Barry O'Sullivan (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My contribution today is also on the Safe Schools Coalition program. I want to make the point that is perhaps lost on my colleague in the Greens that Senator Bernardi is not the only individual in this parliament—in this house or the other—who has serious concerns with respect to this program. In fact, without disclosing any of the content of any meetings that I may have attended with colleagues, the majority of my colleagues are very concerned about some, not all, aspects of this program. Of course, as we know, my friends in the Greens do not have often have regard to what the majority view might be with respect to a particular topic.

The Safe Schools Coalition program was awarded federal funding to the tune of about $8 million with a view to a national rollout. There are now some 500 schools that have the program, 27 of them in my home state. As I understand the intent of the funding, the program was initially set out to do with the issue of bullying in schools. Before I get any catch cries, I promise senators that every fibre of my body wants to see schools free of any type of bullying. I have been a student myself, as have we all. My children have been through school and my grandchildren are still in school. I have personally witnessed the anxiety that comes from bullying in schools. I believe the federal government, through funding grants, has a serious role to play in our education institutions around the country and in dealing with this issue.

Bullying comes in many forms. It can relate to an individual's ethnicity—we have heard reports of that in this place—their physical attributes, their learning and academic capacity, their socioeconomic circumstances, the very suburb they come from, what their parents do, the history of their families, their sporting prowess, their hair colour or their artistic interests. These and many more issues are the subject of bullying in schools. Sexuality and self-gender definition issues and the challenges those bring to young people are just one of the areas that we need to attend upon with respect to bullying. But was the funding devoted to that? Was the funding devoted to a very general in-principal education capacity to deal with people who are in the bullying situation? No. It was directed particularly at the unique cohort of people who are said to be suffering—and I accept they are—with respect to sexual confusion.

Mind you, I think every young person at some stage—and it was my own experience—has difficulty during that puberty. There is confusion and misunderstanding. They are scared. They can be confused. And all of the circumstances, particularly in their place of education, can contribute to exacerbating their position. But this program sets out almost exclusively, to use the words of Senator Bernardi, to deconstruct the general norms that reflect society with respect to these issues. In effect, if you look at the brochures that are distributed to children as young as 12 years of age, it introduces the question of sexual confusion during puberty. I accept that occurs, not in the manner that is described by the authors of this program, but I accept that there is confusion. Then they go on to provide some 13 alternatives—none of the options is heterosexuality. They go on to indicate that you can work your way through this list of experiences and the depositions that are provided by different individuals. All of it relates to this minority grouping of people—they are a minority grouping; I accept that—who are finding confusion about their gender identity and like issues.

I will give some examples. This is asking educators in schools to allow students to access unisex toilets or toilets of their choice. Can you imagine a combined school of 1,000 boys and girls, and this program is encouraging people to go to whichever toilet they choose? It goes on to talk about when you are away on school camps, and says you should be able to demand that you are not gender divided. These are the teachings of the program, this is what has been introduced to the students in the context of anti-bullying. Somehow we are going to suppress bullying where a young man demands that he is going to sleep over in one of the other dormitories with the girls! They are told—and I do not know where this fits in with bullying—that others find that 'their sexuality is fluid and changes over time and that sometimes guys like guys more and sometimes guys like girls more'. They are told that 'looking at sexuality as something that is fluid and always changing is pretty cool'. Imagine introducing this information to 12 year-olds and 13-year-olds who are confused in relation to either their own sexuality or the question of sex generally! 'It is something that is fluid and always changing, it is pretty cool.' I used to say to my mother, who was a very staunch Roman Catholic—I accused her, on occasion, of being almost a bigoted Catholic—that had she been born in China she would have been a bigoted Buddhist.

This is a very impressionable period of time for young people in a confused state. We all know that, for the most part, if we are introduced to a religion in our youth it becomes the religion of our adulthood—some people change, but, by and large, that is true. We are introduced to a language and it is our language for life. We are introduced to cultural issues—some people change, and cultural issues develop, but, by and large, they are the cultural issues of our life. And here we have a program where young people in a very vulnerable state are being told: 'Here are your options. Like a Chinese menu, you can pick any one of the following options that you like. It is okay, it is all perfectly normal.'

I have no problem with any program that pursues the issue of bullying. I have great empathy for young people who, as was the subject of the senator's speech, find themselves confused in relation to this social issue. But there are many, many other social issues that confuse young people as well. I say that the federal government money that is set aside for bullying must be spent on a much more balanced program than what we are seeing with the Safe Schools Coalition program. I think that, in the future, any funding should be applied in ways that professional educators, mainstream representatives and, in particular, the parents of the children in schools have a say in.

One of the main authors in this was a woman called Roz Ward, who spoke at the Marxist conference in Melbourne. She talked about deconstruction. She spoke about the fact that everyone's ideals on gender positions need to be deconstructed and rebuilt in the framework of this program. I say to my colleagues in the Senate let's find some common ground that helps these people. I am all for it. I will be a major supporter of these young folk who are confused about this. But, equally, there needs to be some integrity applied to it so that we have an equitable program that looks after all of those other children in our mainstream education who are being bullied and affected by so many other things in our life, some that I have mentioned. I do not believe that we should continue to support a program where the money is spent on something that is so focused on such a minor group, important as it is, within our school system. I, along with others, have called on our government to review this program. That program is currently under review. I would urge senators to make a contribution to the debate so that we end up at with a more balanced program that will assist all students.