Racism and Prime Minister John Howard

Ms SYLVIA HALE [3.29 p.m.]: Racism has preoccupied this House and the community over the past week. It is pertinent now to re-examine the Prime Minister's contribution to the rise of racism in this country. John Howard's primary political strategy has been to divide and rule this nation. He has consistently pitted one section of the community against the other, whether it be wharfies, Aborigines, the unemployed, refugees, academics, welfare recipients or trade unionists. By identifying a minority and telling the majority that they should fear and loathe it because it is a threat to the way of life of the majority, the Prime Minister has had electoral success, but he has also created the social division that we all now confront.

Undoubtedly, the most destructive aspect of the strategy has been his pandering to the fearful, racist element in the Australian community. John Howard consistently denies that he does so but, as in so many other matters, when you examine the facts you see that the Prime Minister does not speak the truth. Examine his record and his message becomes clear. During his first term as Opposition leader, John Howard saw potential electoral advantage in playing racial politics. His comments in July 1988 promising a reduction in Asian immigration if he became Prime Minister established his credentials as a politician willing to play the race card if he thought it would win him votes. He was widely condemned for those comments and forced to withdraw them, but the lesson he learned was not that this sort of politics is destructive and wrong. Rather, he learned that his appeal to racism had to be more subtle. He learned the black art of dog whistling.

The Hon. John Ryan: Point of order: We have already established in a previous debate that racist remarks are unparliamentary. This attack strikes me as being unparliamentary. It ought to be the subject of a substantive motion. Frankly, the attack is gutless. It is an attempt to make a number of statements about the Prime Minister to which no-one has the opportunity to reply. The speech the honourable member is giving is utterly inappropriate.

Ms SYLVIA HALE: To the point of order: I was prevented from making these remarks earlier on the grounds that it was irrelevant. Surely now, when that bill is no longer being discussed, they are relevant. I am not making racist remarks about the Prime Minister. I am accusing the Prime Minister of fostering a situation where racist tensions can increase. I believe it is perfectly permissible to do so.

The Hon. John Ryan: Further to the point of order: The honourable member did not say, as she just said then, that she accused the Prime Minister of promoting or fostering racism. She has accused the Prime Minister of being racist. That is an utterly unparliamentary attack on the Prime Minister, or on anyone for that matter, particularly when it is not possible for anyone to make a statement in response. To make a statement of that nature without the potential for debate shows an enormous lack of courage.

The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Kayee Griffin): Order! President Johnson ruled:

Offensive words must be offensive in some personal way. When a person is in political life, it is not offensive that things are said about him or her politically. There may be occasions on which remarks offensive to an identifiable member may not be regarded as unparliamentary when applied to a group where members cannot be identified.

Ms Sylvia Hale has referred to both the Prime Minister and the Federal Government. In accordance with President Johnson's ruling, the member should confine her remarks to matters of policy rather than personal issues.

Ms SYLVIA HALE: I referred to the Prime Minister's dog whistling. The first to face the dog whistling were Australia's indigenous community. Who can forget his shouting rant at a hall full of indigenous leaders shortly after his election, his 10-point plan to remove the common law rights of Aborigines arising from the Wik decision, his refusal to apologise to the stolen generation, his axing of Abstudy, his refusal to join the hundreds of thousands of Sydneysiders who walked across the Sydney Harbour Bridge for reconciliation, his destruction of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission [ATSIC], and his denial of the violence perpetrated against Aborigines as a black armband view of history. Next to be given the Howard treatment were the asylum seekers, predominantly Muslims from Afghanistan and the Middle East. His vicious willingness to falsely accuse asylum seekers of throwing the children overboard contrasts starkly with his reluctance to criticise the clear and undeniable racist element in Sunday's riots at Cronulla. This willingness to falsely accuse and smear— [Time expired.]