Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Today is Harmony Day—the international day for the elimination of racial discrimination. Why, on today of all days, has the Prime Minister chosen to weaken protections against racist hate speech?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for his question. Today we are strengthening the Racial Discrimination Act.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are strengthening it because we are making it clear, and we are standing up for freedom of speech. We are standing up for the freedom of speech that underpins our society—the greatest multicultural society in the world.

This is the Australia that the Labor Party believe. They believe that Australia is a nation of racists only held in check by Gillian Triggs and section 18C. I can tell you that we have more respect for the Australian people than the Labor Party do. We know that our precious freedoms, including our freedom of speech, are the very foundations of the nation—the great democracy—that has caused so many people to come from every corner of the world to join us in the most successful multicultural society in the world.

Opposition members interjecting—

We are here in this House of free speech, and it is hard to be heard with the screams of the Labor Party. They are not very interested in hearing anything but their own prejudices. Section 18C has lost its credibility. It lost it a long time ago. It needs to be reformed, and we are putting it in language that does the job. What we are delivering is a stronger and fairer section—a section that will do a better job of protecting Australians against racial vilification and, at the same time, ensuring that university students are not hauled through the courts for years for putting posts on Facebook and that cartoonists, like the great late Bill Leak, do not have to look over their shoulder to see if there is a commission or a lawyer waiting to pounce on them.

Let's be clear: the language that we are proposing to insert in this bill is precisely the intent of the bill when it was first introduced.

Honourable members interjecting—

If I go to the explanatory memorandum of the law when it was introduced in this House by a Labor government, it says:

The Bill maintains a balance between the right to free speech and the protection of individuals and groups from harassment and fear because of their race, colour or national or ethnic origin.

The language we are using is appropriate, is consistent with the intention of the legislation, is clear, is plain and better sets the balance. It is a stronger law and a fairer law standing up for freedom of speech and protecting Australians against racial vilification.

Honourable members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The level of interjections is ridiculously high. I am not going to keep interrupting ministers. There were interjectors on both sides disrupting the debate. I simply say to those members that I will deal with them. We are not going to have that level of noise for the rest of question time. We are really not. This is particularly addressed to the members for Lalor, Gellibrand, Griffith and Hume, who seemed to be arguing through the Prime Minister's answer with someone on the other side. I will refer members to my previous statements on this and act accordingly.