Page 5222 - Week 16 - Thursday, 28 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MS FOLLETT: To come back to the legislation under consideration, the Government does not oppose Mr Collaery's amendment, although the fact that he appears to be introducing it to contain Mr Stevenson's political ambitions and political activities seems to me to be enormously flattering to Mr Stevenson. It is a provision that Mr Collaery has found necessary to the legislation. It is a provision the Government would have put a great deal less priority upon. Nevertheless, we will not oppose it.
DR KINLOCH (12.08): I thank Mr Collaery most sincerely, with a great sense of gratitude, for adding these clauses to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Bill. As far as I am concerned, this is as important as anything in the Bill. I have heard some strange things in the last half-hour. Some of us are ethnics, we have ethnic families, and we want them to be supported. These kinds of clauses will help to do that.
I do not believe in going so far with freedom of speech that people can be vilified racially. Is that freedom of speech? We are on a very difficult matter. I understand that. We do not want to limit freedom of speech, but there is a point at which storm-troopers can say things about people that are so desperately damaging that they lead to terrible ends. I say thank you for these amendments. I hope that everyone here will support them. They are well said.
I also thank the Chief Minister for not being disgraceful - I think that adds up to being graceful, does it not? I do not believe that Mr Collaery is doing this only in relation to Mr Stevenson. I believe that it is in relation to a city which, from that demographic book we saw launched here recently, is the second most complex multicultural city in Australia. In some ways, in its life, I would have thought it was the most multicultural because we have all these embassies from all over the world which add to the complexity of our city. If there is one city where we must not allow racial slurs, racial injustice, racial disharmony, it is the city of Canberra. May that view spread throughout the Commonwealth of Australia.
I want to back the removal of material which incites racial hatred, or the prevention of publication of that material, or displaying material to harass a racial group. It is very difficult to know what to do about the possession of material. I do not believe that we should be in the business of raiding people's homes; but, given that limitation, I support the amendment. I wonder whether one is allowed to answer any of the things Mr Stevenson has said. I hope to do that in the adjournment debate tonight.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .