 I am thrilled that you are all here with us this evening in this wonderful theatre. For some of you who have a relationship to the ANU, you should imagine somewhere underneath this carpet is a much older carpet, and you should imagine that that carpet smelt bad but is full of excellent memories, because we are basically where the old student union used to be right now. So if you are my vintage and some of you in the room are, you know this is the place you snuck in to see bands you didn't tell people about. That of course means we're in Canberra, an extraordinary precinct here at the Australian National University, a name gifted to us by the traditional elders of this place when we opened this new part of our campus, a name that signals that this is a place about gathering and a place about meeting and a place about conversation. And we gather here today on the lands of the Ngunnawal and Nambri people, and I want to pay my respects to elders past and present and to acknowledge any other First Nations people in the room. I want to acknowledge in that that we're on land that was always sacred and never ceded, and that it's not just enough to acknowledge, we have to think about what we want to commit to as well. One of our students at the end of last year, she was finishing up her thesis proposal, gave an acknowledgement, and in the context of a failed referendum she said, I don't think we can just acknowledge anymore, now we need to commit. And she paused to think about what she wanted to commit to as a young PhD student, and I think all of the rest of us in the room paused too and thought what should we commit to, because there's something extraordinary about acknowledging where we are and about the complicated histories that flow with that, and something important too for that acknowledgement, not just to be rhetorical, but to imagine what it is that we commit to. I think here at the Australian National University, we are on a long journey. We're committed to being a university of quality and distinction. We're committed to being a powerhouse of social reconstruction, and we're committed to being a place that hosts and holds hard, complicated, important conversations. And I'm glad we get to be here this evening to do one of those. We're gathered here in March of 2024 to have the third Susan Rine oration, and that feels amazing. We get to do it in the presence of her former partner, Rory Sutton, and her kids, Justine and Ben, and I imagine many people who knew Susan well. And I imagine there's something wonderful about getting to be here in this moment to think about all the extraordinary things that Susan was and all the extraordinary things that she did. And we get to do it in March, traditionally International Women's Day month. We've expanded it. I figured we could take up the whole month. That didn't feel totally unreasonable. We kicked off International Women's Day month here at the ANU with an event at the residency, the old vice chancellor's house. We called it an unlaunch because I realised one of the things that happens during International Women's Day is we launch things and never talk about them again. And I thought maybe we should unlaunch things instead and have lots of conversations. And so we did. In that conversation, we made a series of commitments to each other about what we were going to do. And there were lots of amazing women and our allies in that room. I'm pleased to see some of them here this evening. In the context of that moment, I made a commitment as the vice chancellor to change just a little bit of this campus. It won't surprise some of you who have been here for a while to realise most of the buildings are named after men. It turns out we have more buildings with the word John in them than we do buildings named after women. And that includes a bike shed. Now, the fact that one of those men has multiple buildings named after him feels like something we might need to fix. And so I committed that over the next year, we would crowdsource from the university and from our friends and allies, the names of eight women and First Nations people, and we would name buildings after them. I'm not willing to announce what those are yet because I actually think we're going to need to do our due diligence, but I guarantee you, in International Women's Day month, 2025, there will be more buildings on campus named after women and First Nations people than there are buildings named after John. It's a low bar. I'm incredibly excited, however, in a much broader context to celebrate Susan Ryan tonight and to think about how extraordinary she was. I first met Susan when I was a little girl. I remember her campaign of women's places in the Senate. Great tagline. And I remember the women that were around me when I was a kid talking about what that meant and about how radical a proposition it seemed in the 1970s. I contemplate how radical a proposition it still is. And what it means to think about all those firsts, all the ways that Susan carried the torch, and all the way she was genuinely brave and always remarkable. And to me, as a very little girl, always incredibly approachable. Susan answered my questions about what it meant to be a woman in power because I had a schoolwork assignment to do and I thought I should write about her. I sent her an email and a letter and she wrote me back, not an email. I sent her a letter and she wrote me back. And I remember thinking that was pretty extraordinary because I was quite small and she was being very kind about it. And I remember thinking there'll be lots more like her. And sometimes there were and sometimes there weren't. And think about the last time I saw her upstairs when we launched the A and U Women's Network. And she sat on stage and she looked to me and she was like, I remember you and you were a kid. And you still have all that hair. And I thought, it's true, I do. I didn't know at that point that I would be the first Vice Chancellor to have all this kind of hair, but maybe Susan did. I'm incredibly thrilled in that context that today's Susan Reineration is part of a Ryan who is in and of herself genuinely extraordinary and brave and remarkable. These days, she's the director of the Office for Women, but she has many, many other things and many, many other distinctions. She's also importantly for me in my current role, a caring and critical friend for the Australian National University as a member of our council. And that is great because that is what this university needs. She's also, and this is going to sound deeply creepy, the latest signature in the book. So for those of you who don't know when I became Vice Chancellor, one of the things that happened is I made