Page 5172 - Week 16 - Wednesday, 27 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Let us say that X heads a group called Citizens for an Ethical Society. The organisation is active on a number of fronts, including lobbying governments and educational and public relations areas. Let us say that the organisation also strongly believes that people should be tolerant of each other so long as they do not cause harm to other people. The organisation decides to look at the question of population, forms the view that the world is overpopulated, and that one of the mechanisms to control population is to encourage contraception. If it wishes to promote these ideas it must tread very carefully in respect of this Bill.
There are at least three possible areas of conflict - discrimination in relation to parents, pregnancy and religion. Of the last, it finds that members of particular religions have a religious conviction against contraception. Under the Bill, if X discriminates against a person with such a religious conviction or who is pregnant by, for example, refusing to employ such a person in a public relations campaign to promote contraception, X may be guilty of unlawful discrimination.
Certainly subclause 8(2) relates to this area. However, under the circumstances, it would be somewhat imprudent for X's organisation to employ a person who had such a conviction or attribute. There are a number of clauses, as I mentioned earlier, whereby similar problems arise. One would assume that in a democracy the person we call X is entitled to develop a campaign against such activities, and an argument that a person with such a conviction or attribute would not apply for the position is simply naive.
Another example may serve to cement the point being made. Let us say that X's organisation formed the view that nuclear and chemical weapons were immoral and their proliferation symptomatic of a psychosomatic illness, and it wished to campaign against it. Clause 44 would seem to allow X to discriminate against a person who had a political conviction that nuclear weapons were necessary if X's organisation was a political party or the person was to be engaged in any other similar employment or work of a political nature.
Mr Connolly: "Was a political party or the person was to be engaged in any other similar employment or work of a political nature. Consequently, if X refused - - - "
MR STEVENSON: It is nice to know that Mr Connolly can read as well.
Mr Connolly: We have all read it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .