South Australian Multicultural Bill

Committee Stage

In committee.

(Continued from 18 March 2021.)

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: Mr Chair, I draw your attention to the state of the committee.

A quorum having been formed:

Clause 1.

The CHAIR: Both the members for Ramsay and Cheltenham have had three questions on this clause.

Clause passed.

Clause 2.

Mr SZAKACS: My question is around the commencement date and whether there is a view of government to hold off commencement subject to the charter being consulted and drafted, or whether it will commence and then proceed with the administrative work of that charter.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: Not that I am aware of. I would expect, in the first instance, with the preparation of a charter, as for most other legislation where we have a charter, there would be some accommodation of the preparation of that before the implementation of a number of things. But, as the member would be aware, there is quite a considerable amount of material that would otherwise have gone in a charter that is now going into the act. How much is going to be left for the charter, I do not know. I could not really provide you with any further information on what will populate that charter and whether it should in any way impede the implementation of the rest of the legislation.

Clause passed.

Clause 3.

The CHAIR: We have an amendment standing in the name of the member for Badcoe. The member for Ramsay is indicating that that amendment will be withdrawn or at least not put.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I have some questions regarding the charter. I am curious about the time that you think it will take for the charter to be produced. Perhaps you can detail the consultation you will do regarding the charter.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: My understanding is that this is a project that is to be undertaken by the commission, so it is probably more properly a matter that they be consulted on, as to how they propose to consult on it and how long they think they might take to actually to finalise that. This is not a job for government; this is a charter which is proposed to be for the commission. They should have, and I expect they will be given, support from the department, but it is ultimately a charter that will be prepared. It is their job to do.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Attorney, recently the government called for expressions of interest for commission members in order to have new members of the commission. Given the time line of this process, are we expecting that a charter will not come probably for some time? I am concerned that you are waiting for a new commission to come together. It feels to me that perhaps the charter does not have the urgency that we would be seeking.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: Again, this is something that is being sought. It is being proposed in the legislation. It is intended to be implemented under the supervision of the commission in consultation with the community. My understanding is that the general expectation is that it will be by 22 July 2022.

Clause passed.

Clause 4.

The CHAIR: If I could have the committee's attention for a moment, the member for Ramsay has amendment No. 1 standing in her name, which to me appears similar to paragraph (e) of the Attorney-General's amendment. Have you picked up on that, member for Ramsay?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: There is a slight amendment to that. We are going to propose an amendment to the amendment containing the Attorney's proposed change. If that is acceptable, we will not be moving amendment No. 1 [Bettison-1].

The CHAIR: As long as we are clear, that is fine.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: I move:

Amendment No 1 [AG–3]—

Page 4, lines 10 to 19—Delete clause 4 and substitute:

4—Parliamentary declaration

The Parliament of South Australia recognises and acknowledges—

(a) that Aboriginal peoples are South Australia's first peoples and nations, and the traditional owners and occupants of land and waters in South Australia;

(b) the cultural, linguistic, racial and religious diversity of the people of South Australia;

(c) that all people have a right to express and celebrate their cultural, linguistic and religious diversity;

(d) that South Australia's diversity should be reflected in a whole of government approach to policy development, implementation and evaluation;

(e) that all South Australians should be able to participate in the cultural, economic, political and social life of South Australia to the maximum extent possible;

(f) that State authorities are responsible for giving effect to principles of multiculturalism in the course of their official functions and responsibilities;

(g) that all people are entitled to mutual respect and understanding regardless of their background;

(h) that diversity is an asset and a valuable resource benefitting South Australia;

(i) that diversity brings richness to the South Australian community;

(j) the valuable contribution of South Australians from diverse backgrounds to South Australia,

and wishes to promote South Australia as a unified, harmonious and inclusive community.

This amendment is to put in a new clause 4 as published. I indicate that, in line with feedback received from current and previous members of the South Australian Multicultural and Ethnic Affairs Commission, we are proposing the parliamentary declaration be reframed to more strongly set the tone of the principles of multiculturalism that will underpin the South Australian multicultural charter when that is developed following the passage of the legislation.

The amended parliamentary declaration is more comprehensive and explicit about the parliament's commitment and intent regarding multiculturalism. The charter, which will give effect to the sentiments behind the parliamentary declaration, will be developed in close consultation with the commission and the community, as I have previously outlined.

Mr SZAKACS: Chair, if I may, for clarification, we will deal with the amendment in the Attorney's name and we will subsequently deal with the amendment that I have moved to the amendment?

The CHAIR: Yes. For clarification, member for Cheltenham, it is a good point you raise. We will at least finish the discussion on the Attorney-General's amendment. Before I put that, you will come in and move your amendment to the amendment. At the moment we are dealing with just the Attorney's amendment. Are there any further questions on that?

Mr SZAKACS: This is a very significant amendment that changes the bill before us. There was a large and very time-consuming consultation process that occurred before this bill came before the house. What has changed, since this has been tabled, that has meant the government has made this amendment?

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: I think the member knows full well, and it is that there have been a number of discussions in relation to specifying, in the act, information that would, frankly, otherwise be in the charter. Nevertheless, there seemed to be a desire for this to be specified in the act, and that is precisely what we are doing.

Mr SZAKACS: Who were those conversations and discussions with that you just referred to?

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: It included the shadow minister and a predecessor.

