Page 818 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 9 April 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
be condoned. We should stand up at every occasion to condemn those who might insult, demean and offend others simply on the basis of race. We should stop discrimination based on race whenever and wherever we see it.
The Canberra Liberals will be supporting this motion because we believe certain things. Should intimidating or threatening someone based on their race be a crime? Yes, it should. Should vilification or inciting hatred or creating harm be a crime? Yes, it should. But we do need to consider what the threshold for those crimes is. As outlined by the Attorney-General, section 16 of the ACT Human Rights Act 2004 decrees that everyone has the right to hold opinions without interference. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This includes freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of borders, whether orally, in writing or in print, by way of art, or in another way chosen by him or her.
But in our wish to protect one right we must be careful not to harm others. This debate is occurring in our federal parliament and around the world, including in the UK and the US. It is a debate that we should be part of. It is a debate between freedom of speech and freedom from discrimination. We do need laws in this nation to protect against behaviour that harms individuals who might be intimidated or vilified based on their race. Equally, we need to genuinely protect our legitimate free speech. We need to be cautious that when we start criminalising speech we are restricting that most precious of our human rights, our freedom of expression, and in many cases that may be appropriate to do so.
I am sure all of us would cite examples of where we have seen offensive or insulting behaviour, and indeed maybe some of us—Dr Bourke, I am sorry to hear what you have said—have personally experienced discrimination or racial abuse, and it is not acceptable. As leaders in our community, we have a responsibility to fight intolerance and make it clear that in our multicultural society we will always stand up to the bigots. But, as legislators, we must be very careful when we consider these issues to consider the question of what speech we should make a crime and what we should not. The exposure draft of the federal legislation gives the ACT an opportunity to contribute to that debate. I would ask that the government use care and deep consideration in making their submission.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (11.33): I thank Dr Bourke for bringing this motion to the Assembly. As colleagues will know, it is an issue on which I have made some public comments as well. It is an important one for this Assembly to be discussing today, and it is certainly appropriate that this Assembly reaffirms the importance of our multicultural society and the importance of respecting the racial and ethnic diversity we enjoy and which brings so many benefits to Canberra.
The context, of course, is that the federal government, led by George Brandis, has started what I would characterise as an attack on important protections against racial hatred in the federal Racial Discrimination Act. Specifically, these are protections against offensive behaviour done because of a person’s race, colour or national or ethnic origin.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video