Wednesday, 29 May 2024

Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission

Bev McARTHUR (Western Victoria) (17:37): (922) My adjournment debate is for the Attorney-General and concerns the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission. I pointed out in a previous adjournment that the VEOHRC guidance on Victoria’s conversion practice legislation has been at best contentious and in fact almost certainly incorrect. I question whether their overreach in interpreting the law came from incompetence or from ideology. Recent events suggest it is the latter. In a webinar last week, principal adviser at the organisation Kenton Miller made incorrect, misleading and opinionated statements in what was supposed to be a public information briefing. He claimed, factually incorrectly, that the recent Cass review was:

… based on a very limited number of studies only within the UK

and described it as part of ‘dangerous messaging’ that it is unnatural to be transgender. The review says no such thing. It could only be interpreted this way by someone who prejudged it and was hell-bent on discrediting it. Referring to the report’s eminent author, he said:

Because we now live in a very global village, unfortunately, that means we get to inherit some of the village idiots from other places, which means that a lot of the disinformation that’s out there, such as the Cass report, makes its way into our headlines and our media …

I am sorry the Cass review has not vindicated Kenton Miller’s personal opinions. If he studied it more carefully, he might accord it more respect. But my real concern is what this says about the VEOHRC. I would care less if this were a charity or an advocacy organisation, but the fact is it is a taxpayer-funded, quasi-judicial body, supposed to present fair and objective guidance. It is appalling that employees in an organisation of this standing should abandon any pretence of neutrality and act as paid activists for what has become, I am sorry to say, an ideological cause. We know all about the collapse in political neutrality in Victoria’s public service, but this illustrates an equally damaging but harder to police bias: that of activists and ideologues. It is appalling that individuals are allowed to push their own agendas with the backing of the state.

The action I seek of the minister is a statement clarifying whether this webinar reflected the view of the VEOHRC, and if not, what she will do to stop impolite, incorrect outbursts from public officials misleading Victorians in the future.