Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Manufacturing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the face of widespread community opposition, the Abbott government is continuing with its extreme right-wing agenda and is refusing to abandon its attempts to change section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. The Abbott government's resistance comes despite a joint letter to the Attorney-General from over 120 community organisations urging that the changes be dropped. My understanding is that over 5,000 submissions have been received in response to the exposure draft of the bill, with the time frame for submissions being only around one month. Whilst those submissions have not been made public, it would be reasonable to assume that the majority are probably against the changes.

Section 18C states that:

… it is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, if the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people; and the act is done because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the people in the group.

Importantly, section 18D already provides a wide range of exemptions to section 18C:

s18C does not render unlawful anything said or done reasonably and in good faith:

(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; or

(c) in making or publishing:

(i) a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest; or

(ii) a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held by the person making the comment.

I particularly note the words 'reasonably and in good faith'. It is also important to understand that the behaviour described in section 18C is 'unlawful' rather than 'criminal'. A person is not going to be arrested for offending someone, as some advocates for weakening the act have claimed.

Australia also has obligations as a signatory to several international human rights conventions, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to protect people from racial abuse. The government's proposed changes to section 18C fall well short of the obligations within those conventions. Nor does Australia have a bill of rights as an alternative for protecting a person's human rights

Section 18C was enacted after extensive public consultation. The community backlash against repeal of section 18C was underestimated by the Abbott government. It has now retreated from its original proposal and released a discussion paper in which the words 'offend', 'insult' and 'humiliate' have been replaced by 'vilify'. In the proposal 'vilify' is defined as 'to incite hatred'. This would prohibit a very narrow range of conduct whilst allowing a wide range of exceptions.

A poll in February by Essential Research found that 36 per cent of respondents had experienced or witnessed racism in the past 12 months. Sadly, we do not need polls to tell us that racism exists. In the last couple of years there have been numerous examples of racist abuse exposed in the news media. In some or all of those cases, the abuse has gone further than insults or name calling and resulted in threats and violent behaviour. It is unclear whether these incidents are on the rise, or if the much wider availability of mobile phones which can record video has provided a greater means to expose these incidents. Whichever is the case, it is clear that they are not isolated cases.

The Jewish community has been understandably vocal in its criticism of the proposed changes. In October 2013 a Jewish family, including elderly members, was physically attacked in Sydney after leaving a synagogue in an unprovoked racist attack. Earlier this year anti-Jewish graffiti was found at the Adelaide University. In a statement issued by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry and reported in The Australian Jewish News, President Robert Goot AM SC said that the exposure draft of the repeal is 'deeply flawed' and that it:

… "in effect rips up" key protections to groups within Australian society which have operated successfully for almost 20 years …

Race Discrimination Commissioner, Tim Soutphommasane said:

… the current Racial Discrimination Act strikes a fair balance between freedom of speech and freedom from racial vilification.

Statistics show that most Racial Discrimination Act matters are resolved through conciliation; very few end in court, and 20 years of court precedence now provide guidance and certainty for all. If changes are made the law will become untested and unclear until again tested by the courts.

With Australia's cultural diversity increasing, we should not be weakening racial discrimination laws or encouraging people to think that it is okay to racially abuse others.