Page 161 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 16 February 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
money the Mon community had made. There was no community that did not make money this weekend.
When it was in the nine-day festival, we tried expanding it out into Glebe Park and it did not work. People lost so much money. There were about four or five communities that actually went backwards by $1,000 that weekend. You just cannot let that happen. I think that people’s attitude to the Multicultural Festival and its place in our promotion of the way we do things here in Canberra is a bit misguided. I really do not think those opposite and the crossbench actually appreciate where it fits in our society. This festival, which I changed the nature of, was known in Chicago. I was congratulated—
Mr Doszpot interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Doszpot, I hate to have to warn you but I have asked you a number of times to stop interjecting.
MR HARGREAVES: Thanks, Mr Speaker. I was congratulated on it in Chicago. I was congratulated on it in Beijing. I was congratulated on it in Shanghai and I was congratulated on it in Nairobi. It was not because it was a great fun activity; it was because it was a model of how multicultural communities can come together as a sort of apex of the activities during the year. I have also been invited to Malaysia to go and talk on this very subject, on how we can bring these people together, but lo, Mr Speaker, what do we hear? We hear Mr Doszpot saying: “Yes, but what about me? What about me? What about that statue?” How petty is that?
The ACT, the Canberra community, are leaders in this country on how to do it. We do not have ethnic ghettoes in this town. I was talking to a whole stack of people on the concourse on Saturday who were saying to me: “Look at this. Isn’t it wonderful—all the colour, all the sounds and everything else?” This Multicultural Festival, for all these critics, is actually used as a model interstate, but none of them are as good or as big. None of them are an integral part of a policy of inclusion, mutual respect, cultural diversity and address things like religion. Where were those people when we had the trouble at the mosque? They were nowhere to be seen, Mr Speaker. It was me, the Labor Party, that went out there and told the Islamic community we supported them.
If I had been given that petition to table in this place I would have refused to do it because I would not put my name, regardless of freedom of speech, to a document which could get currency under parliamentary privilege which actually promoted discrimination on the basis of religion. I do not care whether it was three people or 3,000 people who were signatories to it.
This was just a simple case of Hansonism running rife. They are saying, “Freedom of speech.” Well, my word, Mr Speaker, that is unacceptable to me. Any discrimination is unacceptable to me. I would not have done it. Quite frankly, the 38 members and senators who did support it ought to hang their heads in shame. I do not care what party they come from. They should hang their heads in shame. I am particularly disappointed in Senator Humphries because I know the man. I know his contribution to multiculturalism in this city. It has been a very, very strong contribution. He belittles that contribution by supporting that petition to be tabled in the Senate.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video