Lisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Hansard source

I speak on this urgency motion in the hope that this whole sad and sorry saga of politicising race relations in Australia has come to an end. Earlier this month the Abbott government faced up to the reality of its own political incompetence when the Prime Minister, over-ruling his Attorney-General on the latter's signature policy—and one that Senator Brandis had promised to his backers in the Institute of Public Affairs that he would bring through if elected—backed away from introducing changes to the Racial Discrimination Act. This was an abandonment of a reckless and ill-conceived election promise to gut federal protections against racist hate speech that are contained in section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.

These protections have supported and underpinned Australia's multicultural society for more than two decades. The defence of these important protections, and the government backflip on their proposal, was a major victory for people power—for the communities that had organised and spoke up against this assault on the harmony of the nation's diverse cultures. Those community organisations were many and varied. There were groups such as the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples, the Arab Council Australia, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, the Chinese Australian Forum, the Australian Hellenic Council, the Korean Society of Sydney, the Armenian National Committee of Australia, the Law Council, the Human Rights Commission—it goes on and on.

In announcing the policy backflip, and over-ruling the blundering Attorney-General, Senator Brandis, the Prime Minister indicated that his government was reversing course because its proposed green light to bigotry was a needless complication in the government's relationship with the Australian Muslim community. The question remains: has this arrogant government abandoned its promise to give the green light to racist hate speech in Australia, because it has listened to the vast majority of Australians and now realises that their policy was very much recklessly irresponsible, and a destructive one? Is it because of that, or has the government only reluctantly retreated for the time being from its ideologically blinkered promise, because it realised its charter for bigots was exacting too high a political price on a government that is already the most unpopular in living memory?

Let us take a moment to reflect. On 24 March this year, the Attorney-General, Senator George Brandis, shocked the Australian public by stepping in to defend the rights of bigots, and backing this with major changes to our laws against racial hate speech. 'People do have the right to be bigots, you know,' he told the Senate. The opposition to such a radical tear in Australia's multicultural fabric came from all over Australia, but, our course, included rumblings from within his own side, from his own backbenchers—the member for Hasluck, the member for Reid and even Senator Seselja, as well as from Liberal leaders, such as the then New South Wales Liberal premier, Barry O'Farrell, and is successor, Premier Mike Baird.

To declare that the rights of bigots are more important than the rights of minorities—minorities who suffer race hate speech on a daily basis in this country—is simply wrong. While more than 150 community groups came out against the legislation, not one pledged their support for it. Instead, Senator Brandis had to look elsewhere to find support. He looked to fringe groups, like the Institute of Public Affairs, and to the man to whom he owed the greatest debt, and to whom he had promised a legislative change in the first place, the well-known right-wing commentator Andrew Bolt. Even further out was the support he received from the notorious holocaust denier, Frederick Tobin, and the Adelaide Institute.

Senator Brandis had gone so far to the right that even the Prime Minister had to intervene. And what did Senator Brandis say at that moment of backflip when the Prime Minister made a leadership call? He said, 'Well, you know what this business is like. You win a few, you lose a few.' Well, what has Senator Brandis won? He has won nothing in his entire time as Attorney-General. He has won nothing and lost a lot. He has lost a lot of respect. He has lost a lot of credibility, so much so that the Prime Minister himself had to reign him in.

Let's not forget the attempts that Senator Brandis made when he was trying to repeal section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. He made an attack on a very highly credible, highly regarded senior counsel, in Arthur Moses, when Mr Moses provided advice to then premier Barry O'Farrell on these proposed changes—advising that they certainly were not something the premier should support. Then, there was Senator Brandis's phone call appointment of the new 'Freedom Commissioner', Tim Wilson, who was appointed to help him with his cause to repeal section 18C. Then, of course, there was Senator Brandis's attempt during Senate estimates to silence entirely the Race Discrimination Commissioner, Tim Soutphommasane, from being able to speak on this issue. Well, now what we have seen is Prime Minister Abbott outlining:

I don't want to do anything that puts our national unity at risk at this time and so those proposals are now off the table.

That was his remark, because of his new counter-terrorism proposals that he wanted support for from the Muslim community. It was okay for the Prime Minister to put our national unity at risk before. It was okay to divide Australians, to give freedom to bigots and to take away the rights of victims of racial abuse. But now that he wants to get his counter-terrorism proposals through, he wants national unity. Now national unity is all of a sudden important to him. When all of a sudden the Prime Minister wants the Muslim community onside, the government backflips on these draconian racial discrimination laws.

What does this mean, then, for the future? The question still remains, and I put it to Senator Brandis: what is it that you want to say to people that is not in the current legislation that you cannot say now? That is really the fundamental question here when it comes to the attempts by this government to make these changes. What is it that you want to say to Aboriginal people in this country that you cannot say under the freedom provisions currently in section 18D of the Racial Discrimination Act? What is it that you want to say to me that you cannot say now under our current racial discrimination laws and the freedom provisions provided within them? Why have you seen it to be so necessary to politicise race relations in this country?

There has been a flawed consultation process in the government trying to make these changes and bring them forward. Nevertheless, that did not stop the community from putting in 5,000 submissions or more, the majority of which were against the changes. The people have won out here with this backflip. The people have won out and our laws remain, which is a good thing for Australia. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.