House debates

Wednesday, 9 February 2022

Bills

Religious Discrimination Bill 2021, Religious Discrimination (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2021, Human Rights Legislation Amendment Bill 2021; Second Reading

6:57 pm

Photo of Julie CollinsJulie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Hansard source

As many speakers have said in discussing the Religious Discrimination Bill 2021, I cannot support it in its current form. But what I do support is people not being discriminated against due to their religious or non-religious beliefs. Indeed, people should not, because of their religious belief, be offended, humiliated, intimidated, insulted or ridiculed by another person. In my home state of Tasmania, this has actually been the law now for 24 years.

In Tasmania, for the last 24 years, it has been illegal to discriminate against people on many grounds. Indeed, our current legislation says that you cannot discriminate against people on the basis of race, age, sexual orientation, lawful sexual activity, gender, gender identity, intersex variations of sex characteristics, marital status, relationship status, pregnancy, breastfeeding, parental status, family responsibilities, disability, industrial activity, political belief or affiliation, political activity, religious belief or affiliation, religious activity, irrelevant criminal record, irrelevant medical record. We have a number of attributes in my home state of Tasmania on which you cannot discriminate against people already, and it has been the case for 24 years, and it has been working, which shows you can achieve a balance. You can have people's rights not trump another's rights, and you can have people be kind and live in harmony together, as we have done now for 24 years. We have many people in my home state of Tasmania say that they do not support this bill in its current form. Indeed our Liberal Premier has written to the federal Liberal government, saying that the state government does not want this bill to override Tasmania's existing protections regarding discrimination.

So many Tasmanians and so many of my constituents have contacted me, and I have said to those constituents, 'I hear you.' I say to the people who are contacting me who have one of the attributes that may be trumped by another in the bill as it is currently drafted, 'I hear you.' I say to the children who could be impacted if this bill is passed in its current form and to whom harm may be done, 'I hear you.' That is why Labor is moving amendments to the bill as it currently stands.

The government is also moving some amendments, and they are welcome, but they simply do not go far enough. Labor will move additional amendments, particularly amendments in relation to proposed section 12. We are concerned that this would allow people's beliefs in some cases to trump the attributes of other individuals. It could cause some people who are already discriminated against, and who shouldn't be, to be further discriminated against, and I cannot support that. I simply cannot.

I am listening to my constituents—and I am finding it very difficult to be talking on this bill today. I want to protect the children in my electorate and children around Australia. I want to protect the families. I want to protect the people who are practising their faith right around the country, like we already do in my home state of Tasmania. That is why the amendments that Labor is moving are so important. We will move the amendments in this House and we will move the amendments in the other house, and, if we're successful in getting these amendments up, we will insist on them.

I say to those on the other side, particularly some of my Tasmanian colleagues who sit on the other side and who have been vocal: support Labor's amendments, if you're serious. If you are really, truly serious, you need to come into this place and support Labor's amendments, because our amendments will do what is necessary to protect vulnerable people.

My colleague the member for Whitlam gave a very eloquent and heartfelt speech yesterday, and many people have referred to it. It was a real privilege to be here to support him on that yesterday. He said that it should not be beyond the people in this place to be able to find the right balance, to ensure that we give protection to people of faith and their religious activities and also to people to whom this bill may do harm, and I agree with him. As I've said, in my home state of Tasmania that is currently the case, so I'm sure that, if the Tasmanian parliament managed it 24 years ago, this parliament could manage it today.

But, of course, we know that some on that side don't want to do the right thing in regard to this bill and that, in fact, this bill was designed to be a political wedge. It was a commitment that the current Prime Minister made in 2018. It was a commitment that was made to try and wedge people on this side. What we have seen from this government in the last few days has been disgraceful, trying to rush through this bill and amendments, which we have only had for 24 hours, in one day. This government has not had those amendments properly scrutinised. It has not consulted with people of faith. It has not consulted with interest groups on those amendments.

Of course, we know that the inquiries into these bills did not go long enough and did not have time to properly deliberate and consider alternative amendments, although they did say that these bills, as they are currently written, should not be passed. But they did, as I do, support the intent of the bill, which is to protect people who are practising their religion. All of us want to see that.

What we need to do in this place from time to time is make very difficult decisions, and for some on this side of the House—and I know for some on the other side—those decisions have weighed heavily in recent days, as they have on myself. But I am proud to be a member of the Australian Labor Party. I am proud to say that the amendments we are moving will protect people. I am proud to say that the amendments we are moving hold true to my values. And I hope that the people in my electorate understand how difficult these decisions have been. I stand up here today in good faith to explain to my constituents why decisions are being made as they are. The reality is that this Prime Minister wants a wedge. He wants Labor to oppose the fundamental right of people to practise their religion. That is not something that we oppose. We want people to be able to practise their religion, but we want protections for vulnerable people, and we need to do both.

This debate should have been about bringing everybody together. It should have been a time for unifying this place and the community. I think it shows the Prime Minister in a very bad light. He's talked a lot about character in recent days. I think the way that this has been done shows a lot about the Prime Minister's character, and I have to say I think I agree with some of his colleagues and their assessments of recent days and weeks. This is not about the Prime Minister, though. This is about people and it's about protecting people. Those on the other side are given the opportunity today to protect all people from discrimination—people who are practising their religion and undertaking religious activities but also vulnerable children and other people, people with disabilities, people who are already discriminated against who shouldn't be. I hope that everybody on that side weighs up Labor's amendments and considers them in the manner in which they are being brought to this place and that they do the right thing. This should be a moment when we all come together and do the right thing, and I hope the House is up to it.

Comments

No comments