Page 4461 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 19 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
First and foremost is the title of the Bill. When this legislation was drafted, the Alliance Government, I think quite properly, decided that the draft Bill was to be called the Discrimination Bill. That is entirely appropriate because that is what it is about. It is about countering discrimination; it is about dealing with aspects of discrimination and seeking to counter them. Similarly, we have a Crimes Act; that is, an Act to counter crime in the community and dealing with various acts that the legislature makes illegal. Accordingly, just using the principles of plain English, "Discrimination Bill" is the most appropriate form of wording. That is what the old Alliance Government had, and that is what we would be seeking, it seems along with Mr Collaery, to substitute.
There are a number of potential problems, I think, with this legislation. For a lot of them we will have to wait and see, in some respects; but for others there is a lot that we can do now. Like most legislation, if commonsense is applied, any problems that cannot be readily seen can be overcome in practice. It is very good, however, to get things right to start with, and that is what we certainly are attempting to do with our amendments to this piece of legislation. We want to amend it so that, as far as is practical, it is got right to start with.
It is worthy of note that most States in fact have a similar type of legislation. In New South Wales, of course, there is the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Act, introduced by the Greiner Government. I am mindful of some of the arguments that I understand Mr Stevenson will be raising in relation to whether there is in fact even a need for this type of legislation.
It should be said that Australia is one of the freest countries in the world. In Australia there is less discrimination, hatred, racial bias and ignorance that has a real effect in the community than in most other parts of the world, because of the very nature of our society. We are a very fortunate country. We have inherited some excellent traditions. We have forged some excellent traditions through our short 200-year history. We are one of the freest countries in the world, and a country where all people are, to all intents and purposes, free and equal before the law.
There are always problems in relation to this. There is always the notion that, if you have a lot of money, obviously you are much better placed than people who have none at all. Something cropping up more recently in terms of our legal system is that, more and more often, if you have a lot of money you can afford to buy good lawyers, and if you are dirt poor you will have legal aid and will be looked after; but, if you are middle class or in a job that does not pay very well and you do not qualify for legal aid, you are disadvantaged. That is very true. Nevertheless, we are a fortunate country.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .