitments preclude me from doing so, but we should never lose sight of the fact that that does not mean that any of us lack solidarity with the objectives of greater justice and addressing issues of equity and equality. Australia should be a nation where all people are treated safely and justly. There is no place for harassment or violence in any part of the community, including the workplace, because they diminish the dignity of people and strip them of their agency. I continue to say that the foundation of liberalism is empowerment, and great liberals have always supported emancipation, empowerment and liberation, just like the people of Goldstein, and I follow in that tradition. I'm also proud to see that the inquiry into conduct in this place is led by a proud Goldstein constituent, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins.

I can understand some Australians look at this place and question whether it will ever change and whether there are those inside it who are listening. That comes with frustration and anger. As I said at the time, whether we have to go through a postal survey to deliver marriage equality or not, the cause of human progress and justice has never been delivered on a silver platter. Good causes must be fought for. As hard, sometimes, as it is, it is a privilege to be part of that change that gives future generations a better and more just world than the one you inherited. For those who seek equality and justice outside this place, you have allies in this building on all sides of the chamber, regardless of their partisanship and whether they are there with you in person or in spirit.

Now, of course, is a time to honour Edith Cowan's legacy. It's a legacy that we should be proud of as a country but it's also a call to action for the future: to stand, to fight, to lead. Edith Cowan took those steps and, of course, we encourage all members in this place to continue that legacy and journey.

Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Cowan for the opportunity to reflect on the life of a truly remarkable parliamentarian, Edith Cowan. I also thank the member for Curtin and the member for Reid for their heartfelt words. By doing so, we all share the story of another trailblazing Australian woman who challenged the establishment, challenged her colleagues and challenged accepted practices. When sharing her story, we do so in the passionate hope that others will be inspired and follow in her footsteps. Right now there is a lot of frustration and a great deal of disappointment, anger and disempowerment. To those of you feeling frustrated and demanding change, many gathering outside this building as I speak, I encourage you to take heart, take courage and take inspiration from the life of Edith Cowan.

As others have mentioned already this morning, Edith Cowan was the first woman to be elected to any Australian parliament, winning election to the legislative assembly of Western Australia on 12 March 1921. At the time, voting was not compulsory, but, interestingly, in her electorate of West Perth more women than men turned out to vote, delivering her a slim victory of just 46 votes—an epic example that every vote counts.

If anyone hasn't read her maiden speech, please do so. I encourage you to, because it's clear from the outset that her intention was to bring a female perspective to decision-making. Her speech covered a broad range of topics, focusing on welfare, health and social justice. Here are some excerpts that, for obvious reasons, warm my heart. She demonstrated an independent spirit from that very first speech:

I was sent here to uphold law and order and constitutional government, and it will be my desire to assist in carrying out these objects in a proper and satisfactory manner; while in the discharge of my duties here I shall be responsible only to my own constituents … There are too many here to-day who are possessed of the old party spirit which seems ever to exist, but I cannot see why we should drag party into things that concern the whole of the State.

It was definitely her continued and sustained reference to the need for both genders to be represented in the parliament that dominated her speech. She saw a future where men and women worked collaboratively for the betterment of all. Here are some more prophetic words from the woman herself, words that ring true even today in 2021:

The views of both sides are more than ever needed in Parliament to-day. If men and women can work for the State side by side and represent all the different sections of the community, and if the male members of the House would be satisfied to allow women to help them and would accept their suggestions when they are offered, I cannot doubt that we should do very much better work in the community than was ever done before.

Unfortunately, the torch that was lit by Edith Cowan and passed to generations of women that followed, from many sides of politics, seems to have dimmed in recent years. The behaviour and attitudes on show over a century ago still ripple through our political discourse. Edith and the many women supporting her would have hoped that 100 years on the ambition of young Australian women would be to follow in their footsteps, to lift that torch and carry it forward. But, unfortunately, the opposite seems true. In a recent survey of 2,000 young Australian women aged 18 to 25, zero per cent expressed an interest in politics as a career. I was shocked, and I will work hard to change that. Looking at the events of the last month or so, I have to say: who could blame them? But I want young women in Warringah, and indeed across Australia, to aspire to work here, for politics to be a safe, welcoming and admirable career path.

We simply need more women in this place. In this 46th Parliament, there are 45 women in the House of Representatives, just under 30 per cent. In the Senate, the numbers are better, amounting to nearly 50 per cent. The reality is that Australia is still the fifth-worst in the OECD for inequality and political participation, above only Lithuania, Japan, Israel and Hungary. I therefore commend groups like Women for Election Australia, who aim to inspire and equip women to run for office and sustain them once elected. I wish them all the best in their endeavours to inspire and equip 2,000 women to run for political office in 2022. If Edith Cowan could do it 100 years ago and make substantial change, imagine the possibilities now. Enough is enough. Don't wait for the change. Be the change. Make your voice heard. Make your vote count.

Trent Zimmerman (North Sydney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.