a mess. And then I cleaned it up. And someone opened up a cupboard and said, I found a thing that you might like. And that thing is the visitor's book for the Australian National University. And I opened it up and sure enough, I did like it because this is a visitor's book signed starting in the 1950s by people that came here. So Prince Philip, 1954, Menzies, somewhat later, Gough Whitlam repeatedly, and Margaret too, frequently signing above him, which makes me kind of happy. Malcolm Fraser, who did have to write Malcolm Fraser, Prime Minister, in case there was some doubt. And Bob Hawke who took up a page all for himself and felt the need to write nothing more than Bob Hawke and the date. When I found the book, Bob was the last signature in it from March of 1984. And so at the beginning of this year, I decided I could do one of two things. I could put this in the archive where I imagine the university archivist believes it should belong, or I could reopen it, give someone a pen and say, oh, sign the book. And over the last three months, multiple Prime Ministers have signed this book, the Prime Ministers of Papua New Guinea, and Malaysia, and Vietnam, the President of Peking University. And I suddenly realized, looking back through this book, that the only women who'd ever signed it had signed it as someone's wife or someone's daughter. And I thought, uh oh, that's not good. And so in March, I'm happy to say, in this book now, I have the signatures of Julia Gillard as our first female Prime Minister, June Oscar, both the first First Nations woman to sign this book, but also the extraordinary Commissioner that she was and someone who is now heading up an amazing initiative about First Nations gender justice. This afternoon, I asked Helen Clark to sign it, which gets me two former Prime Ministers. I feel like I'm doing pretty well. And just now I made pattern to sign it because I figure if you're going to have a visitor's book that records the history of the place, it should be all the extraordinary people who come through this place and give extraordinary talks, and I know you will give one pattern. But before we get to hear from you, I know Rory Sutton, Susan Ryan's former partner, would like to make some words. So if you'd join me in welcoming him, that would be lovely. Well, that was a pretty hard act to follow. So I won't take up a whole month of women's year. But I would like to thank the Chancellor and the Vice Chancellor for the opportunities to say a few words on behalf of Susan's family, in particular, Justine and Ben and Kate. Ben and Kate just flew in from New York to especially for this occasion, I'm sure. Anyway, but the Vice Chancellor mentioned the word first. And that's the theme I want to take on today. The word first has particular relevance in today's gathering. And of course, it's frequently associated with the name of Susan Ryan. She was, of course, the first female ACT senator, the first female member of the Labour First Female Labour Cabinet Minister. And she was also the first age discrimination commissioner. Of course, Susan was extremely proud and energised by her achievements. And she was particularly energised by the era of the Whitlam period, 1972 to 1975. And she never stopped talking about it, to be honest. But it's great. But because of that, she was instrumental in organising in 2019 at the Whitlam Institute, a conference called Revisiting the Revolution, Whitlam and Women. And in particular, she ended up writing the paper that related to that, in which one recognises that she was the beneficiary of a lot of very important women that often don't get mentioned, who were back in that 1972-75 period, were prominent women. For example, Marie Coleman. She was the first Social Welfare Commission head of that. Then there was Elizabeth Reed, of course, who is Whitlam's adviser. Joan Kerner and Jean Blackburn, Schools Commission. Mary Gordran, deputy president of conciliation and arbitration, and later the first female on the High Court. And then there was Elizabeth Abbott, arbitration commission and then Chief Justice of the Family Court. These are very important women. And they don't get recognised in the same vein often that Susan does and others do. But there were many other women, of course, Penny Winsley comes to mind, all sorts of people. And then, of course, there are lots of people thereafter. So Susan then summed up the whole thing in this document here by saying that, and I quote, underpinning this expansion of women into senior legal roles was rapid movement of women into policy positions in the bureaucracy, a situation from which Susan acknowledges she was a beneficiary. So continuing the first, the theme of the first, Susan had a huge affection for this university. And I recall the sheer joy in her face and the expression when she became, was given an honorary doctorate in 2017, only to be followed up a year later when she became the alumna of the year, of the ANU. And clearly Susan would revel in the fact that the ANU's leadership now is a diumvirate. That is responsible now for the direction of this university. Our vice chancellor, the first vice chancellor, female vice chancellor, our chancellor, the first chancellor of this university. And I think we should congratulate them. And I'm told that many other women are being pushed forward, also in the ANU. Am I right? Yeah, right. Just making sure. And that engenders memories of the Whitlam Barnard Dumberett of 1972. So we've got to do awfully here. The family wishes to thank you both for supporting this occasion. And it's now my privilege to call upon one of Susan's most favorite colleagues at the Human Rights Commission, Padma Raman, to deliver the 2024 Susan Ryan oration. