Key Takeaways
- The Australian government has proposed new hate speech and anti-vilification laws in response to the Bondi shooting
- The opposition leader, Sussan Ley, has come under pressure for her handling of the issue and her authority within the Coalition is under question
- The proposed legislation has been criticized by various groups, including the New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties and the Greens, for its potential to limit free speech and impose unfair restrictions
- The bill’s chances of passing in the Senate are uncertain, with the Greens representing the only viable pathway for the legislation
- The government and opposition should take a step back and reconsider their approach to addressing hate speech and anti-vilification, rather than rushing to pass legislation that may have unintended consequences
Introduction to the Bondi Shooting
The Bondi shooting, which occurred on December 14, was the worst terror attack on Australian soil and sparked a frenzy of activity in the country’s politics. In the aftermath of the attack, opposition leader Sussan Ley was quick to issue a statement offering the Coalition’s "full and unconditional support" for the government’s response. However, as the days turned into weeks, Ley’s position on the issue became increasingly complicated, and she found herself under pressure from within her own party and from the government.
The Coalition’s Response to the Attack
As the national security committee of cabinet met in Canberra and intelligence agencies and police scrambled to respond to the carnage, Ley appeared almost daily to demand that the government take action to address the issue of hate speech and anti-vilification. She called for a royal commission to be established and for parliament to be recalled to pass legislation to fight antisemitism. However, as the government proposed its own legislation, Ley found herself unable to support it, citing concerns that it would limit free speech and impose unfair restrictions. This decision was supported by a factional cross-section of Liberals, but it has left Ley’s authority within the Coalition and her credibility with voters under serious pressure.
The Proposed Legislation
The government’s proposed legislation combines tough new legal protections with provisions to establish a national guns buyback scheme. However, the bill has been criticized by various groups, including the New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties and the Greens, for its potential to limit free speech and impose unfair restrictions. The committee charged with reviewing the draft laws held a two-day inquiry and is working through the weekend to prepare a hurried report. Despite this, thousands of submissions remain unread, and the deputy chair of the committee, Liberal National MP Phil Thompson, has expressed concerns about the bill’s potential impact on free speech.
Criticism of the Legislation
The New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties has warned that the bill would impose significant limits on free speech, and that selective or biased enforcement by government and police was a recipe for failure. Anne Twomey, a leading constitutional expert, has likened provisions designed to ban hate groups to the Menzies government’s failed efforts to dissolve and ban the Australian Communist party in the 1950s. Twomey has warned that such laws might be unwise and unnecessary, and bring strong potential for abuse further down the line. The Coalition has also proposed that individual phrases considered antisemitic, including "globalise the intifada" and "from the river to the sea", be explicitly outlawed in the bill. However, legal experts have cautioned that this approach is risky and that the wider context of comments and the individuals making them should be considered.
The Politics of the Legislation
The politics of the draft legislation have become increasingly heated, with the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, accusing Ley of hypocrisy and the foreign minister, Penny Wong, alleging that Ley’s leadership was "unsalvageable". The treasurer, Jim Chalmers, has accused the Coalition of having lost the plot, suggesting that Ley was cooked. However, despite the politics, the fact remains that the bill would be bad law if passed in its current form. The government and opposition should take a step back and reconsider their approach to addressing hate speech and anti-vilification, rather than rushing to pass legislation that may have unintended consequences.
Conclusion and Next Steps
As MPs prepare to head to Canberra for a special sitting next week, the fate of the proposed legislation remains uncertain. The Greens represent the only viable pathway for the legislation in the Senate, but they have expressed concerns about the bill’s potential to limit free speech and impose unfair restrictions. Labor says it is open to passing new laws for other groups in the future, including LGBTQ+ Australians and people with a disability. However, for now, the bill looks friendless, and both Ley and Albanese should learn from the rush to action in the wake of the Bondi attack, potentially saving themselves from future embarrassment and sparing the parliament from shoddy lawmaking.