Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Firstly, let's be crystal clear about what the Criminal Code Amendment (Agricultural Protection) Bill 2019 does. It does nothing to address protesters who are trespassing on agricultural land, because that issue is already addressed under state and territory laws; it's already illegal to trespass onto private property and to cause damage.

We understand that for many agricultural communities, and indeed many farmers, protesters are an issue that's causing anxiety. Let's be clear: most farmers are doing the right thing. Most primary production facilities are family owned and run, and some of them are isolated. Most farmers care for their animals, and they are doing everything they can to ensure that their livestock is looked after.

But let's also be clear about why some people are deciding to take action into their own hands and about why some people are protesting by taking action on the streets. In Senator Chandler's contribution she said that it was about having a personal aversion to eating meat. But it has nothing to do with that, and it has everything to do with animals being treated cruelly and abhorrently and governments failing to act. That's what people are protesting about. Senator Chandler must have been asleep when Four Corners broadcast that horrific footage of animals expiring on a horrific journey as a result of the live-export trade with cattle and sheep—animals were being cooked alive at sea.

When it comes to raising animals, again, most farmers do the right thing, but we have laws that allow pigs to be trapped standing in sow stalls while pregnant unable to turn, unable to move and unable to interact with their piglets. That's what some of our current laws allow. We've got poultry that live short, miserable lives in tiny cages where they never see the light of day, where they can barely move and where they can't stand up on their own. That's what people are protesting about, and that's what people are concerned about right across the community.

This isn't an issue that is just limited to those people who are taking direct action but it is an issue that is of concern right across the community. They know that the government is not taking action on any of these fronts. They're too busy protecting their mates in big agribusiness, handing out perks left, right and centre, rather than standing up for animal welfare standards. The government acknowledges that property damage and trespass laws exist. It has been made crystal clear that, when it comes to laws against property damage and trespass, they're written at a state and federal level. So this legislation has nothing to do with people trespassing on private property and damaging private property, because those things are already offences. What this bill does is quash fundamental rights to organise, to advocate and to protest. These are antiprotest laws. This bill creates two new offences. The first of those is that using a carriage service for inciting trespass on agricultural land will result in a penalty of imprisonment for 12 months. The second is that using a carriage service for inciting property damage or theft on agricultural land will result in a penalty of imprisonment for five years. At its heart, this bill is actually about clamping down on political communication and the ability of people to organise and advocate for issues that they are passionate about, issues that many people right across the community care deeply about.

What it means is that if someone blows the whistle by filming illegal animal cruelty and then posting it online, they'll be prosecuted and subject to serious penalties. It means that if someone shares an event on Facebook for a non-violent protest—let's just say against something like a coal seam gas pipeline—they will be subject to prosecution. If somebody is advocating for an end to live animal exports, are they inciting trespass or property damage merely by calling for an end to those industries? These laws, as they are written, are so loose that many of these activities could be subject to prosecution.

Indeed, legal experts at the Law Council of Australia are extremely concerned about these laws. They say the bill has 'the potential to create a chilling effect on legitimate dialogue and debate around animal rights and food production'. That's what legal experts are telling us. We know that this has the potential to further restrict media freedom. Despite the very clumsy attempt to carve out an exemption for journalists, the Law Council also says, 'It may nevertheless make many media outlets reluctant to pursue legitimate stories.' That's called a chilling effect. These laws are unnecessary, because trespass and property damage are already illegal; people can be prosecuted under existing state and territory laws. But what they will serve to do is to have a chilling effect on people's legitimate right to publicly express a view about an issue that they have every right to be concerned about. Because this is an issue of great concern; it's something the Greens have been campaigning on for many, many years—improving animal welfare standards.

Really, this bill is part of a trend that we're seeing within this government where rising social movements for justice are being met with crackdowns by this government and parliaments right across the country. Instead of addressing what protesters are concerned about, they're going after people's legitimate right to protest. It's about putting fear into the community that people's activism and advocacy will land them in jail. Just look at the trend that we're seeing here in Australia. We've got raids by the AFP on the national broadcaster when their story uncovered potential unlawful killings in Afghanistan. In Tasmania we have a state Liberal government that introduced laws restricting protest that were so poorly drafted that the High Court found them to be unconstitutional—again, another government going after people's legitimate right to protest rather than addressing what people's concerns might be. In Queensland right now we've got a Labor state government evoking the ghost of Joe Bjelke-Petersen—cracking down on people who are concerned about climate change and the rapid loss and extinction of so much biodiversity in this country, and increasing search and seizure powers in response to the Extinction Rebellion and calls for a climate emergency. And what's the response from the Labor government in Queensland? 'Let's have laws that throw these people in jail.'

Of course, this is going on right around the world. But we shouldn't be looking at international jurisdictions and following on from their lead. We're seeing draconian protest laws being put in place in the US for the fossil fuel industry. We're seeing authoritarian governments around the world trying to destroy social movements and civil disobedience. We've got protests in Hong Kong being met with extreme police brutality, cracking down on what is a movement for democracy.

