Page 871 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 9 March 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
tear down an effective and important program. Unfortunately, that is what we often see, and that is what I am fearful we are seeing here—that this review is being utilised by opponents as the first step to unpick an important government program. I think that is the agenda of some members of the federal parliament in this case.
Mr Hinder’s motion outlines some of the ridiculous comments that have been made by some in the coalition. I think they are disgraceful comments, and I think that there is no place for them in public debate. Sure, let us have a free public debate, but the sorts of outlandish comments we have seen are simply unwarranted, unhelpful and disrespectful.
Some of those comments, unfortunately, do not surprise me, coming from the individuals that they have come from. It seems that, whenever there is an effort to educate young people and empower them to make good decisions, conservative ideologues—and that is what these people are—feel the need to label it as a Marxist agenda or even worse. They make not-so-subtle connections between homosexuality and sexual abuse, and I consider that to be entirely unacceptable.
I have reviewed the concerns that George Christensen raised. When you get down to it, you see that he appears to be worried about links to websites that provide accurate and useful information for young people about topics that, frankly, he probably just does not want to discuss. That is his problem, not the young people’s. I think he is also underestimating the skills and capacity of our young people to seek out information on the internet as well as their ability to appreciate good quality information when they see it.
We know that it is better to inform young people about the issues that are live for them. Children and young people are interested in and sometimes concerned by their sexuality. Children are identifying younger and younger as being transgender and are making the very brave decisions to come out as transgender, even in primary school. These children need all the support they can get, and we should not be seeking to restrict that just because we are personally confronted by the issues it raises. Of course, material needs to be age appropriate and presented in a manner that is accessible for children and young people. This debate has been had before, with sex education and reproductive health and with sexual health, but we have learnt time and time again that information is important and crucial to young people making informed and safe choices.
Importantly, what do these comments say to those young people who find themselves questioning and exploring their sexuality and/or gender? It says to them that these old, white, conservative men in politics do not understand their issues, do not care about their wellbeing and are not offering them any support. In some ways, it is quite possible that they will not be surprised by that; I think some of these people make it clear that, in fact, that is their position.
What people in positions of leadership and authority need to understand is that these comments can be offensive and alienating to young people who are in the process of working through issues of sexual and/or gender identity. This can be dangerous. We know that the rates of suicide are high in young people who identify as homosexual or transgender, and we know that mental health is everyone’s responsibility.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video