The state government will soon release draft changes to the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Act, one of which provides a reasonability test for religious freedom during public debate.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Gay marriage advocates have questioned the timing of the changes, saying that it will play into the hands of marriage equality opponents ahead of a national plebiscite on the issue.
The government yesterday announced along with the change, it would amend the Act to allow the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner to reject a complaint if they were of the opinion that a person would not anticipated that offence, humiliation, intimidation or insult would have been caused by their actions.
Attorney General Vanessa Goodwin said there were concerns that the complaint acceptance threshold was too low and exposed respondents to lengthy, costly and stressful proceedings, even if the complaint was ultimately dismissed.
Discussion in parliament on the law changes on Wednesday was prompted by a question from Greens leader Cassy O’Connor.
She expressed concerns about any planned changes to section 17 of the Act, regarding sex, age, and race discrimination – and sexual harassment.
Premier Will Hodgman said there were no intentions to change section 17 and that the other changes would get the balance between free speech and protection from discrimination.
Anti-Discrimination Commissioner Robin Banks believed no changes were needed at all.
“In my opinion, we have the right balance already … these changes are unnecessary,” she said.
Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group spokesman Rodney Croome said he feared anti-gay marriage campaigners would exploit the softened law provision on religious freedom.
Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group spokesman Rodney Croome said he feared anti-gay marriage campaigners would exploit the softened law provision on religious freedom.
"This is exactly the wrong time to water down the Anti-Discrimination Act because it will give a green light to those who want to exploit the proposed marriage equality plebiscite to stir up anti-gay hatred,” he said.
“It is never reasonable to denigrate other people in the name of religion,” he said.
Australian Christian Lobby Tasmanian director Mark Brown said laws needed to be changed so free speech and debate could progress without fear of prosecution.
“There are always going to be some people that will not be able to communicate in a respectful way but we will hope that people will be able to share their views in a way that is not hurtful,” he said.
Hobart Catholic Archbishop Julian Porteous welcomed the change on the freedom of religion issue but said a thorough review of section 17 was needed.
"Those not acting in a formal religious capacity would still face the threat of being unjustly silenced by the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner," he said.
“It is important than any change made to the Act also protects the freedom of individuals to advance a position on marriage in a respectful way.”
Ms O’Connor said the government was bowing to the right wing of its party and church lobbyists in making the change.
“It is dangerous to change laws to weaken protections for certain groups of people at the behest of a powerful church lobby,” she said.
Ms O’Connor said the changes were unnecessary given that there was already a reasonability test within the legislation.
Labor’s Rebecca White said the party had seen no evidence that indicated changes were necessary
“We don’t want to be in a situation when people can make hateful comments and hurtful comments under the law,” she said.
