Tim Watts (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Communications and Cyber Security) Share this | Hansard source

I listened to the Manager of Opposition Business try to convince those opposite to take action on the important issue of religious vilification by quoting the words of the Prime Minister in his second reading speech back to him. It was not effective, so let me take a different tack. Let me quote the words of Twitter to those opposite. These are the depths that those opposite have stooped to—that they are being lectured by social media platforms about decency and integrity. This is evidence from the Select Committee on Social Media and Online Safety, established by this Prime Minister, as he says, to consider his so-called antitrolling bill. All of the social media platforms that appeared before this committee highlighted the problem of religious vilification as part of the radicalisation of violent extremists online. They called out the absence of a legal standard in Australia with respect to hate speech targeting people of religious faith.

Let me quote Twitter. It may shame those opposite. This is the standard they have fallen to. Twitter told the inquiry:

… Australia continues to utilise a very limited definition of hate speech under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) that is limited to race-based speech or behaviour, and does not include a number of the aforementioned categories, including sexual orientation, disability-based, religious-based or gender-based speech.

These are the depths that they have stooped to. The Prime Minister set up a social media inquiry to put the big tech giants under the microscope, and, really, it's shining a mirror on the government—a mirror of the standards that they apply to themselves. This has consequences. This kind of radicalisation through religious vilification has real-world consequences. We saw it when an Australian murdered 51 people of faith in New Zealand nearly three years ago. The Christchurch terrorist was radicalised by online extremist speech. That was the finding of the task force to combat violent extremism online, established by this government. They highlighted the role of this hate machine online. Those opposite have an opportunity to deal with it today in this amendment. Vote for it. You can stop this. It's the same radicalisation that drove the Utoya terrorist. It's the same radicalisation that drove the Christchurch terrorist.

Let me quote to you one of the witnesses in this inquiry, a person of faith representing a religious organisation. This is an organisation that was charged with trying to stamp out Islamophobia and violent extremism and radicalisation online in the wake of the Christchurch attacks—the Australian Muslim Advocacy Network. Ms Rita Jabri-Markwell committed herself and her organisation, on a voluntary basis, to identifying online Islamophobia targeting Australian Muslims. She identified hundreds of examples, including, shamefully, the vile posting of former Senator Fraser Anning, who was condemned in this chamber by both sides of parliament. There were great speeches from those on both sides of parliament. Those identified instances of Islamophobia and hate speech by former Senator Anning were sent to the social media platforms. Their response was that there was not an adequate legal basis to kick his page off the site. I asked Ms Rita Jabri-Markwell, the director of the Australian Muslim Advocacy Network, in these hearings how it made her feel to do all of this voluntary work, only to see that we had not advanced the legal framework dealing with hate speech and vilification of religious groups in this country since an Australian murdered 51 people of faith. There had been no change. This is what she told this inquiry. I asked her how that felt, and she said:

It's made us feel really lonely. I don't know how else to describe it. It's kind of like you don't matter.

This is what people of religious faith are telling your government, Prime Minister.

But we just have to keep going. If another scenario like that happens—

That is, an Australian murdering 51 people of faith—

I wouldn't be able to live with myself if I knew that I hadn't tried everything.

This amendment is something we can try to stop this radicalisation. It's been called for for two years since the debates about 18C of the racial vilification act, called for by the Australian Muslim community and called for by the Australian Jewish community. We should act now. (Time expired)

See this speech in context