Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I hear the member over there. I hope he is not laughing at that. I hope he believes that his fellow Australians are better than some of the comments we have heard in this chamber today. I believe my fellow Australians want to tackle and defeat racism in this country, but the best way to do it is to give them free speech.

When we discussed changes to this legislation, I proposed a change to 18D. When we discussed 18C many people said to me, 'But there are provisions in 18D that are there to protect.' Those provisions protect:

(a) in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work; or

(b) in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public interest;

This includes clarification that such statements must be made 'reasonably' and 'in good faith'. Yet in the legislation there is no definition of what is 'reasonably' and what is 'in good faith'. These are very vague and subjective terms that turn the onus of proof on the person who has made the statement to prove before the court that what they did was reasonable.

What is the test for reasonable? What is the test for good faith? It simply should be, if it is an artistic work—as in the Bill Leak case—exempt from the act. The defence for Bill Leak's cartoon simply should be it is a bloody cartoon, therefore an artistic work and so exempt from the act. There should not be a requirement for the cartoonist to prove in court that what he has done is reasonable and in good faith.

We still need restrictions on freedom of speech but those restrictions should be limited to incitement of actual or threatened physical violence. Where they cross over into the threshold of what we saw in that Queensland university case we, clearly, have a problem with legislation in this country.

I hope that those on the other side, when they argue this backwards and forwards across the chamber, who wish to see changes to 18C and 18D do so with good hearts, do so wanting to eradicate racism from our nation. On this side, our belief is that the best way to eradicate it is to bring those people out into the open. Do not let it fester underground. Let's defeat them with open debate and free speech rather than with government sanctioned restrictions on freedom of speech.

With that, I thank the House and I hope that those who contribute to this debate will respect that there is goodwill on both sides of this parliament.

See this speech in context