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chancellor, and thank you, Rory, for that beautiful introduction and to the ANU for welcoming me here today. I too would like to acknowledge the Nannuwal and Nambri people as the traditional custodians of the land we're meeting on and recognize any people or families with connections to the lands of the ACT and region. I acknowledge the elders caring for these lands over millennia. I pay my respects to the old ones who've come before and the young ones who will follow. I've been the executive director of the Office for Women for six months now. This is a new, unprecedented deputy secretary-level role to oversee the Office for Women. It reflects a strong commitment from this government to put gender equality at the heart of decision making. I stand in the role with a strong sense of responsibility and hope. I took the role in large part because of Susan. Susan used to say to me, change is slow and incremental. But the trick is to find the moments when it can be exponential. And that's all about the authorizing environment. And what an authorizing environment we have. For the first time, a minister for women who is also the minister for finance and the public service and data. Minister Gala has noted that this was a deliberate decision to the highly important central role of the finance ministry with the women's portfolio, ensuring that gender is embedded in all government budget decisions. I've just come back from the commission on the status of women, CSW, as it's known CSW 68 in New York, and accompanied the minister for the meeting. I have to say that wherever minister Gala has said she was also the minister for finance, there was a sharp intake of breath. And by the end of the week, the two weeks, she was telling people that that's what they should, telling other ministers for women that that's what they should be seeking, a central portfolio. At her Susan Ryan oration last year minister Gala has spoke to Susan Ryan's contribution and the impact she had on her career. Today I want to speak about the very significant and personal impact Susan had on me. I also want to focus on how she always saw the need for structural and systemic change to improve women's lives. She used her tactical power within government to make significant change. I had the great privilege of knowing, working and calling Susan a close friend and mentor and believe the battle she fought for women are unparalleled in Australia. She was always ahead of her time. I first met her in the late 80s as a student at the ANU when I did a bit of part-time work for another great senator Margaret Reynolds. I got to know her better later when she worked on the republican movement and the campaign for a charter of human rights and finally really closely in her time as the first age discrimination commissioner when I was the CEO of the Human Rights Commission. After five years of working closely together when Susan was age discrimination commissioner we used to meet regularly for long lunches where she would give me career advice. She would suggest the most audacious jobs that I didn't even think I could be a candidate for and then she would remind me that I had a fabulous husband with a twinkle in her eye. Susan loved Paul as she loved many men who had taken on so much of what we still think of as women's work just to let me shine. Susan also developed a great and deep friendship with Mick Gooder the social justice commissioner who she would address as comrade till the very end. Their conversations that I was lucky enough to be a party to at times still make me pinch myself. It would always start with Susan bellowing comrade we need to talk. I read her memoirs catching the waves before she started at the commission and reread it in preparation for this oration. Something that struck me rereading it was how her voice is captured. Short, sharp, incisive sentences that speak with a clarity of purpose, precision and pragmatism that was Susan. There's a great passage in her book that I wouldn't mind letting you know about. It's about her her first day at school and a nun recollecting Susan's first day at school said and I quote they gave her all the best dolls to play with and sat her in the dolls corner. She didn't like dolls. She undressed them and threw them in a corner. Mother Antonia told her to pick them up and said but and she said I don't want to. Mother Antonia said the poor little dolls will get cold. They have to have their clothes back on. Susan said oh don't be silly they're not alive they're only dolls and wouldn't pick them up. She sat on a chair in the corner for punishment but would not pick them up and put them away. It somehow sums up Susan for me. Principal systematic yet incredibly pragmatic and practical. It is that ability to make practical change to women's lives through structural change that drove her time in parliament and I saw it in her time as the age discrimination commissioner. It is what I hope I do at the office for women keeping a sharp focus on real change for women in all their diversity knowing it requires systemic and structural change. It's a special time for the office for women. This year we celebrate our 50th birthday. This milestone invites us to remember where the office for women started. As a small but determined four person team known as the women's affairs section of the department of prime minister and cabinet. They were the heady days of the early 70s that Susan loved and the team was stood up to support the then prime minister Gough Whitlam's women's advisor Elizabeth Reed. Interestingly Elizabeth was a member of ANU's philosophy department and been away studying at Oxford. Also interestingly the others on the shortlist for the job were Ann Summers and Susan Ryan. Susan believes that she had the backing of one of the few female academics at the time on the panel but the two men felt her imminent divorce and two young children were a risk. The women's affairs section was at the heart of implementing historical reforms of these productive few years transforming the way government recognized and supported women in Australia. It was under the Hawke government with Susan Ryan as the first female cabinet minister and minister assisting the prime minister for the status of women that things accelerated. Susan was also education and youth affairs minister. Paul Keating thinks her greatest achievement was in education reducing the retention rate in high schools from three to ten to nine in ten but that requires a whole other speech. In what she called a flash of inspiration Susan appointed Ann Summers and an outsider to the public service and already esteemed journalist with the financial review from the press gallery to run the office for the status of women as it was known at the time and then real change started. We had our first ever agenda for women and an idea that was so novel at the time. Women's responsive budgeting and the first women's budget statement. Susan was also instrumental in implementing our international obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. That really rolls off the tongue or seed or as it's called through the Sex Discrimination Act or the SDA. Something she said was the greatest achievement of her life. Susan was the ultimate tactician. She wasn't a fan of the international system even when she was the age discrimination commissioner. In fact she was deeply skeptical of it. She left New York when her first husband Richard Butler was at the UN mission for Australia and the family had been there for just a year. A brave and scandalous thing to do and yet she was able to use seed or to give women in Australia