Page 145 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 16 February 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
He finished by saying:
I am proud to be Mon and many all do.
That is what the Multicultural Festival is all about, Mr Speaker. It is taking people who are different from us and giving them a reason to be seven foot tall and bulletproof, and for once a year to celebrate their uniqueness amongst their fellows who are doing exactly the same thing. If you walked through that concourse on the weekend, you would have seen exactly what I am talking about.
The second part of this motion, which I know will cause difficulty for some people, is about this community’s leadership in promoting harmony and respect within our many different cultural and religious communities. I was trying to say that, almost uniquely, the ACT stood up against the discrimination against a series of cultural groups over the years, and in recent times it has stood up for the Islamic community.
I can remember demonstrating in City Walk against detention centres when there was no other politician from this place to be seen. There were no federal politicians to be seen. But we still did it. I went to ministerial councils and had to fight the lot. The only support I got for the abolition of the English test, the abolition of detention centres and the recognition of the right of people to practise their religions, was from Tasmania. I had to fight the then Liberal chair over it all, and I got rolled. I did not like being rolled because we were right and they were wrong.
The third part of the motion refers to the welcoming nature of the ACT community. Jon Stanhope declared this city a “welcoming city”. He could do so because he had the authority of the chief ministerial position. Jon Stanhope has stood up in the national community and defended the cultural communities. But he has done that in representing this community, because this community has expressed itself to be a welcoming city.
I noticed that one of the suggested amendments calls on the government to consult with local multicultural organisations to do various things. What part about two multicultural summits, 16 roundtable discussions with different ethnic and cultural groups and the fostering and support for the Canberra Multicultural Communities Forum don’t people understand? For example, it calls on the government to do something. The government has been doing this for six years. If the amendment said the government should continue to do this, I would support that, but it does not. It calls upon us to do something as though we have done nothing.
When I was standing up for the Muslim community in Canberra, I did it at the beginning by myself. Later on, when it became in vogue, those other people who were suffering from relevance deprivation jumped on the bandwagon. I, for one, think it is an appalling state of affairs.
I have now been given a copy of Mr Doszpot’s amendment. I think it is an appalling state of affairs that Mr Doszpot would put forward an amendment without having the courtesy to talk to me prior to doing so. He goes on about having a multipartisan
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video