Remember when Lisa Wilkinson—the highly-paid host of Channel Ten’s, The Project—claimed that ‘absolutely nothing’ would change with the redefinition of marriage? Well, less than twelve months later we’ve seen that this claim is patently false. For instance, according to News Corp papers today, The Australian Taxation Office has set a three per cent “benchmark” for staff to identify as gay, bisexual or transgender, under a plan that encourages employees to feel safe to come out of the closet”.
So, let me get this straight (if you’ll pardon the pun). Getting a job with the ATO may now no longer be based solely on ability but ultimately whatever sexual predilection you identify as being? In keeping with the introduction of their ‘sexuality quota’ maybe they could even change their name to ‘The Gay-T.O’?
According to the article, back from his now infamous trip to China, “…Assistant Treasurer Stuart Robert said it did not relate to recruitment but a “benchmark against which future statistics can be compared”. Yeah right, and I’m a gender-fluid unicorn! That’s nothing more than ‘Newspeak’— i.e. ambiguous euphemistic language used chiefly in political propaganda—in obscuring the LGBTIQ lobby’s real objective.
The problem with any quota system—whether based on sexuality or gender—is this: not only is it inherently patronising to all those included in the special quota, but it also lowers the standards of employment. As Liberal Party Senator Eric Abetz was quoted as saying:
It’s of great concern that taxpayers’ money is being spent on this kind of nonsense, which is condescending and sends entirely the wrong message that people from certain backgrounds or who are not heterosexual are only employed to meet a benchmark as opposed to being on merit.
Abetz went on to tell Flat White:
Our public servants should be selected on capacity and ability not on their eye colour or any other physical attribute or identity. Everyone should be assessed on their merits of capacity to serve not on a particular feature which bears no relevance to performance. An obvious and logical corollary is that neither should anyone be rejected on these irrelevant characteristics.
Ironically, we are already seeing a significant disparity in the Australian Public Service with the latest statistics showing that a significantly larger number of women are currently being employed over men. Just note the Australian Public Service Commission: State of the Service Report, 2016-17. On page 17 of the report is the following graph:
As the document states, women now represent 60 per cent of employees in the Australian Public Service. And this was achieved not by merely observing ‘benchmarks’ but ‘…as agencies implement the strategy through agency-specific action plans’. The question that I—and I’m sure many other people—have is, “So, who is going to address the gross inequity of this situation?” Or do male lives not matter as much as female ones?
What’s more, why has the ATO set the benchmark for its ‘sexuality quota’ of three per cent when—according to The Australian Bureau of Statistics—same-sex couples account for only 0.9 per cent of all couples in Australia? Prior to the same-sex marriage vote, Magda Szubanksi told us ad nauseam that something like 10 per cent of the population identified as LGBTIQ. She said:
There does seem to be a constant number of roughly 10 per cent of same-sex attracted people…
It’s not like there’s an army of us who are going to take over. We just want to have the same rights and protections.
Having the ‘same rights and protections’ is one thing, but what has now become clear is that they were never going to be happy with just that. It seems more likely that three per cent is just a starting figure and that they won’t be truly satisfied until we’re forced to employ close to the mythical 10 per cent. And how do we know that the figure won’t later be further enlarged?
How long will it be until we see similar quotas implemented in the Navy, Army, Airforce and Special Forces? Because let’s face it, as Jordan Peterson has rightly argued, the LGBTIQ lobby doesn’t just want equality of opportunity, but equality of outcome regardless of merit.
Mark Powell is the Associate Pastor of Cornerstone Presbyterian Church, Strathfield.
Illustration: Ben Davis.
Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.