There
has been some worrying comment about the Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination
Bill that the Federal Gillard Labor government wishes bring into effect. A
series of articles in The Australian newspaper and elsewhere has given a number
of reasons to be concerned.
Today
the Institute of Public Affairs has released its submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Legislation Committee. Printed below is the Executive Summary from IPA’s
submission. To read the entire submission go to the following web address http://ipa.org.au/library/publication/1356055327_document_211212_submission_-_anti-discrimination.pdfThe exposure draft of the Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012 [“the draft Bill”] represents a dramatic and radical attack on Australians’ fundamental freedoms under the guise of reforming anti-discrimination law.
The draft Bill makes government the
arbiter of behaviour within a substantial range of private political and
personal activities. The draft Bill would politicise and regulate private
interpersonal relationships in a way they never have been in Australia.
In a very real sense, these laws are not
anti-discrimination laws. They are laws designed to give the government
authority over our lives in completely new and unjustifiable arenas. This is an
excessive and indefensible increase in state power.
The proposed laws give the government
explicit power to interfere in almost all facets of human interaction including
eighteen areas of public and private life, such as political opinion, religion
and social origin. The government is also required to decide what falls into
these categories, making the state the total and final arbiter on our most
fundamental liberties.
By redefining discrimination to be
anything which “offends, insults or humiliates” the proposed law will extend
the infamous provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act that led to the
Andrew Bolt case to almost every area of public and private life. By expanding
the grounds on which people can claim to be discriminated against to include
areas such as “political opinion” the law will stifle genuine discussion on
almost every topic for fear of legal consequences.
This draft Bill has deservedly been
criticised from across the political spectrum as a massive overreach and an
unjustified curtailment of individual freedoms.
Democratic governments rely on the free
exchange of opinion for their legitimacy. This draft Bill, if enacted, would
dramatically limit freedom of speech in Australia.
This submission also raises other
concerning elements of the draft Bill. The draft Bill substantially reverses
the burden of proof onto the defendant. It introduces a large amount of
uncertainty and ambiguity into anti-discrimination law.
The draft Bill introduces a subjective
test for decisions about whether the law has been breached. Subjective tests
are impossible to comply with and should never be used by the courts.
There is no justification for such a dramatic overhaul of anti-discrimination law, and no place for such extraordinary limits on freedom of speech.
There is no justification for such a dramatic overhaul of anti-discrimination law, and no place for such extraordinary limits on freedom of speech.