Review of Harassment in the South Australian Parliament Workplace

Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. T.A. Franks:

That this council notes the report by the Equal Opportunity Commission to the houses of the South Australian Parliament, entitled Review of Harassment in the South Australian Parliament Workplace, dated February 2021.

(Continued from 3 March 2021.)

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (16:36): I rise to conclude my comments noting the report on the instances of sexual harassment in this parliament that has been presented to us by the acting equal opportunity commissioner of this state. I rise to speak about sexual harassment, specifically the sexual and discriminatory harassment that exists here in our own system of governance. It is a scourge that a lot of people would rather pretend does not exist, insisting instead that these institutions such as ours of power and privilege are somehow immune from such things.

Acting Commissioner Emily Strickland has said in the introduction to her report, 'The fact that political institutions are far from immune from unacceptable, unlawful behaviours is disturbing.' It is quite disturbing. It is not surprising—absolutely not surprising. From the findings of the equal opportunity commissioner and its review of harassment in our South Australian parliamentary workplace—this workplace—we know that it simply is not true.

In fact, you would be hard-pressed to find a single woman working in this workplace, where our laws are made and codified daily, who has not experienced some sort of sexual harassment or sexism in her lifetime. For those who then experience it in this very place at such a rate is not just disappointing, it is certainly not surprising, it is indeed to our shame.

The women in this workplace have become so adapted to the presence of sexual harassment that they have learnt not to be surprised or shocked by it, only disappointed, as they have stated in the report. We thought, no doubt, aspiring to be in this place—whether it is a politician, a staff member, or anyone who works in this building in the various work roles that we have here—that perhaps a place designated to form the law might somehow be different. It has, of course, been shown to not be different. In fact, it has possibly been shown to be far from different, but indeed one of the last vestiges where the shame of sexual harassment is kept far too secret.

It has been quite a bad start to the political year, with the federal government's own handling of alleged sexual harassment, both the historical and the more recent, being so poorly managed, and with our own Prime Minister, the leader of this nation, demonstrating himself to be completely lacking in either empathy for the women of Australia or, potentially, respect for the women and girls of Australia in his response on Monday to the tens of thousands of those marching against misogyny, those women and girls, and men and boys, who marched this Monday. The words of the Prime Minister in response to that protest were to feign admiration that at least in this country we were not going to be shot.

As we march for justice and as we march for an end to violence and sexual harassment, those words that we were lucky we would not be met by bullets show that the Prime Minister has a lot more to do in terms of his empathy training. Are we supposed to feel grateful for not being shot? Are we supposed to be grateful that at least we were allowed to march against misogyny and disdain on Monday and that our own government would not kill us for the privilege? Of course, that is exactly what we are made to feel. We are made to feel that we should be showing gratitude—gratitude for the benevolent sexism that allows us to speak even if it concurrently mocks and trivialises almost everything we say.

I point to the federal parliament because, as supported by the findings of this South Australian report, it would be an act of great hubris indeed to pretend that our own hallowed halls are any less filled with contemptible acts of sexism and harassment than other parliaments, and we must remember that as we consider our next steps. We have an opportunity in South Australia to become national leaders in regard to tackling institutional parliamentary misogyny, but we know that, with any pathway to reform, admitting we actually have a problem and owning that problem is the first step.

What this report covers is not pleasant, but it is a catalyst for change and a change that I hope we look back on in coming years with some pride. It is a report that has already started to have a domino effect, as we see the federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins, take a similar challenge and shine a torchlight of transparency on the federal parliament, as we have now done in South Australia.

Something else that I would like to urge consideration on as we reflect upon this report is what is lost if we refuse to act. In the narrative of rape culture and sexual harassment, we hear so much about the futures, the potential, of 'promising young men', their promise often excusing their perpetrating. They are men with the world at their feet, men destined for greatness, men who were on the pathway to be the Prime Minister—men, men, men and always men whose glittering destinies are protected with the ferocity of those guarding the crown jewels.

Why do we not fiercely protect the futures of young women in the same way? How many young women have had a capacity for greatness and how many young women's trajectories have not been nurtured quite so delicately, if at all? When reports of harassment have been met with directives to 'just ignore it' or 'not to cause a fuss' or 'that's just what this workplace looks like' or 'if you can't stand the heat then get out of the kitchen', or any number of dismissive minimisations, if those young women have been believed at all, we are sacrificing their potential and we do it at the diminution of our parliaments.

