The world of politics, policy and public life

Prime Minister uses eloquent words!!

Kevin Rudd has been coming in for a bit of flack for inserting turgid, bureaucratic language into his speeches.  Given all the – somewhat overblown in my view – fuss about plagiarism by politicians, perhaps he feels it is safer for him to write his own speeches rather than relies on words provided by others.

I was reading through the transcript of a speech Mr Rudd gave recently at the Ethnic Business Awards in Sydney, which I thought wasn’t too bad.  I was especially struck by the words about multiculturalism which he used to close his speech.  I have heard some questions raised about whether or not the new government is genuinely committed to multiculturalism, so it was good to read his positive words on the topic for that reason alone. But I also thought the words he chose were quite eloquent.

Of course, as the PM acknowledged, they were not his own words, but rather those of Joseph Assaf, a migrant from Lebanon who has written a book called “In Someone Else’s Shoes”.  Perhaps it shows the benefits of using other peoples’ words after all.  In any case, like the PM, I also think they are eloquent words.

“Multiculturalism is not a passing fancy. It is not a hobby. It is not a Government policy. It is not a nice thing to do or a marketing opportunity.

“Equally, diversity is not a choice. It is not an option. It is not a public relations exercise or an employee relations program. In Australia diversity is a fact of life and multiculturalism is a way of life. May it ever be so.”

I haven’t read the book yet, but from the things I’ve read about it, it looks like a thought-provoking read.

4 Comments

  1. David Christie
    Posted November 28, 2008 at 5:53 pm | Permalink

    Is there a good definition of “multiculturism” that would be accepted by the players in Australia … I don’t mean Andrew Bolt, rather a definition that would facilitate understanding of posts like this current one?

  2. Andrew Bartlett
    Posted November 29, 2008 at 12:30 am | Permalink

    David

    Like many social terms, there have been quite a few different definitions put forward for the term “multiculturalism”, although understandably there is a fair degree of commonality between most of them.

    This one below is from the Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils of Australia website. I think it’s a bit stiff and formal, but it’s workable:

    Multiculturalism acknowledges, accepts and respects the cultural, ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity of contemporary Australia. It acknowledges the unique position of our indigenous Australians as First Nation people.

    Multiculturalism provides a framework for the just and equitable access to national resources, inclusive decision-making, and the rights of all to live without fear of prejudice, discrimination and vilification.

    Multiculturalism recognises and promotes the socio-economic potential of diversity and facilitates and supports participation of all Australians in building a strong, harmonious and fair community.

    Petro Georgiou did quite a good speech on the topic and some of the history behind it just recently – I meant to include a link to it in my original piece, but forgot. I’ll put it in now, but you can also click here to have a read.

  3. David Christie
    Posted November 29, 2008 at 6:10 pm | Permalink

    Thank you Andrew. Would you agree to a preamble that might say ” Within a structure provided by Australian Law and by International Conventions signed by Australia, Multiculturalism accepts and respects…” ?
    David

  4. Andrew Bartlett
    Posted November 29, 2008 at 7:43 pm | Permalink

    Sounds fine to me David. Many definitions make a point of mentioning adherence ot the rule of law and shared democratic principles and the like.

    This quote Georgiou made in his speech says it fairly well I think:

    “multicultualism is about cultural and ethnic differences set with a framework of shared fundamental values which enables them to co-exist on a complementary rather than a competitive basis. It involves respect for the law and for our democratic institutions and processes. Insisting upon a core area of common values is no threat to multiculturalism but its guarantee, for it provides the minimal conditions on which the well being of all is secured.”

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.