Page 566 - Week 02 - Thursday, 14 February 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Deepavali, which has occurred in the past, and smoking ceremonies as well. I actually attended the smoking ceremony for Dr Bourke when he arrived at the Assembly. I recall—I will stand corrected if it is not so—that all Labor members and all Greens attended that ceremony. The advice from the Clerk suggests this would now not be possible under this motion.
That is the consequence of what is being said. Where is the line drawn, and why are the Labor Party and the Greens—who I assume are supporting this—the people who are going to dictate who is given the right to voice their opinion and use the facilities that should be free and open to them in a democratic society?
At the beginning of this week, about 200 people attended a service of prayer and worship that was organised by the Speaker—not by the Assembly. I cannot remember the last time I saw 200 people in this place coming to support the Assembly. What I saw was a broad and diverse group of Canberrans—
Mr Rattenbury: Liberal Party members?
Ms Gallagher: It wasn’t a preselection meeting, was it?
MR HANSON: I am receiving some interjections—
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, members! Sit down, Mr Hanson. Members, this is a serious matter. There has been a little bit of conversation, which I think we would like people to keep to a minimum. Stop the clock, please, Clerk. This is a serious matter, and it should be dealt with seriously and respectfully. I do not want interjections about preselections and the like. It is not appropriate.
MR HANSON: It reflected a diverse range of people from our community—from people who are not religious to Catholics, Anglicans, Jews, Ba’hais and Buddhists. It was very well attended, and it was a multi-faith forum where anybody was able to attend. I came away from that service, with a very, very strong view that it is a good thing to do. I cannot understand how any opportunity where 200 members of our community come together, where we have a diverse range of people—from people with no faith through to many representatives from Islamic countries from the embassies—showing their support for this Assembly, is a bad thing. I simply cannot.
It is clear to me that it does not engage in any way the nonsense and the spurious arguments put forward by the Attorney-General that it somehow engages the principle of separation between church and state. It is not a matter of whether it engages that principle or not; it clearly does not. But it seems that the far-reaching nature of this motion is pushing the state to a position where, in effect, it could be discriminating against religion. That is a very, very dangerous and unfortunate consequence of this motion.
I hope the minister is not trying to send the message to our religious communities, our multi-faith communities, that they are in some way secondary in consideration, they are not welcome in this place and that they are second-class citizens. I hope that he is not trying to change the way we start the sitting each day where members who are religious are given the opportunity to say a prayer if they wish to do so.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video