The reason politics is failing at the moment, the reason people are so angry at their political representatives, is that they're not listening. Instead, people are being met with governments—whether it be in response to movements for climate justice or for democratic rights or for improving animal welfare—that are cracking down on dissent. We live in a free and democratic society. Peaceful protest has always been an important part of achieving social change. Throughout history, civil disobedience has been a tool for people to make their voices heard, whether it be on universal suffrage or the civil rights movement. Most social movements throughout history have been successful because they have been legitimately expressing their right to be heard.

While we've expressed serious concerns about this bill, we also know that Labor acknowledges all the criticisms I've just made about this piece of legislation, yet we learn that they are going to support this bill. We know it's bad legislation. We know it does nothing to protect farmers. We know it is going to criminalise legitimate political communication. And Labor knows it, too. If you read what the Labor Party said in their additional comments in the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, which reported on this, Labor expressed precisely the same concerns. Firstly, in their additional comments, they said that the bill was unnecessary—correct—because trespass and property damage is already illegal. They said that the bill may have a range of unforeseen consequences—again, correct; you only need to look at what some of the expert legal commentary on this legislation has been: these laws could be used against farmers, including those undertaking legitimate protest against things like coal seam gas.

The Labor Party also acknowledged that these laws could be used against workers in unions in their fight for better pay and conditions in the food and agriculture sector—correct. The Labor Party acknowledged that the protections for journalists and whistleblowers are inadequate—yes, again, correct. And, if you look at the single recommendation that the Labor senators gave in full in that report, it reads:

Labor Senators recommend the bill be substantially amended to deal with the numerous significant unintended consequences that have been identified by submitters and outlined in this report, and that the amended bill be resubmitted to this committee for review.

It sounds like they're going to vote against the bill. It's a bad bill. There are serious concerns about it. But we now hear that Labor will support the bill, even if their amendments fail. How does this happen? Where has the opposition gone in this chamber? Well, I can tell you where it is: it's sitting over here, with the Greens and the crossbenchers. That's where the opposition to this rotten government is.

The Labor Party have decided that the way to beat the government is by becoming just like them, by giving them everything they want. Let's have a look at what they've done since the last election: $158 billion in tax cuts, something they rarely criticised in the lead-up to the election campaign—rightly, in my view. Again, they've rolled over and given them everything that they want—tax cuts for millionaires. It is a party that for 100 years has supported progressive taxation, and now they're joining with the Liberals to turn Australia into a flat-tax country, just like Trump's America.

And temporary exclusion orders: centralising more and more power in the hands of the home affairs minister—again, the Labor Party was critical of the government on that but have given them everything they want. Again, on the drought bill, the Labor Party made very clear that this was going to be a slush fund for the Nationals, and they opposed it in the lead-up to the election but have now given it to the government. In the lead-up to the election, the government established a $1.2 billion slush fund—not my words, but the words of the Labor Party—that could be spent on private schools, money that is being ripped out of our public school sector and going into the pockets of our wealthiest schools. Well, it was a slush fund in the lead-up to the election, and now it's Labor's slush fund, because they have supported the government on it, refusing to back Senator Faruqi's disallowance motion only this week in the Senate.

Here we are with a further crackdown on peaceful protests, on the right of innocent people to stand up and express their democratic views on how animals are treated. This bill has been roundly condemned by the legal fraternity. It encroaches on media freedoms and, indeed, restricts the powers of unions to ensure that they can advocate for better pay and conditions for workers in the agricultural sector. And Labor are again rolling over and supporting it and giving the government everything that they want. My message to the Labor Party is: you don't beat the conservatives by becoming conservatives; you don't beat the Liberals by giving the Liberals everything that they want; you don't kick out the tories by adopting their policies—you take a stand and you show some leadership.

Here we are in the middle of a climate emergency, where people in the state of Queensland are standing up expressing the view of so many people right across the country and, indeed, right across the globe, and saying that we can't continue to burn fossil fuels. But the response of the Labor Party in Queensland is, 'Let's crack down on civil disobedience; let's lock up protesters; let's give the green light to Adani; let's quash dissent.' People are screaming out for an alternative vision, and it is the Greens in this chamber that are the real opposition, taking a stand against this rotten government.

This is a bill that's unnecessary and expands the reach of the state in a way that criminalises people's democratic right to protest. We've already said that, if someone chooses to break the law by trespassing on private property or, indeed, by damaging private property, they have to face the consequences of those decisions—and there are laws against those actions. But to go to where the Liberal Party have now gone, which says that what we are going to do is restrict people's freedoms and rights to express their concerns over the welfare of animals, is a step too far, and it looks like the Labor Party have taken that step with them. I say to my colleagues within the Labor Party: it's not too late; you can vote against this legislation. Your amendments are not going to be supported. We've already heard that these amendments are unlikely to be supported.