In the face of these cultures that we have seen persist, how many women have abandoned their political ambitions and left their posts, deciding in the end that this potential for greatness does come at too high a cost? How many Brittany Higginses have walked away from a career in politics, learning that the light on the hill was never intended to shine for them? How many promising young women's names will we never know, even as their abusers and harassers go on to become more and more powerful?

Of course, we know, and the findings of this report confirm this, that it is not only women who are subjected to this kind of harassment. Approximately one-third of the survey respondents reported having been harassed about a personal attribute that is protected by our equal opportunity legislation and half of those respondents reported that this harassment had gone on for longer than 12 months. In this and other instances of harassment, over two-thirds of respondents said that they had not reported it because of a range of fears, including a lack of trust in the complaints process and the justifiable fear of repercussions on their career. Where they had done, many felt unsupported in the process and were met with what they believe to be an inadequate response. I do not doubt them.

The machinations of harassment are complex and often invisible to the naked eye. It is so easy to say, 'Well, why don't people report?' This attitude betrays a complete ignorance as to the emotional, structural and financial difficulties faced by those people who do speak out about abuse and workplace toxicity.

Politics, we all know, can be an unforgiving line of work in so many ways, but it is especially unforgiving of those who threaten the team, the party, the faction or, worse still, the game of politics. We cannot ask, 'Why do these people not report?' We must instead ask, 'How can we make it easier for them to report in the first place?' Better still, 'How can we change our culture so that no-one needs it ever again?'

If we cannot adequately answer those questions or take necessary, stringent and committed steps to ensuring those outcomes are realised, we have no business in this place being legislators. I would also add that if you find yourself resistant to this need for change, you absolutely have no business in this workplace in this building. To the respondent who asked to be taken off the list of this review, I say to them it is perhaps time you were taken off the ballot paper.

It is my belief that the most important thing this government can do, and this parliament can do, in response to the acting commissioner's report is to establish a people and culture section. As the acting commissioner wrote, 'Sexual and discriminatory harassment will only be eliminated through concerted efforts to create cultural change.'

That department, that is properly equipped to manage reports of harassment and to swiftly address issues in regard to this, not to mention, of course, provide ongoing workplace training, is what you would find in even any modestly equipped organisation in this day and age. It is astonishing that our state's legislative body has not established this already, but again it perhaps speaks to the hubris that exists across all legislative bodies that assumes the rules are somehow different for us, simply because we get to make them.

Recommendation 3 is the ensuring of flexible workplace arrangements to ensure inclusivity. We may not have experienced the full brunt of the COVID-19 lockdowns, but we have been able to witness adaptability. One of the most logical ways to end sexual discrimination and harassment is to champion the full participation of women in the workplace. If we cannot do that at the highest levels of government here, then what is the point of us?

Until we make it clear that the South Australian parliament is one that values women—many of whom are currently, have been or will be, mothers of small children—then women will not become magically valued in the absence of this practice. This change cannot be done incrementally. It cannot be half hearted, and an immediate start would be to, as the report recommends, make it possible for mothers and fathers—and fathers—to breast and bottle feed babies in this chamber. Who knows, perhaps having some real-life babies in this building rather than just some overgrown ones might actually foster that human empathy that seems to be lacking in our leadership.

In a previous parliament, I was shouted down by a former President for pointing out that we did not allow infant children or their parents in this chamber to be on the floor in the case of a particular division. One of my colleagues, as she faced the difficulty of juggling having a small child and a ringing bell, was put in an awkward position and I raised it at the time as an absence of an inclusive workplace. At the time, I was shouted at. Indeed, by pointing out the problem you are often cast as the problem in this place.

But believe me, in the new-found conversions of those whom I have seen at the rally on Monday to see this place purged of sexism, of sexual harassment and arcane practices, to become a place that is less suited to paid-up members of The Adelaide Club and far more representative of a diverse democracy, I have seen their hypocrisy and it has felt suffocating, but at least it shows we can actually change.