practical and profound change through the passing of the Sex Discrimination Act. As we implement the respected work positive duty in the Sex Discrimination Act something again Susan campaigned for in her time advocating for a human rights act in the 90s. We should remember her pioneering role always ahead of her time. With the passing of the Sex Discrimination Act came the first challenge from Deborah Lauri the first female airline pilot who tried to work for Ansett in the 70s. She had flown since she was 16 but had to fight so reginaled all the way to the High Court to be able to fly commercially with the aid of Susan's Sex Discrimination Act. Susan copped a lot of crap for introducing and getting the legislation passed. It was the end of families and civilisation if you looked at the press clippings from the time. But Anne Summers reminded me that it was Susan's brilliant use of tactics that resulted in it getting passed. She initially introduced it as a private members bill when she was in opposition and it socialised the idea and as she said by the time we got into government the first burst of hysteria would have exhausted itself and we could just get on and get it done. She also locked in Shadow Cabinet by flushing out the moderate liberals from the coalition. Strategically just brilliant. They've been huge advances that have improved women's lives since those times. We've seen seismic shifts like paid parental leave and achievement again implemented through the Sex Discrimination Act. In more recent times national plans to address domestic family and sexual violence, successive significant uploads in funding for early childhood education and care, all life reforming reforms for women in Australia and all part of our rich history and all traceable back to the incredible groundbreaking work that Susan started. My colleagues and I at the Office for Women are committed to continuing Susan and Summers work with the same determination and clear mindedness. I could just talk about Susan. There are so many stories and lessons I learned from her but she wouldn't want me to. She'd want some substance to this address. Although we've seen so where are we with gender equality in Australia? Although we've seen great advances in recent decades the evidence tells us clearly there's still a long way to go before we reach gender equality in Australia. In spite of efforts across the nation, rates of violence against women remain alarmingly high. As of today, destroy the joint is reporting that 16 women have been murdered by their current or former partners this year and we're only in March. We continue to have high rates of sexual violence with poor justice responses. The Australian economy is increasingly reliant on paid and unpaid care. Women on average do nine hours a week more unpaid care than men and even with widespread work for shortages women dominate paid care work women dominated paid care workers low paid and often insecure and therefore often done by the most marginalised including migrant and refugee women. Women in Australia are very well educated. We are the fourth highest level of tertiary educated women in the OECD. Almost 36% of Australian women have a bachelor's degree or above compared with 28% of men. Yet even at a record low the gender pay gap is 12%. It was around 33% when Susan Ryan was the minister. When you take into account superannuation bonuses part time over time and other payments the the gap is more like 19%. For the first time this year this data has been published by the women's gender equality agency at the employer level so all employers who have staff of over 100 have to report and they're publicly available allowing us to see in detail where action is needed to improve the gender pay gap and we know compared to other OECD countries women in Australia are at the high end for part-time work. This is a contributor to 34% of retired women relying on their partner's income to meet their living cost at retirement compared to 7% of retired men. We have more women in positions of leadership than ever before across a range of settings yet so many women especially public figures experience high rates of abuse online. Across all of these gaps we know that groups of women experience this gaps more acutely or just differently. This includes First Nations women, migrant and refugee women, women with disabilities, LGBTIQA plus women. Whilst we think we're headed in the right direction changing attitudes around gender is stubborn and non-linear. Data has shown that 43% of women aged between 16 and 24 reject attitudes that support gender inequality compared with only 20% of men in the same age group. These are complex structural problems. They require sophisticated and sustained solutions. For the last 18 months the Office for Women has led the development of working for women a strategy for gender equality which the minister launched at the press club on the eve of International Women's Day. While we say it's the first ever gender equality strategy for the Commonwealth I'm sure Susan would disagree and say her agenda for women was the first. The strategy outlines the Australian government's 10-year vision for gender equality and Australia where people are safe, treated with respect, have choices and have access to resources and equal outcomes no matter their gender. It is structural as Susan would have wanted it to be. It sets out a path to make progress towards this vision with a focus on five interrelated priority areas. Gender-based violence, unpaid and paid care, economic equality and security, health, leadership, representation and decision making. Its foundations are in the need for everyone to work together to shift attitudes and stereotypes that drive gender inequality, that tell men and women what they should do and that limit people's choices and opportunities based on their gender. The strategy clearly sets out government priorities and current actions for gender equality and articulates areas for future effort. While acknowledging the structural power of governments the strategy recognises that gender equality cannot be achieved by government alone but that every individual organisation, community and institution has a role to play. I hope Susan would have thought that the strategy is a document of its time ambitious and holding government to future action but realistic about the levers that are available to the Commonwealth. The strategy is a call for action for every part of the community and outlines practical actions everyone can take to help achieve gender equality in Australia. It builds on and complements other government plans and efforts to achieve gender equality including the national plan to