David Leyonhjelm (NSW, Liberal Democratic Party) Share this | Hansard source

This is a debate about traditional freedoms. As my record shows, the Liberal Democrats always defend the full range of freedoms in the Western liberal democratic tradition. Other parties might defend freedoms selectively, but they shirk from the task of defending freedoms that unpopular groups rely on. Other parties say that they defend freedom of religion, as we do. But only the Liberal Democrats believe that a school should be free to refuse enrolment to gay children or to expel them. Why would a parent want their gay child enrolled in a school that thinks their child is an abomination? Expulsion from such an abhorrent school would be a blessing and shouldn't be banned. Freedom of association is a fundamental freedom, but only the Liberal Democrats have supported the rights of motorcyclists to join motorcycle clubs, rejecting the lie of guilt by association. A right to a fair trial is fundamental, too—but only the Liberal Democrats support the rights of accused perpetrators of child abuse or domestic violence to a fair trial. Two bills that undermine justice for these people are due to sail through the Senate this week—opposed, presumably, only by me.

Being innocent until proven guilty is also under attack. I have not heard anyone, other than the Liberal Democrats, consistently rail against regular reversals of the onus of proof and the application of strict and absolute liability. Property rights are fundamental, but only the Liberal Democrats fight against unexplained wealth laws that seize the wealth of people who have not been convicted of a crime. Traditional freedoms have been routinely attacked under the guise of national security. Freedom of movement of those who are not facing any charge is constrained through control orders and, more concerningly, through preventive detention. And our privacy is undermined by government surveillance of our communications as if we are all just criminals in waiting. When I defend our traditional freedoms against attacks under the guise of national security, I cut a very lonely figure because parties that pretend to stand for freedom are missing in action. We also see retrospective laws in tax and migration that pull the rug out from under people. Some parties might defend migrants, and some might defend taxpayers, but only the Liberal Democrats defend both.

Finally, I turn to freedom of speech. Other parties selectively defend freedom of speech but only the Liberal Democrats are consistent and comprehensive, with four weighty bills before this parliament to light the way towards free speech. Free speech is fundamental to our democratic society and a key part of what makes life enjoyable. Importantly, it doesn't mean you are under any obligation to politely listen to what others have to say. 'Traditional freedoms' means all the freedoms I have raised today; it's not just a particular freedom that my political base or any other base might like this week. The Liberal Democrats are the only party to truly stand for freedom in this country.