Page 684 - Week 02 - Thursday, 23 March 2023
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
With all due respect, however, I am not interested in a privileged white man trying to mandate that I be re-educated to think like a member of the Greens party. I have here the anti-racism training. It says:
Since white people in Australia hold most of the political, institutional, and economic power, they receive advantages that nonwhite groups do not. These benefits and advantages, of varying degrees, lead to white privilege.
Explain to me, my white people across the chamber, what benefits do you receive that I do not? What benefit do I not receive? I do not believe it exists. Does that lead to you being a white privileged woman or man? Does it? I do not know. I do not think it is right. I think this policy is complete rubbish because it is simply not true.
What the Greens are trying to do here, as I read it, as a woman of colour, is divide me and my white friends by saying that you have more privileges than me because of your white skin. This is not anti-racism training; this is racist in itself. You are trying to divide me and them. This is full of hatred. You know what I think of this rubbish? It is rubbish and it should go in the rubbish bin, where it belongs. It is really, really ridiculous. I cannot even talk anymore because it is just full of hatred and it causes division and it belongs in the rubbish, where it should stay.
I will bring a little bit of love into this. If the Greens and ACT Labor are interested in some practical anti-racism training, however, I am happy to have a chat with Ms Lee to see if the Canberra Liberals might be in a position to provide you white folks with training on racism. Thank you.
MR HANSON (Murrumbidgee) (4.34): I was not going to speak to this motion, but, having heard the impassioned speech from Mrs Kikkert, I would like to commend her for what she has said. I think Mr Braddock should reflect on that. He should choose his closing his remarks very carefully and consider apologising to Mrs Kikkert and to Ms Lee for the offence that he has caused them.
MR BRADDOCK (Yerrabi) (4.35), in reply: I would like to thank all members for their contributions today. As you can see, these conversations are difficult and do create great passions. I will go through some of the points which were raised during other members’ speeches. Ms Cheyne, I definitely acknowledge that I said training was made available to all MLAs here, and I note that you mentioned that only half actually undertook that training. I think that, in itself, says that there is more work to be done in this space.
Mrs Kikkert, I think everyone, regardless of the colour of their skin, their ethnicity, their religion, can learn and would benefit from training in this space. I do not believe any one grouping, regardless of religion, ethnicity, colour or whatever it may be, has an absolute monopoly on racism or not being racist. Therefore, I fully commend my motion to the house.
I would also like to share a story that I heard while doing my research for this. On a sporting field, during a match between two young teams, it was reported to the umpire that racist taunts had been stated but had not been acted upon. The match ended when
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video