end violence against women, the government's response to the Australian Human Rights Cooperation Respected Work Sexual Harassment National Inquiry, the National Women's Health Strategy and Weanu Utangani including the Change Agenda for First Nations Gender Justice which was released last week at the launch of the Weanu Utangani Institute for Gender Justice here at the ANU. I had the privilege of working with June Oscar on Weanu Utangani. A key tool for implementing working for women is gender responsive budgeting. It was clear at the UN that Australia was a world leader in the 80s by introducing it but it changed over time and was abandoned in 2013 being reintroduced in 2022. Susan would have been delighted at its reintroduction. Gender responsive budgeting puts consideration of gender impacts at the heart of policy design and budget processes. This means that it's a core expectation, a core part of the way policy is shaped at the Commonwealth level to understand the gender impacts of the work we do and deliver on behalf of the government. When the government recently turned to redesign of the stage three cuts Treasury engaged with the Office for Women and ensured that gender analysis contributed to government decision making. A gender analysis helped make sure that low and middle income taxpayers who are disproportionately women got the most relief while the redesigned tax cuts would also boost incentives to women's workforce participation. This also links to a slightly nerdy obsession of mine, data. It was an obsession shared by Susan and the importance of success of evidence-based policy is one of the many things I learned from Susan. If we don't understand the problem it's much harder to solve and if it's not clear that there is a problem how can we expect our colleagues in the community to be on board with the solutions. Earlier this month the Minister for Women launched the second of Australia's status of women cards. Released annually on IWD the report card includes the most recent available data on the social and economic equality issues facing women and girls in Australia. The report card will be an important tool to track and measure progress against the strategy. The report card is however only a snapshot of the data available. We know there are gaps in how we capture and disaggregate gender data. As the co-chair of the Gender Data Steering Group with the ABS the Office for Women is supporting work across government to understand where data gaps exist and strengthen our evidence base which we know is necessary to inform our work. We know there are gaps in particular in understanding the diverse and intersectional experiences of different groups of women, men and gender diverse people. Much more work needs to be done. Implementing working for women requires the Office to work across government building on significant policy endeavors and investments specifically targeted at structural inequality. Take paid parental leave for example. We've made changes that expanded the scheme for both parents to share in the 26 week entitlement and offered four weeks of reserve leave for each parent by July 2026 as well as the recent announcement that superannuation will be paid on the government's paid parental leave scheme from one July 2025. This will hopefully encourage shared care and send a strong signal that both parents play a role in caring for their children. These are again structural changes that we hope will change behaviour and lead to a society which is more equal. For half a century the Office for Women has worked under 11 different Prime Ministers eight Ministers for Women 14 Assistant Ministers. We've also worked with thousands of women, allies and organisations with a shared commitment to gender equality. That work continues as urgently as ever. Reflecting back from when Susan was the first Minister assisting the Prime Minister for the status of women reminds us for the need for eternal vigilance and in Susan's words focusing on the long game. As I come back from CSW it's a reminder that women's rights across the world are regressing and continue to be under threat. The backlash that has come from the gender equality project cannot be underestimated and requires us to continue the struggle. So let's continue to honour Susan's legacy by understanding that structures are important in women's ability for choice and for making women's and thus all of our lives better. I want to end with one of her many insightful awakenings of understandings of our systems and structures of power that we need to continue to focus on and I quote We begin to see that society was structured and manufactured by its rulers to achieve endless disparities between the sexes. Our subordination was not destiny. It was a construct of men which we had acquiesced to for too long. Forever in all societies power has been held by men. Women had occasionally acquired power but only by attaching themselves to the right male or through an anomaly created by class or wealth or now and again by spectacular talent. Women would aspire only to the power behind the throne. Their hands were permitted to rock only the cradle. Recognition of the palimpsest of patriarchy was like an electric shock given for depression. A sudden violent awakening after which nothing could be the same. Adrenaline flowed through the discovery that there was an explanation. Human existence was not just a big swamp with women accidentally submerged in their muddiest puddles close to the edge. Society was created by humans. We could describe it, analyze it, criticize it. We could change it. So let's continue to change it. Thank you. Padma, it is my privilege to to moderate the Q&A session and Padma has agreed to take a few questions. There are microphones at the side of the stage. There's one there. Oh, one down there. So if you have a question for Padma, please come down and I will recognize you after I've asked a few questions myself. Padma, you are an extraordinary advocate and champion and supporter of women and girls and you've spoken very passionately about your friendship with Susan Ryan. You knew her well and a number of us in this room did not have that honor, that privilege to know her. You said that she wouldn't want you to talk about lessons you learned from her but you must have learned so many. Looking back now, what is the lesson or lessons that you took from Susan, her work, her career, her focus, her legacy? Yes, I have been, I was saying to Rory before, I've been quite emotional writing this speech, thinking back. She left us so quickly, so suddenly I'd only spoken to her a couple of days beforehand and she'd expressed great delight at a lunch we were going to have with