Thursday, 17 October 2024

 David LIMBRICK (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (12:35): (700) My question is for the Attorney-General. When the Nazi salute prohibition was brought in, the Attorney indicated that she hoped this law would never be used. However, I feared that the laws would quickly create a martyr for this insidious ideology. Unfortunately, I was right. Within days after royal assent of the bill a man was charged, and it has been indicated that he will in fact serve time in prison. This has been framed as something historic by these people and is actively being used for recruitment. Suffice to say the salute ban has backfired. Given the government’s poor track record on legislating away hateful ideas, what consideration has been given by the Attorney-General to the possibility that the proposed anti-vilification reforms may also backfire?

 Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Services) (12:35): I thank Mr Limbrick for his question. I reject the premise of your question in relation to the way you have characterised the Nazi salute ban. I was very proud to bring about legislation that is outlawing a symbol of hate, a symbol that causes fear and a symbol that causes distress and trauma particularly for our Jewish community and indeed other groups and minorities in Victoria which have been subjected to hateful speech and gestures. I do not believe it has been a failure. I maintain I would prefer that people are not charged with it, but if you are going to display these hateful ideologies and symbols and gestures in public then I expect police to charge people, and that is what we have seen has happened. In relation to the anti-vilification laws, as I gave an update to the house on Tuesday, these were undertaken with extensive consultation. They will be introduced into the Parliament this year, and we will have an opportunity to explore the impact and the importance of the purposes of those laws, which are about making sure that there is an appropriate framework to respond to hate speech, incitement and threats based on a person’s attribute. Again, I do not want to have these laws introduced in Victoria. I would much prefer that people treat each other with respect. I would like people to feel safe. Unfortunately, people have felt the need to call for laws for greater protection, and that is what I plan to do.

 David LIMBRICK (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (12:37): I thank the Attorney for her answer. My supplementary question is: how will the government measure the success of any new anti-vilification regime?

 Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Services) (12:37): In terms of what I would like to achieve with anti-vilification laws, it is for everyone in Victoria to feel accepted, to feel a part of the community, to be proud of themselves and not have to pretend they are someone else. Success would be not having to have the laws applied but to bring about a measure of incentive to act appropriately, to treat people with respect and to not bring about harm to people because of a particular attribute. The less the laws are used, the more successful we will have been.