Tyron Whitten (WA, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Finance, Minister Gallagher. After Equality Australia was rejected by the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission, rejected by the AAT and rejected by the full Federal Court for deductible gift recipient status on the basis that it was considered a lobbyist group, why did the Labor government overrule the judiciary and legislate that they should be granted deductible gift recipient status?

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just a moment, Minister. Senator Whitten, this matter, as you may know, is currently before a Committee of the Whole, so that level of specifics in relation to the subject matter shouldn't be being asked as a question. You may wish to ask in more general terms.

Tyron Whitten (WA, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I might save my question for another day.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay. But does One Nation—I do have Senator Hanson down. With the indulgence of the Senate, I'm assuming that we can move to a first supplementary. I'll just seek advice. Senator Whitten, the minister is quite agreeable to answering your question. You are new to the Senate. I think you deserve some leniency in that regard, so I will invite the minister to answer your question.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Whitten for the question, and I can speak in general terms so as not to interfere with a bill that is currently before the Senate in the committee stage. There are two avenues, essentially, for deductible gift recipient status. One goes through the process that Senator Whitten outlined in fitting under the criteria that are used for administrative approval, and then there is the capacity for government to bring legislation before the parliament which seeks to include other organisations that the government believes are suitable for DGR status through legislative processes where they get debated on the floor of the Senate, which is currently what is happening in relation to the organisation that Senator Whitten outlined in his question.

Within legislative approaches, there are often a wide—sometimes it's only a couple of organisation; sometimes it can be 10 or more. They are often across a broad spectrum of civil society, from community organisations to faith based organisations and fundraising organisations for particular causes. The government considers this through our normal processes and brings that legislation here for debate, and it requires a vote of the Senate in order to pass that.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whitten, if you have a first supplementary in general terms?

Tyron Whitten (WA, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As general as I can make it, President. We know that Equality Australia is influential in political circles. Who pushed for Equality Australia to get this special legislative treatment when the organisation was rejected by the full Federal Court as a lobbyist group?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The consideration the government gives is through its own decision-making processes about DGR status. In relation to the organisation Senator Whitten has outlined, the government believes this organisation does very important work for the LGBTIQ+ community in terms of advocacy, support, counselling and education. Across a whole range of functions, that organisation makes a significant community contribution to our country. Senator Whitten, I understand you don't agree with that listing but the government and those on this side of the chamber acknowledge the very valuable and significant role that organisation plays in supporting the LGBTIQ+ community and their families. We strongly support the listing of that organisation, and no doubt the Senate will have more to consider in relation to that.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whitten, second supplementary?

Tyron Whitten (WA, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will continue to be as general as I can! Deductible gift recipients are provided a special privilege because they are judged to be a public good. Australians forego their hard-earned tax dollars to allow many wonderful charities to raise money to do their vital work. DGR status is not to be handed out as a political favour. Equality Australia is an entity that peddles radical gender ideology to the children of Australia. Why won't the government allow parents to have a choice with this outrageous display of nepotism?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I and those on this side of the chamber would disassociate ourselves from those comments, imputations and assertions just made by Senator Whitten about that organisation. It is deeply disappointing that we continue to see culture wars and divisive attacks on incredibly important organisations in this country. I accept, Senator Whitten, that you don't agree, but I think that—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whish-Wilson, that commentary is unnecessary.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

to demean that organisation and characterise it that way is incredibly disappointing. That organisation has saved lives. It supports communities and educates people. This country should be more about what organisations like that do right across the spectrum than about the kind of language and division you seek to peddle in this chamber. The country would be much better off, and it's organisations like Equality— (Time expired)