Page 2254 - Week 06 - Thursday, 6 June 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
In the case of Haig Park, the merits of Field Marshal Haig were debated at the time of the naming of the park. The name itself was part of the argument and, from the number of people still engaged in that argument, the rights and wrongs of the First World War are far from settled. Taking this opportunity to include more people in that conversation seems very wise.
In the case of William Slim Drive, I believe Mr Gentleman has made the right call. The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse emphasised that redress should accept a reasonable likelihood test rather than a higher standard of proof when assessing allegations of historic abuse. That means we should believe survivors and not put them on trial when trying to right the wrongs of the past.
While Slim will never face the trial he deserved, we should not be running a protection racket for his legacy. We cannot honestly claim to be engaged in redress and healing whilst continuing to commemorate the perpetrator.
I believe the third part of Mr Gentleman’s decision, that of opening a proper process to respond to other problematic place names, will be the most important—a process of listening and considering, a process without the histrionics and carrying on that we have seen in the last few months.
As a politician I am perfectly comfortable with weeks of letters to the editor slagging me off. But the idea that a victim of child sexual abuse would be exposed to the same makes me sick. The mob should not be allowed to bully the victims of anything. Intimidation by those whose identity politics is threatened by the truthful telling of Australian history should never be allowed to prevent victims from coming forward. I thank Mr Gentleman and his directorate for the hard work they have done, and I look forward to the renaming.
MR PETTERSSON (Yerrabi) (4.02): I also rise to put on the record my support for this decision. As I do that I want to note the very sombre mood that has taken over this place. It is often very hard to confront our history. For far too long we have not confronted the immoral, unfair and terrible actions that took place, often in the shadows. But in coming forward and renaming this road we are confronting that past, and speaking truth to that silencing culture.
I want to cast back very briefly to when Ms Cody first raised this, and the vitriol that we saw in our community about this discussion. A terrible conversation took place. Ms Cody was attacked for raising this. I am very glad to see in this decision today an acknowledgement that Ms Cody was correct and brave in bringing it forward, and I thank her for doing it.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Auditor-General’s report No 2 of 2019—government response
Motion (by Mr Gentleman) agreed to:
That the Assembly take note of the following paper:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video