Cultural change is actually quite easy to institute, even the cultural practice of sexual harassment and, yes, it is very much a practice, despite some people's insistence on believing these things to be innate. I point to two examples of the world leadership Australia has shown in reducing harm and how it is quite simple to instil different values and behaviours in the community despite them challenging the cultural norms of the time.

In 1970, the state government of Victoria introduced legislation to require the compulsory wearing of seatbelts. They were the first government in what we would call the Western world to do so. This was met with horror, but within 14 months the rest of Australia had followed suit and within seven years seatbelt wearing rates had increased to 90 per cent in our community. Who knows how many lives have been saved as a result of Victoria's then zero tolerance approach to ensuring cultural change.

Similarly, state-based campaigns to curb smoking have been enormously effective. In 1999, the South Australian parliament enforced a ban on all indoor dining areas. By 2004, amendments to the Tobacco Products Regulation Act 1997 saw smoking banned in all enclosed public places, workplaces and shared areas. Did the public love it? Not so much. At the time there was a visceral level of outrage. 'You can't ban smoking in restaurants,' they said. 'People love to smoke after a meal,' they said, but they adapted and quickly.

When smoking was banned inside pubs and clubs five years later, the response was similarly incensed but then accepted. 'You can't ban smoking in pubs,' they cried. 'People love a cigarette with a drink. You are infringing on their rights. This is a nanny state.' But they did adapt. If one were to stroll down Rundle Mall right now and pop into a coffee shop or a pub, order a drink and then light up a cigarette inside, not only would they be swiftly interrupted and told to put it out but the people around them would look on in horror because it is simply not done anymore. It was something as pervasive as sexual harassment continues to be in this place, but sexual harassment is also something that we can change with a zero tolerance approach.

I have to ask, as do many millions of women around this country, why it seems so much more impossible to adapt cultural thinking around sexual and discriminatory harassment than it does to smoking or wearing seatbelts. They cause harm. Sexual harassment and sexism causes harm. I cannot understand why one would want to perpetuate the presence of sexual harassment. It makes you scratch your head and wonder, 'Is sexual harassment that enjoyable for the perpetrators?'

The logical answer at the moment seems to be yes. If the body responsible for creating the legislation in this state includes among its number people who enjoy harming others through sexual and discriminatory harassment, then we do have a big problem but it is a problem that we can change. But I have to tell you, Mr President, it is not enjoyable for the victims and the survivors.

It was not enjoyable for me. It was never enjoyable for me, not a single one of the times when I, like so many women in this place, experienced insults or rumours. There have been cracks about karaoke. Tweets with representations of vaginas come to mind, and they are certainly not covered in this report. But the accounts in this report brought back many other instances, more minor perhaps than that. They came back into my mind as I read through these pages because these are all of our stories and the experiences in these pages are actually shared by far too many of us.

My experience is that of many of my political friends both in my own party and across the aisle. It is not enjoyable for those of us who want to go to work and to move through this world without fear of being shoved right back up against the sexist spectrum once again by men, because it is mostly men, reminding us how, in one way or another, at the end of the day, they rule the roost.

It seems at this stage that men do rule the roost in this Parliament House and the federal one. At the end of the day we are being told, either overtly or implicitly, that this house is not a place for us. A woman's place is in the house, the upper and the lower, but this is a parliament that has the least representation of women in the entire nation. While that is changing and improving, I think that has added much to the culture of this place.

I am tired and I am angry, just like the women were on Monday when they took to the streets. I am so angry at the treatment of women that some days in this place I feel it difficult to breathe. I watched how Jasmeen Kaur's body was found in the Flinders Ranges in the last two weeks, and I am angry that we see women stalked and not taken seriously. I am angry that in this house of power and legislation we see women treated with disrespect and sexism and not taken seriously.

If women who are privileged enough to work in this place, Parliament House, of all places, cannot expect to be free from or protected from this sexism and sexual harassment, where can any woman in this nation feel safe? What message are we sending to the promising young women coming up through our ranks about their prospects and what they can expect? More importantly, what message are we confirming to those promising young boys, the inheritors and often the gatekeepers of power, that will let them know just how little it belongs to them?