some international guests the next week. So the shock of it has almost, and it was COVID as well, right? So it's only thinking back on her achievements and how much she taught me. One of the things that I took out of the speech was when she first started as the Age of Discrimination, when she was announced as the Age of Discrimination Commissioner. Kathy Branson, who was the president of the Commission and I, had both suggested her name, not that we had anything to do with the process, we'd suggested her name and when she got announced, we both looked at each other and went, what have we done? How is this trailblazing ex-cabinet minister who must have an ego the size of God fit into the Human Rights Commission? But what in fact happened was she was, she didn't just fit in, she guided us and helped us through some of the most difficult times at the Commission. She would do things like we had, this is when Jillian Triggs was the president and some of you would know we had hours and hours and hours of estimates, hearings where she was under attack. Susan would often come up to the table with a big smile and use her filibustering tactics to eat up some time, very charmingly. But I think one of the things she used to teach us during those sessions was however bad it feels now, it will pass and people will forget about it. And I think one of the things I've learned from her most is that long game. She was persistent over a long period of time and she felt that if you didn't get it done this time round, there was always another time that might come. And she certainly thought that with the Charter of Rights. There was a process of consolidation of the anti-discrimination laws and she felt that that was another chance. So she never gave up. And I think it was Anne's point about the tactician in her. She was tactically brilliant and even where she would sit at the Chairman's Lounge, I think about that. She had a very specific spot that she would sit. And it was because everyone would have to walk past her to get into the lounge. So even where she was sitting to have, you know, to relax before a flight, she was thinking strategically about how to influence and who she might be able to bump into that might help her with her current cause. So she was remarkable. But I could talk about the lessons I've learned forever. But brilliant policy thinker as well. An extraordinary resilience, obviously. We've spoken about earlier about Susan's love of the Australian National University. And as Chancellor, I'm absolutely delighted that we're in the family here and that we are holding the Susan Rhino Ration. What role do you think Anne Yu played in her career? And what do you think our university or universities more broadly can do to address the issue of gender equality and be champions and supporters of the campaign for gender equality? Yeah, I think one of the things that comes through in her memoir is that her love of the ANU was because when she came back from New York with Justine, she wanted to do a Masters. And Masters degrees weren't allowed to be done part-time back then. And she recalls, you know, having Justine on her hip. And ANU allowed her to do a Masters part-time. Not on what she wanted to do it on, which was Christina Stead, because we weren't into Australian literature then. So it was on a couple of obscure poets, but she still got to do it. And I think that transformed for her her pathway. And she saw education as being so important for women and girls to reach their potential. She saw the power of it. And I think as an institution, we need to keep that in mind. We are, we still, you know, there are more female graduates from the ANU than there are men. And we need to instill that sense of social justice and the importance that education gives women and girls. Now, there was someone standing at the microphone. So, oh, yes, please. Over to me. Yeah, if you say your name for everybody else and for Padma and then ask your question. Thank you. So, Kim Rubenstein from the University of Canberra, but also still an honorary professor here at the ANU. Padma, thank you. Glad to see you. Yes, thank you. And what a wonderful address. And thank you to Rory as well for the introduction and to acknowledge Penny Wensley, who you mentioned, who is in the room here too. Padma, my question really comes to the end point of your lecture, which is about the structures. And you mentioned the Deborah Laurie or also known as Deborah Wardley case in the High Court. And that was a structural case. It was a constitutional case about section 109 of the Constitution. And it's for a mini constitutional law class here. It's when there is a Commonwealth law and a state law that clash. Section 109 says the Commonwealth law, Trump's, although that's not the right word to use these days. Prevails, I think. Prevails. Let's use prevail. Prevails. And that is a reminder that the structural issues that we face as a nation are about a federal system. And you're head of the Office for Women and the minister is the minister in a federal context. And I wonder if you wanted to reflect a little about the nature of our federal system and how much that impacts on the achievement of gender equality in Australia. Thanks, Kim. I can see my public service colleagues are going to think, oh, what's she going to say now? Because they could read the speech, but they didn't have any control over what I say. I haven't been a public servant for very long. I think the federal system is really frustrating. And I think it really holds us back in many ways. And even my last gig before this was as the CEO of Amrose, which is Australia's national research organization for women's safety. And there it was really obvious even though we have a wonderful national plan now, the delivery is done through the states. And getting the states and territories to agree to that plan was hard enough. Leave alone thinking through the funding that you're providing to the states and territories and how you get them to deliver what your priorities might be as the Commonwealth. So I think you look at the UK, things get through easier. So a federal system does make government priorities harder to implement. Please feel free to come down to either of the microphones if you have a question. Padme, you mentioned the reference to the level of abuse online. I came into politics in 1998 when the internet was, we were using emails and the like, but we didn't have smartphones and there was no social media as we know it today. So I guess I escaped unscathed until the latter part of my parliamentary career. And I essentially, as soon as I finished politics, I got off social media. It was so toxic. You had to do it because