Senate debates

Monday, 27 March 2017

Questions without Notice

Racial Discrimination Act 1975

2:45 pm

Photo of Lisa SinghLisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Attorney General) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Attorney-General, Senator Brandis. On Friday, the Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils of Australia, FECCA, gave evidence to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee's inquiry into the government's Human Rights Legislation Amendment Bill 2017. Does the minister agree with the chairman of the Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils of Australia, Joseph Caputo OAM, who says, 'the proposed changes send a strong signal that racism is acceptable'?

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

Well, if that is what the gentleman said, I entirely disagree with it. In fact, I think it sends a very strong signal that racism is unacceptable that we are strengthening this law.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Singh, a supplementary question.

2:46 pm

Photo of Lisa SinghLisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Attorney General) Share this | | Hansard source

It has been reported that government members of that committee refused to allow the Aboriginal Legal Service to give evidence on watering down section 18C, to that same inquiry. Does the minister support that decision?

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator, I am not aware of that. I know that the inquiry was time-limited; as to the way in which was conducted, I was not there, I was not watching it, and I am not in a position to comment on the way in which the proceedings transpired.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Singh, a final supplementary question.

Photo of Lisa SinghLisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Attorney General) Share this | | Hansard source

Why is the government ignoring the concerns of multicultural Australia and Indigenous Australians, and weakening protections from racism—just to satisfy ideologues on its backbench and One Nation?

2:47 pm

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

We are strengthening protections against racism by introducing as a new species of prohibited conduct the concept of racial harassment. As you have heard me say before, Senator Singh: what kind of anti-racial-discrimination statute is there that omits to mention racial harassment as one of the prohibited species of conduct?

Photo of Penny WongPenny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

What sort of attorney-general defends the rights of the bigots?

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Singh, I am trying to address you but I cannot hear myself speak through the yelling of Senator Wong.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Wong, on a point of order.

Photo of Penny WongPenny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

I will repeat it so it is on the record: what sort of attorney defends the rights of the bigots?

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

There is no point of order, Senator Wong. That is not a point of order.

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

Any attorney worthy of the name defends the rights of all Australians under the law. Senator Singh, what sort of anti-racism statute omits reference to racial harassment? And yet the Racial Discrimination Act by section 18C fails to do that. So what we are doing is we are strengthening the Racial Discrimination Act while at the same time removing from it its anti-free-speech provisions.