Indeed, it appears that this house has not been for us as women, but it is time that all women and men in political parties stop keeping the secrets of sexual harassment and sexism. Those secrets are not our shame, they are the perpetrators' shame. Whether it is in your party, in your faction or in this parliament, a woman's place is in the house and that house must be safe for all of us.

The Hon. I. PNEVMATIKOS (16:56): I too rise to speak on the Review of Harassment in the South Australian Parliament Workplace undertaken by the South Australian Equal Opportunity Commission. The report clearly outlined that there is a culture of unacceptable behaviour within this workplace that has the effect of working to the detriment of women employees in this workplace, whether they be members, staffers, clerks, parliamentary service officers, cleaners or catering staff.

Within the first page of the report the acting commissioner gives a scathing appraisal of this place when she stated:

There are some fundamental gaps in policy, training and complaints practices that, if addressed, will make a significant difference in preventing and responding to harassment.

It is clear that changing practices, procedures and policies will assist with the objective of working towards creating culture change. The acting commissioner identified:

…strong leadership in driving workplace standards and an emphasis on systems that shift responsibility away from victims and place the onus on leaders to respond effectively is crucial.

From the participation of workers completing the survey the commissioner was able to provide a statistical report that identified the basis of their findings. The report found that 27.1 per cent of workers surveyed had experienced sexual harassment within the workplace, and that 31.6 per cent reported having experienced offensive comments or jokes made about a personal attribute contrary to equal opportunity legislation. Further, 77.8 per cent of those who had experienced sexual harassment did not report the instances.

It must be noted that not all in this place participated in the survey and, further, that past employees were not actively approached to participate. It would not be presumptuous to assume that there are many who in all probability have left this workplace because of harassment. Statistics are one measure of the extent of the problem The stories told by the participants are more important. One participant stated:

The culture is rotten. There is a hierarchical view of management from the political to the staff to the staffers of parliamentarians. The culture says if you want to advance you just put up with behaviour that wouldn't be tolerated anywhere else.

Another said:

I have worked in many workplaces prior to parliament—and it is the worst. I have seen staff be directly harassed, physically assaulted and treated like 'property'.

Another said:

The parliamentary workplace is a toxic environment as most of the power sits with the MPs and staff will harass other staff as part of a way to get ahead and be viewed better by the party and the member.

These stories reflect the human and social cost of these discriminatory practices. They show the true cost of what working in politics takes. So that the choice for women is to suffer in silence or report instances and jeopardise their career prospects or walk away with the hope that the next workplace will not be as toxic as the one they have been in.

It was not surprising that many assumed that political priorities took precedence over the safety and welfare of individuals. The experience of women in parliament is further exacerbated by employment practices. Many women in parliament are employed on a casual or contract basis. This impacts on their vulnerability as women and as workers.

I accept that parliament is a complex workplace; however, this parliament cannot be above the law. This cannot be taken as a political matter. This issue crosses party lines. It affects everyone in the workplace. If it is used as a political issue it is to the detriment of all women in this place. Some will, and have, struck back with, 'Well, you knew what you were getting into.' Being elected to this place does not mean that we lose our voice, identity, dignity and rights. It should mean the opposite. We cannot hide behind the political shield of this as politics. The women in this workplace no longer accept this rhetoric. The public certainly do not either and expect a higher standard of best practice.

Over 100,000 people, mostly women, marched across Australia to voice their concerns and demand an end to gender discrimination, harassment and abuse, and thousands were here in South Australia. Their demands have been met with deflection and attack from the Morrison government. To draw an analogy of our peaceful protest in a democratic country with protesters who live under oppressive and undemocratic regimes being shot is no comparison. It seems the Morrison government would prefer that harassment and abuse remain in private and outside of public discourse.

Speakers at the Adelaide rally spoke about how the power imbalance between men and women and patriarchal and misogynistic structures are deeply rooted within social constructs, laws and institutions within our society. Everything works to prevent women from gaining a level playing field and, as one speaker said, these imbalances and abuses date back to colonial times. As Michele O'Neil said:

Don't think you have or you will get away with it. We know you. We know your name. We know every grope, every insult, every rape. We know you.

As women collectively, 'We know you,' and after reading the report, we know you better. Quite frankly, we did not need this report to tell us what we already know and have been talking about ad infinitum. For those who are oblivious to what is happening under our noses, or claim to not know what is going on, firstly, I am not sure you are spending enough time in this place and, secondly, you may very well be part of the problem, and, thirdly, you need to be part of the solution.