you had to be accessible. But as soon as I could say, I'm not part of this anymore, I did. And I think back now of the number of young women who were encouraged to go into parliament and yet they would often break down to the point of absolute despair over the treatment they were receiving on social media. And I would just say it till I was blue in the face. Don't read it. These people don't matter. This is contrived. Only worry about the views of people you love and respect. But it would get to them. It was insidious. What is your advice for women with a profile or even women without a public profile who are subjected to this utterly horrendous level of abuse? It was really interesting being with the minister at CSW because we had lots of bilateral meetings with other ministers from other countries, other ministers for women. And it was a common theme. They're all reflected on the abuse that they're receiving. And some of it is not just abuse. It's threats, violent threats. And our minister herself said, I know I didn't know this, but she's been under attack. And both her daughters have, but not her son. Which is really interesting. The way, I made a passing reference to this in the speech, that the gender equality project is attracting a backlash. There are consequences to gender equality. It requires men to give up power. And the consequences mean that we're seeing more violence. I mean, there's the whole issue of the Nordic paradox where Nordic countries are more financially, in terms of economic security, are more gender equal. But they still have a significant problem with violence against women. And I think that the fact that women are targeted so much more says something about, and it's easy to do online, right? You're anonymous, you don't have to reveal yourself. But it was really frightening hearing the number of ministers who've had the same experience who are hounded on social media. And one of the themes was, how do we get young women into politics? Why would you want to go into politics if this is what is going to happen to you? So I think, I don't have a solution to it, but I think we do have to be conscious of that and keep fighting it. It's hard to regulate online platforms, but we have people like the E-Safety Commissioner who can at least sign a light on this issue. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Joanne Bumgartner. I do healthcare consumer work and work within the community. And I gave, when I was at ANU, I did a course in the International Human Rights Law and gave a talk in Darwin about preserving Indigenous language use and teaching them how to make a complaint. And I think the problem, not just there, but in the community in general, is knowing how to make a complaint and when to make one and where to make one, too. I think there's more assistance really needed in that area. Thank you. Yeah, having run the Human Rights Commission for 11 years, maybe I fail to do that. It is also very complex, though, having to explain to people the process. I mean, for a start, Australia only has anti-discrimination laws. We've only given effect to our international obligations in the negative through anti-discrimination laws. But then the international human rights mechanisms, like complaints, are hard to navigate and they take a long period of time to resolve. So while those mechanisms are important, they can take time and I completely agree with you. Our systems of anti-discrimination laws are not used as much as they could be. We know there's way more racism than the race discrimination complaints we get. We know there's way more disability discrimination than the complaints we get. Interestingly, sexual harassment was always one that was used in terms of the commission, more so than the other areas. But you're right. We could do a lot more to educate people on how to assert their rights. Both nationally and internationally. Padma, we've often spoken tonight and previously about the Sex Discrimination Act being a watershed and you said Susan, apart from her children, saw that this is her greatest achievement in life. What do you think will be the next game changer in this space? I really do think the positive duty. So the respective work, which was the Human Rights Commission's Sexual Harassment National Inquiry, one of the recommendations was to introduce a positive duty on employers to provide a workplace that's safe from sexual harassment and sex discrimination. People who only think about it in the context of sexual harassment, it'll be really interesting to see how the sex discrimination bit of that plays out. But that means that as of December last year, all employers have a positive obligation it's not just when you're harassed, you can go and complain to the Human Rights Commission. Employers have a positive obligation to provide a safe workplace, safe from sexual discrimination and sexual harassment. And the Human Rights Commission has powers around implementation of that. I think that's going to be a complete game changer. And if we had a Human Rights Act in Australia, which we don't, that would be the difference as well. It would impose positive obligations on employers and structures that we don't have at the moment. As I said, it's in the negative, but I think the positive duties will be a game changer. And I can see Kim nodding. I hope I'm right. During your time as Director of the Office for Women. Might take a bit longer. Another question over here. Hi, I'm Sophie Baker. I am not Nectar Coordinator anymore. I am now an artist. And I'm actually asking, I've got two questions, one for each of you. The first one is about the general politics of the world. Do we need to enshrine abortion in the Constitution? The other one is about, can I ask you questions or should I leave it at that one? Who's that one directed to? I can give an answer. What's your second question? And then Padman and I'll have a chat as to who's going to answer which bit. Cool, that sounds good. My other question is I was on an aeroplane and I bumped into one of ANU's chief funders. And we were having conversation about how women don't choose physics and how ANU has been running some women-only recruitment rounds. And I've seen the statistics around what it would take to change the gender gap in terms of women leaders in science and STEM. And I'm wondering, and I put to this guy, well that's fantastic what he think of these running this funding. He was funding this women-only recruitment round and he wasn't keen. He actually really thought, his main concern was that some men were missing out. I can ensure him that any competent able male who can get the right results to get in or the results to get into ANU physics