Section 18C: Right to Bigotry Dumped

Wednesday 6 August 2014 @ 11.50 a.m. | IP & Media | Legal Research | Torts, Damages & Civil Liability

Today the press reports that, after six months of public debate, controversy and resulting political criticism flowing from the Federal Government's decision to repeal (and/or change) section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) (the Act), it took the Federal Cabinet only 60 minutes to kill the proposed changes to section 18C which currently proscribes so called offensive behaviour based on "race, colour or national or ethnic origin".

Background Leading to Scrapping of 18C Changes

It is reported that the months of consultation by the government have produced more than 5,000 submissions from community groups and other interested parties. Submissions which apparently have led to the Prime Minister's view that, overwhelmingly, feedback on the proposed changes to the law has been negative, and that such, combined with the Federal Government's new proposed anti-terror laws (see our previous post Government Considering Reversing The Onus Of Proof For New Anti Terrorism Laws), means that the Federal Government needs to reach out to minority communities for co-operation - Muslim communities in particular.

Yesterday's cabinet discussion of the section 18C changes is reported as being the first time the proposed laws had been discussed in cabinet since March 2014. Previously, the Attorney General Senator Brandis had been forced to water down his proposed legislation revealed in an exposure draft (see our previous postBrandis Reportedly Considering “Watering Down” Controversial Racial Discrimination Act Changes) and to open the changes to public consultation.

Once the results of public consultation were in, it became evident, as the SMH reports one senior cabinet source saying:

"The purpose of the exposure draft was to get community feedback and the feedback has been 'don't change it'. As part of combating terrorism, we want the moderate Muslim community to be onside. One of the sticking points has been [section] 18C. . . . It was seen to be swimming in a different direction to the terror legislation . . ."

Reports indicate that the Attorney-General opened the debate in Federal Cabinet , a debate which  then ". . . endorsed the decision to dump the legislation".

Reaction and Comment

SMH refers to the decision as  "the rationale for the retreat" saying that  the dumping of section 18C, "a proposal that was always an unnecessary, divisive and ideological indulgence" provides cover for the new proposed upgraded anti-terrorism laws, making them more acceptable to ethnic communities when they will be required to accept new curbs on freedom of movement and privacy to re-enforce Australia's national security.

In its Federal Politics section SMH reports that well known conservative blogger and notable defendant in the most well known case under section 18C, Andrew Bolt and his fellow conservative radio journalist, Steve Price ". . . devoted the majority of their Tuesday night 2GB radio show to lashing Prime Minister Tony Abbott's decision to dump the changes".

Mr Bolt is quoted as saying the ". . . decision [to not repeal section 18C] spelt a dangerous time for Australia and that the Prime Minister's justification was an 'excuse rather than a reason'". Further, he is reported to have claimed that Australia is ". . . being asked to assimilate to immigrant values".

The Conversation quotes the opposition leader Bill Shorten as having said that the PM was seeking to use the proposed changes to national security announcement  “ . . . as cover to finally dump his deeply unpopular changes to section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act".

The new Human Rights Commissioner, Mr Tim Wilson, an appointment of the current government who was appointed with the special job of promoting free speech, is reported by The Conversation as having tweeted:

“Disturbed to hear the government has backed down on 18C and will keep offensive speech illegal. Very disturbed.”

Much of the reaction to this reversal now also focuses attention on what other of its now unpopular but announced measures the Federal Government will retreat from. Some believed to be called into question are:

  • the paid parental leave scheme;
  • the reintroducing of knights and dames; and
  • several unpopular budget measures (co-payments for example).

 TimeBase is an independent, privately owned Australian legal publisher specialising in the online delivery of accurate, comprehensive and innovative legislation research tools including LawOne and unique Point-in-Time Products.

Sources:

Related Articles: