Equality Act delayed until after election
A Senate committee has recommended an inquiry for a federal equality act that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity with new enforcement powers.
But the inquiry wouldn’t report until 2011 -” after the next federal election -” and the move has already been opposed by the Opposition.
This comes as complaints to the Australian Human Rights Commission about homophobia in the media or commercial services are being turned away because federal protections don’t go that far.
Andrew James was one of those turned away after finding no federal regulatory authority was prepared to consider a sexuality discrimination complaint unless he was sacked -” a requirement not attached to discrimination based on race, sex, age or disability.
At present, you have more chance of receiving [the Commission’s] help if you’ve been discriminated against because you’re married, than you do if you’re gay. Has anyone stopped to think about just how absurd that is? Equality means everyone, you don’t get to pick and choose which minority groups are worthy of protection and which are not, he said.
To put sexual preference in the same category as criminal history, religious and union affiliation is the Government’s way of saying, -˜Being homosexual is within your control and therefore we will only protect you if you get fired from your job -” for anything else, you’re on your own’.
He didn’t believe those fighting discrimination should have to wait three years for the politicians to remedy the blinding inadequacies of the current federal laws.
Under the proposal for 2011, a completely new complaints system and enforcement powers would be given to the Commission.
The senate committee examining the effectiveness of the Sex Discrimination Act also recommended it be amended to protect same-sex couples from discrimination on the basis of their relationship status.
The marital status protections were a good start, the Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby said last week, but would affect only a small part of the discrimination faced by gay and lesbian people in areas like employment, education, services and accommodation.
There is no place for discrimination against GLBT people in Australia in 2008. The need for comprehensive discrimination protection on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity should be a top priority for the Government, Lobby spokesman Peter Johnson said.
With increasing interactions between the GLBT community and federal service providers following the recent same-sex reforms, the need for federal discrimination protection is more pressing than ever.
Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young, who was on the committee, also thought the recommendations didn’t go far enough, saying the marital status definitions should include registered relationships legally recognised by states and territories. Further, she wanted sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination tackled via a new dedicated federal law that could address gaps in state and territory laws.
Liberal senators also dissented from the committee’s report and agreed with Australian Christian Lobby concerns that the Sex Discrimination Act prevents states from banning single women and lesbians from IVF.
All things being equal and as part of our federal system of government, state and territory parliaments should be able to make or amend such laws on the basis that the best interests of the child concerned are the overriding consideration, the Liberal senators wrote.
The Liberals also opposed an Equality Act, declaring the lack of any compelling evidence of deficiencies in the existing legislative scheme (particularly in light of additional protection available under state and territory legislation), there is no evidentiary basis for this recommendation.
Have your say: Do you agree with the Liberals that there is no need for more anti-discrimination protections on the grounds of sexuality or gender identity? Tell us at www.starobserver.com
In regards to me last post it was not last election in WA but the election before that.
Craig B – Your lucky, one of the reasons personally I would like a federal anti-discrimination act that covers sexuality and transexuality etc, is because if you remember at the last state election in WA, the western australian oposition state government (dirty liberals) was considering repaling the anti-discrimination laws which protect lgbt in WA.
I work for a catholic organisation in Brisbane, originally established by nuns, while the nuns do not have a direct impact on the day to day running of the organisaiton their original values are still the frame the organisaiton’s operation.
As a counsellor and am out at work and out with other referring organisations, as necessary. I have not experienced any direct or indirect discrimination.
I feel that organisations regardless of their platform need to consider what the individual brings to their role – too many organisations in my personal and professional experience fail to consider the benefits that are gained by a diverse workplace. Too many managers and organisations work for a damage control perspective – a deficit model, not a strengths perspective.
I recall Penny Wong dangling this legislation as some sort of pay off for selling gay marriage down the plughole. Now we find out the truth, it’s just garbage fed to us, along with any rubbish about caring about gay old pensioners and lesbian old pensioners, who await the decision to grandfather them from elder abuse in 2009.
What a sell out and a shameful display from the ALP.
Go to the URBIS consultations in Sydney and tell them that gay old pensioners are not disposable junk that can be thrown in the bin, rendered impoverished and ignored. Straight pensioners are our allies and they are not timid and afraid either.
Stephen is correct in many ways. Stephen must remember, however, that the churches are given specific exemptions from the anti-discrimination laws. Perhaps Stephen would choose to come on board in an adventure to remove government funding from those organisations that specifically discriminate against lbgtqi people. … Hit those homophobes where it hurts them the most, in the pocketbook.
The Coalition sticks to their discriminatory policies because it’s how they continue to get elected. They appeal to the bigots and the homophobes who would like to see us all disappear.
I don’t agree with the Liberals on this issue and I urge Malcolm Turnbull and George Brandis to give the matter more consideration. The services sector of the Australian economy is huge and employs many gays, lesbians and people with gender identity issues. The federal government funds many of its educational, health, welfare and employment programs by outsourcing service delivery to private operators. These operators are spending taxpayers’ dollars and should be bound by strict anti-discrimination laws. Any exemptions for religious and conscience reasons should be severely limited.
I was subjected to ongoing harassment, discrimination and vilification for the four years that I worked as a counsellor for the Catholic Church. Alas, the anti-discrimination laws in NSW are so weak and ineffectual that it would have been almost impossible for me to bring an action against the church. We need anti-discrimination legislation at both state and federal levels that GLBTI people can actually access and which enforce just outcomes. It should also be the case that the exemptions afforded to religious agencies that provide government services are repealed.