Page 2257 - Week 07 - Thursday, 27 August 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
of gender transitioning, free from parental control. That claim is wrong, it is abject nonsense, and it does no credit to the individual who has put that forward. This bill does not create any new rights for anyone, nor does it restrict other human rights such as freedom of religion. Of course, parents and teachers can lovingly talk with their children, and children in their care, about the full range of issues that come with growing up and discovering who you are as a person.
This bill bans incredibly harmful practices that seek to change a person’s sexuality or gender identity. I am pleased that all who have spoken in this debate support that principle. That is an advance on where this territory and this country has been in my lifetime. I will repeat that: it is an advance on where this territory and this country has been in my lifetime. Even in debates in this place, this century, those issues have been contested.
As we have heard, the bill is very specific in what it seeks to achieve. It does not override or criminalise the preferences of parents—preferences they have to raise their children in whatever religious faith they choose. It does not seek to mandate that parents must be nothing but accepting of their child’s stated sexuality or gender identity. These are matters for parents and their children. No piece of legislation can mandate parental acceptance of a child. No piece of legislation can do that; only common decency would suggest that parents do not disown their children because of their sexuality or gender identity. Sadly, in the history of this city and in this nation, there are too many tragic stories where that has occurred, but there is nothing we can do in legislation that will prevent that from happening. Fortunately, because societal attitudes have changed, that is increasingly rare, and that is a great thing. That that has occurred only because people have pushed for reform.
In this place, that started nearly two decades ago with Jon Stanhope’s government. We have been bitterly opposed along the way but we arrive in 2020 in a much better position. That the Leader of the Opposition in this place can get up and support this in principle is a great step forward, and I am delighted to hear it. We are going to disagree on some elements of detail but the principle that we are agreeing on today is a powerful one and it is a powerful message to send to the community.
Feedback from survivors of conversion practices will have a key role in the implementation of this legislation. I want to put clearly on the public record that the views of those who have bravely come forward have been so valuable in this process. I pay tribute to the Brave Network of survivors for sharing their experiences and their expertise with the government. I encourage others to engage with Brave Network to educate themselves on the forms that these practices take and why the approach in this legislation will go some way towards addressing the terrible harm, grief, anxiety and destruction of lives that has been caused by these practices.
The aim of the bill is very clear. It targets practices that are abhorrent, that are outright quackery and that belong in the distant past. They should never have happened and should never have been part of any modern society. I refer to practices that are aimed at changing, fixing or curing someone—however you characterise it—to change someone’s sexuality or gender identity. It is coercive behaviour that is abhorrent. These are very specific practices. Fortunately, now they are very rare, but they do still
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video