Wednesday, 30 October 2024

Anti-vilification legislation

Chris CREWTHER (Mornington) (19:09): (895) My adjournment matter is for the Attorney-General. The action I seek is for the Attorney-General to provide an update on the Labor government’s consultation of faith communities as they prepare to pass changes to Victoria’s anti-vilification laws. The Allan Labor government’s proposed changes to the anti-vilification law risk the freedom of religion for people of faith and the freedom of speech of Victorians more generally.

These proposals are a concerning threat to freedoms we take for granted. Current anti-vilification legislation is effectively restricted to race and religion in alignment with the rest of the country, albeit there have been issues of freedoms even with the current laws, yet this Labor government wishes to broaden these laws to cover a variety of other traits such as disability, gender identity, sexual characteristics and sexual orientation. That all sounds well and good until one looks at the details. The government is trying to lower the legal bar for what qualifies as vilification. Currently one must actively incite hatred to commit a criminal offence. Under the proposed changes speech that is likely to incite will become a criminal offence. Under this standard almost all speech referring to those with protected attributes, regardless of intent or context, could be deemed criminal. Journalists, writers, comedians, academics, artists, business leaders, entertainers, absolutely anyone could be caught by this, not to mention people of faith where a public or online expression of one’s faith, whether you are Jewish, Christian, Muslim or any other faith, could be considered vilification if somebody subjectively feels that their protected attributes have been harmed.

People of faith may be silenced from expressing their views and could potentially face legal action for sharing their faith-based or general views on sexuality and biology. Going from objective to subjective harm is dangerous. It may effectively determine that certain groups based on certain attributes have a special moral status in our society, a special moral status that if you question will leave you possibly going to jail under these new laws. Let me reiterate a point I made in my inaugural speech: it is not wrong to be a Christian or a person of faith or someone who speaks their mind. In a secular, multi-ethnic and multifaith society like Victoria the government should be actively fostering healthy debate instead of enacting laws that might force compliance and make the expression of one’s faith or views more difficult. With an open society and open debate, we promote a marketplace of ideas. As former Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies said:

Stagnant waters are level, and in them the scum rises. Active waters are never level: they toss and tumble and have crests and troughs; but the scientists tell us that they purify themselves in a few hundred yards.

We must ensure active waters, we must protect debate and objectivity, and we must oppose this government’s assault on freedom of speech and freedom of religion.