Your complacency perpetuates the status quo and does nothing to assist in rectifying the problems. Our community expects better of us, and parliament can no longer operate like this. Regardless of whether we need this report, we now have recommendations that need to be implemented. It is obvious some have not and will not read the report. To assist some of our members who are not inclined or do not have time to read the report, I would like to list the 16  recommendations.

Recommendation 1: that the South Australian government form a centralised human resources function—the people and culture section—to provide services across the parliamentary workplace, including the development of a workplace training program, a performance management framework, the development of human resource policies and practices, induction and exit practices, a wellbeing framework that includes supporting staff in electorate offices, and other functions as recommended by the review.

Recommendation 2: that the people and culture section develop a strategy to increase diversity across the parliamentary workforce and to create a culture that values inclusivity.

Recommendation 3: to ensure flexible work practices that support inclusivity operate across the parliamentary workplace.

Recommendation 4: that the people and culture section develop sexual and discriminatory harassment policies to apply across the whole parliamentary workplace.

Recommendation 5: that the people and culture section develops training for all members of parliament and staff in the parliamentary workplace aimed at increasing participants’ awareness of sexual harassment and discriminatory harassment and induction materials for all newly commencing members of parliament and staff in the parliamentary workplace, covering off on relevant policies, procedures and complaint processes related to sexual and discriminatory harassment.

Recommendation 6: that the houses commit to leading cultural change within the parliamentary workplace.

Recommendation 7: that each political party implement and actively promote internal policies regarding sexual and discriminatory harassment which set behavioural expectations of party members and provide robust procedures and sanctions to respond to complaints of harassment.

Recommendation 8: that the people and culture section prepare a framework to be implemented across the parliamentary workplace which includes a behavioural code requiring that all staff in the parliamentary workplace act in a respectful and safe manner, and associated processes to govern allegations of breaches of the code and a range of sanctions where a breach is established.

Recommendation 9: that the people and culture section develop complaint procedures that apply across the parliamentary workplace in relation to sexual harassment and discriminatory harassment.

Recommendation 10: that the people and culture section establishes contact officers across the parliamentary workplace, suitably trained to provide confidential support and information on reporting options to employees experiencing or witnessing harassment, and ensures victims of harassment are aware of and have access to ongoing counselling services with the expertise appropriate to the type of harassment experienced.

Recommendation 11: that the Attorney-General consider amendments to the Equal Opportunity Act 1984.

Recommendation 12: that the houses introduce a code of conduct for members of parliament.

Recommendation 13: that the people and culture section develop work health and safety policies, procedures and training to assist persons conducting a business undertaking and other duty holders in the parliamentary workplace to meet their work health and safety duties in relation to psychological hazards arising from sexual and discriminatory harassment.

Recommendation 14: that the houses of parliament support a compliance audit by SafeWork SA across the parliamentary workplace, to be conducted within two years of the date of this report, with a focus on the health and safety risks arising from psychological hazards including those arising from sexual and discriminatory harassment.

Recommendation 15: that the Attorney-General consider a referral to the South Australian Law Reform Institute to review the benefits of amending the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 to provide that employers have a positive obligation to prevent workplace sexual harassment and unlawful harassment and that the equal opportunity commissioner is provided with powers to enforce that obligation and investigate systemic unlawful discrimination, including systemic sexual harassment.

Recommendation 16: that within three years of the date of this report the houses initiate a review of the implementation of recommendations made in this report and their effect on culture and practice in relation to sexual harassment and discriminatory harassment.

It is not enough to implement these recommendations. These recommendations do not comment on the personal responsibility members have to change their behaviour. We need members to commit to programs of prevention and a change of culture. While we remain complacent, this behaviour continues to ruin lives. Let us not be fooled, this behaviour did not begin at a crossbench Christmas party. It was happening before, and it has certainly been continuing to happen after the Christmas party.

I look forward to all the recommendations being implemented and members actively looking at themselves and this parliament to ensure a safe, healthy and egalitarian workplace for all. If you disagree and you are not with us on this, stand aside.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. D.G.E. Hood.