House debates

Wednesday, 4 December 2013

Constituency Statements

Racial Discrimination Act 1975

9:42 am

Photo of Michael DanbyMichael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take on the issue of discrimination in this country. This issue struck a chord with people overnight on my Facebook page. There, people in unprecedented numbers have been looking at the issues I have raised.

In 1995, during the Keating prime ministership, section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act was introduced into Australian legislation. For 11 years under John Howard protection against hate speech remain untouched. This raises the question: why is the current government so intent on repealing the racial discrimination legislation, which was so successful during all the years of the Howard government? The answer, unfortunately, lies in the right turn represented by this government and by their cheerleaders in the Murdoch press. Many right-wingers say that the repeal of section 18C is directly related to the conviction in court of conservative columnist, blogger and broadcaster Andrew Bolt.

A week ago today in my electorate, the former Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, was awarded the Jerusalem prize by the Australian Jewish community. During her passionate address to a packed audience, the former Prime Minister unequivocally condemned Attorney-General Brandis's plan to repeal section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. Prime Minister Gillard voiced her support for section 18C and drew attention to the attacks on it in the Murdoch press. She said that, earlier this month, the Weekend Australian had editorialised in favour of weakening racial discrimination laws. She said:

Allow me, please, to read from their editorial—because I cannot make the argument in favour of these laws better than they have in their twisted views.

The editorial said:

“… Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act provided the foundation for a Federal Court finding in 2011 that [Andrew] Bolt’s articles about light-skinned Aborigines amounted to unlawful racial vilification …

… Bolt’s columns did contain some errors of fact and they might well have caused offence—

The Australian argued—

But so what?

Former Prime Minister Gillard said:

…“so what” is nothing less than the preservation of the social fabric of respect and decency that binds all Australians, from all backgrounds, and all walks of life, together.

I could not have said it better than the former Prime Minister, who received a standing ovation for her remarks. It was a warm-hearted moment in my electorate to see so many people coming together in appreciation of the former Prime Minister and her long-standing, passionate and sincere views that were in place despite the lack of political support she had, sometimes even in her own party, on these and other issues.

The issue is not going away until the coalition, and specifically the Attorney-General, gives a guarantee to the Australian people that the Racial Discrimination Act will be left untouched. It was good enough for John Howard; I do not see why it is not good enough for this current government. I hope that wiser heads will prevail. Mr Howard was a wise man. I applaud former Prime Minister Gillard's rallying cry; her Jerusalem Prize is well deserved. (Time expired)

Comments

No comments