Mr SZAKACS: Were there any stakeholders who were consulted or not consulted during the consultation process who have raised with you or the government their desire to include these substantive matters in the bill?

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: I am not sure who was not consulted; that is a bit hard to say. However, there have been a number of parties who have, in particular, worked with the Hon. Jing Lee and with the Premier's office. I know I had conversations with the former shadow minister, the member for Badcoe.

I cannot recall whether I specifically had them with the now shadow minister, but in the conversations I have had in that regard with the opposition, under the new leadership, they are consistent with the same conversations I have had previously with Ms Stinson I do not think I can take it any further. There is ongoing conversation with Premier's office representatives and, in particular, the minister assisting, the Hon. Jing Lee.

Mr SZAKACS: I note the persuasive efforts of the member for Ramsay and the member for Badcoe, and it is certainly worth putting on the record my appreciation and our appreciation of the consultation efforts of members of SAMEAC, who have independently and collectively expressed a view about their absence within the consultation process of this reform of the bill in the first place. The endeavours of the opposition on this have been to give voice to the members of the multicultural communities, who have felt silenced or sidelined in their views to include this in the substantive bill.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: I will take that as a comment.

The CHAIR: Which the member is quite entitled to make.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: In relation to the parliamentary declaration, how do we give effect in the parliament to this declaration? It is a great set of words, which has been amended quite substantially, particularly to include acknowledgement of the Aboriginal people, South Australia's First Peoples and First Nations and the traditional owners and occupants of the lands and waters of South Australia. There was no reference to it previously. Now that we have landed on this set of words, how will we give effect to it?

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: I think the member is experienced enough in this house to know that once something is in the statute there is expected to be some compliance. Some of it is not punitive; some of the laws we pass here are to express an intent or, in this case, a declaration of the parliament of the recognition of the diversity in our community. That is precisely what it does, and it is in the statute.

We have different names for different documents like these, such as a charter. We have a public sector charter, we have children's charters, we have all sorts of charters now in modern legislation.

Mr Szakacs interjecting:

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: I know you say that it is a declaration, but I am just saying that, like that, there has been a development in our statutory law of the commitment to certain recognition. In this instance, it is described within a declaration of the parliament.

It is actually much more common in the commonwealth arena in the legislation, and it is very common in relation to our association of signing up to international treaties and other declarations at the level of the United Nations. I do not know if it will help any further, but it is there. The publication of legislation, when it passes this parliament, has a significance to contemporise the intention of the parliament and also the government, where it is to actually enact a number of things, and it is to have an educative value.

It is just like what we are doing in this legislation in moving away from 'ethnic' to dealing with the recognition of 'multicultural' and 'intercultural'. That is part of the contemporary development of this type of legislation. We want this to be a statement that is incorporated in the legislation. It incorporates a number of areas of recognition, including the First Peoples of our state and of course the diversity of the cultural significance of what we enjoy the privilege of in this state.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I have a concern that when I read about the submissions from different organisations, different stakeholders, they were very clear that we should have a recognition of Aboriginal peoples in this declaration. I am a little concerned, and I am asking for some clarity as to why that was not in the original proposal in this original bill.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: I think that is very obvious. It was proposed that this be developed under the supervision of the commission itself in a charter. Clearly, that conversation has moved on, and there is an expectation that the diversity of our community be considered in the legislation, and that is what we have done. So I do not know how clear I can be about that. We are happy to do it and put it in the bill, and we have.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Is there intention for the Attorney, who has carriage of this bill here, or the Premier or the minister assisting to actually give effect to this declaration: to ask parliamentarians to sign this bill, sign this declaration and make it transparent and open to South Australians?

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: Indeed, that is sort of the implementation of these things. This is not a declaration of government; this is a declaration of the parliament, and I would hope that every single person in this house of parliament and in the other place actually commits to this, because we are putting in a law, and if this law passes, which we expect it will in one form or other, then we as a government would expect that all of our colleagues here in the parliament will indeed sign up to it. So if they have not got that message, let me be very clear: I expect it to be signed up to, if it is passed.

The CHAIR: Member for Cheltenham, I am conscious of the time, but it might be appropriate for you to move your amendment to the amendment now, and then most likely we will report progress.

Mr SZAKACS: Thank you, Chair. I move to amend the amendment as follows:

After paragraph (j), add the following additional paragraph:

(k) the contribution that migration, temporary migration and refugee resettlement has made to multiculturalism and interculturalism in South Australia.

The CHAIR: Do you wish to speak to that at all, member for Cheltenham?

Mr SZAKACS: If I can speak to it and I may seek leave to continue.

The CHAIR: Yes, that is fine.

Mr SZAKACS: This is an important amendment. As has already been the case, the member for Ramsay has indicated that we will not be proceeding with a series of other amendments on this clause; however, in the words of the Attorney, the importance of this clause is a recognition of diversity. It would be improper for this parliament to pass a declaration recognising diversity without recognising the enormous contribution that migration has made to this state.

We have already seen very important amendments moved that recognise that we are all migrants in this state. We are all migrants in this country, and we tread lightly on the lands of First Nations people, who have had a continuous living culture of 60,000 years. However, as we talk about a declaration, talking about the contemporary contribution that migration has brought to this state is profoundly important.

The CHAIR: I am going to interrupt there. You do not need to seek leave to continue. As you have carriage of this amendment, you are able to speak as many times as you wish.

Progress reported; committee to sit again.

Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00.