would get a place. I think what we're seeking to do is ensure that there are places taken by competent able women who might not otherwise think that physics is a course for them. We've got to encourage women to see the opportunities and I'm surprised that he's funding it if he doesn't believe in it. But anyway, that might be a discussion for another day. Do you want to? Well, on that one, it is unbelievably difficult to change the Australian Constitution. I think we've seen that in recent times of, what is it now, 45 referenda, only eight have been successful and they were no-brainers. They were simple questions that really didn't need a campaign, a political campaign for yes or no. So, we changed the Constitution really. I cannot think of many more controversial issues that would divide the nation if you wanted to place the right to an abortion in the Constitution. Our Constitution is a very high-level document. It doesn't go into much detail. It basically says what the federal government can do and the states do or the rest. It really doesn't say that much. To introduce such an emotive, complex topic would be very, very challenging. That's not to say it's not right, but as a pragmatist, I could not see it being a policy platform for any future government. It would be a very divisive issue. And so, I think most politicians deal with it state by state, federally, when it comes down to abortion drugs and things like that. They deal with it quietly without creating too much division within the community. That's not an uplifting answer, I know, but in Australia's context, it would not get up. It is too complex, too emotive, too difficult. The yes case and the no case would be so divisive. And it wouldn't get there. Your thoughts? Yeah. And coming back from the US, I can see why you would think that. And being at the Commission, being at CSW, it is under attack in so many places. We had the head of the UN Family Planning Association here in Australia. I didn't get to meet her because I was over in the States. But someone who did, who I was talking to earlier, said that she thought that Australia was doing really well and we are compared to the rest of the world. Apart from a few private members' bills here and there, it's not been under threat in the same way that we're seeing across the world. At CSW for the first time, there were these people walking around with big badges saying family on it. And a lot of the language was being diluted by inserting family. This is the new tactics and we also need to know that that group that has been working in the US to take away reproductive rights is very organised and very well funded. So if we did have a campaign here, I could tell you who would get most of the money. Yes, let's not open that floodgate. I see our former Vice-Chancellor Brian Schmidt is here and it would be remiss of me if I didn't say, Brian, thank you for naming our International Women's Day lecture as the Susan Rye narration back when you did. So thank you, Brian. We have a last question here. Thank you. My name is Eleanor Rosenman and I didn't come to say this, but I am also the CEO of the Women's Legal Centre here in the ACT and the Chair of the National Peek. And so on the issue of complaints, I can say that if you know women, trans people or non-binary people who do want to make complaints about sexual harassment or discrimination, I would really encourage you to get in touch with us because we can help. But I do have a question, which is to say, pardon me, I was thrilled with your appointment to the Office for Women. One of the things that was before my time but that I understand really characterised Susan Ryan's heyday was the collaboration between women working in the gender specialist sector and women working in government and women working in parliament. I wondered if what advice you would have to women like me, activists and women working in the sector about how we should approach building those coalitions and a comment on how you were doing that in your new role? Well, I hope I do that effectively. I've always believed in the importance of civil society and we have worked together in the past, but I think the Office has to have great connections with the women's sector to be able to do its work. It also has to be able to tell the sector of the limitations of, and I've been learning this, the limitations of being in government, but we couldn't do our work without the sector and we couldn't do our work without partnerships and deep partnerships, not just consultation for consultation's sake, to say we've ticked a box, but the expertise is out there in the ground. You're the one dealing with complaints in the ACT and hearing about what women go through. We sit in an office block providing government with policy advice. We couldn't do our work unless we understood the lived experience of women. So I think hopefully we've done it and the strategy, developing that, I think the Office spoke to over 3,000 women and that includes organisations. So I really strongly believe in a collaborative partnership with civil society and with academics and with experts and we're a tiny office. I think our minister calls us small but mighty and we couldn't do our work without those connections. I want to thank you Padma on behalf of the audience and the Australian National University for agreeing to be the deliverer of the 2024 Susan Ryan oration. You knew her well and I cannot think of a better person to make this speech this evening. I've come to know you well as a councillor at the Australian National University an alumna of this university and you have also taken on a role on our subcommittee on student well-being and student safety and your insights, your perspectives, your common sense are so valued. I was absolutely delighted when I learned that you would be the first executive director of the Office for Women in another life. I was responsible for that portfolio but it was under a male prime minister so I was only allowed to be the minister assisting the prime minister so I'm glad to see we've come a long way in terms of labels at least. As you know ANU has a mission and that includes addressing gender inequality and you've made it quite clear that gender equality, gender equity is not just a moral imperative it's a social and economic necessity for this country and I wish you all the very best in your work. I look forward to the game changing legislation that will come in under your guidance and direction and advice and you have made such an impact already in the role it might only be six months but you're already making waves and I know that Susan Ryan would be very proud of you. Ladies and gentlemen please thank Padme Raman.