Unfair, unwanted, unnecessary Anti-Discrimination changes must be halted

 Inadequate consultation on changes to Anti Discrimination Act

 Labor will oppose Bill

 Hodgman Government determined to water down fundamental protections

The Hodgman Liberal Government must immediately withdraw its determined effort to water down Tasmania’s Anti-Discrimination Act which achieves nothing more than an open invitation to allow speech that incites hate.

Shadow Attorney-General Lara Giddings said the government had not only failed to adequately consult on its unnecessary and unfair changes to the Act but was now roundly ignoring widespread community opposition to the move.

“The government is refusing to listen to community concern,” Ms Giddings said.

“The Premier and the Attorney-General have failed to adequately consult with Tasmanians on their proposed changes and they have not allowed sufficient time for the community to consider these very, very important issues.

“Labor has consulted widely and Tasmanians on both sides of this debate are unhappy with the approach being taken by the government.

“At the very least, the government should withdraw this Bill and take the time to listen to the concerns of all Tasmanians instead of relying on the Legislative Council to do their work for them.

“Changes to the Anti-Discrimination Act will open the door to speech that incites hate in Tasmania and that door should remain firmly closed.

“It’s particularly pertinent that these changes should not be permitted in the lead-up to the Federal Government’s planned plebiscite on marriage equality. The publicly funded plebiscite will open the door for potentially very damaging – if not downright nasty – messages to be spread in the community, as occurred in Ireland.

“Mr Hodgman and the Attorney-General know that freedom of speech comes with the responsibility not to do harm to others and that current anti-discrimination laws protect Tasmanians from harmful speech.
“They also know there is no such thing as unfettered freedom of speech – not even in Parliament with Parliamentary privilege do we have unfettered freedom of speech.

“These changes risk taking us back 20 years in social reform. By turning back the clock, we risk going back to the old days when the likes of wolf-whistling was considered by the whistler to be a compliment to women and people felt free to denigrate others on the basis of race, sexual identity, gender and so on.

“It’s shameful they have chosen to attack our protections. It’s shameful they are not listening.

“It’s shameful that they are seeking to permit speech that is not permitted currently and should never be.”
Lara Giddings Shadow Attorney-General