Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2024
Mr BURKE (Watson—Minister for the Arts, Minister for Home Affairs, Minister for Cyber Security, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Leader of the House) (19:32): Right at this moment, in summing up, I thank everybody who has contributed to the debate. I should also thank all the officials and the clerks and the people at the Table Office at this time of night.
The circulating of amendments means there are people working very hard and making sure that, procedurally, everything is ready to go. I thank them for that, and I will effectively continue my summing-up speech until that process has concluded. In summing up, let me say, first of all, that this legislation will represent the toughest laws Australia has ever had against hate crimes.
We're doing that at a time when Australia needs the toughest laws it has ever had against hate crimes. What the parliament's doing in dealing with this legislation is acknowledging that a crime—for example, a crime against property—is already criminal. It should be criminal.
People should be caught and they should be punished when they engage in that sort of crime. But when the crime against property, at the same time, is designed in a way to cause fear and intimidation, and to be inspired by hatred of a group of Australians based on their race, their faith, their disability or who they love, then there is an extra layer of offence that the Australian people have.
The most high-profile of these crimes—the people who are members of these different groups—have all experienced this form of hate finding its way into violence for most of their lives. One of the saddest things is that while the people most affected by these hate crimes are distressed, they are often not surprised. Most of the publicity that we have seen of late has been about crimes relating to antisemitism—a form of bigotry that is as ancient as it is vile.
In bringing forward this legislation, the intention of the government is to see this go through both houses of parliament not with a small majority but with as many members of parliament coming together as possible in a show of unity to the Australian people that these hate crimes, these forms of bigotry, have no place in Australia at all. This is not about politics.
This is about whether the Australian parliament believes it's acceptable to advocate for, threaten or commit violence against another person because of who they are, who they pray to or who they love. The Albanese government have been steadfast in our condemnation of antisemitism, and we've been taking meaningful action. We've criminalised the public display of Nazi symbols and the Nazi salute and banned trading in Nazi items.
We've appointed the first Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism in Australia. We've established Special Operation Avalite as a joint agency between the AFP and ASIO to investigate and deliver high-impact disruptions and prosecutions and committed more than $57 million to improve safety and security at Jewish schools and synagogues. Many people might be aware that my part of Sydney, the area which I represent here, probably has the highest level of religious observance in Australia.
That's the nature of my part of Sydney. In my area, there are very few people who are Jewish. The engagement I've had with the Jewish community, in particular the members of the Adass Israel synagogue, has been particularly moving.
The community welcomed me from the moment I first turned up at the synagogue. The leadership has been phenomenal. Their sense of hope and generosity in the face of the hatred that they saw there can only inspire us to see the best of the Australian spirit.
It's a reminder of how their resilience represents the best of our country and how the way that the thugs who tried to destroy a place of worship represent views and attitudes that have no place in Australia at all. I will never forget that, following my first visit there only a few days later, it was mentioned to me, as it had been mentioned to the Prime Minister earlier that same day, that the rabbi's visa was soon to expire.
As the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs—the shadow portfolio that the member opposite once held, although when he held it, I'd held it before that as well—I took the strongest action that a minister for immigration can take in this country—that is, when someone has been told they don't belong, you respond loudly by making them a permanent resident.
To do that for the rabbi and all his family—we couldn't be in the same room at the time; I was interstate. I'd been at the synagogue earlier that week. I've visited the synagogue again since.
When we were there on our phones as he and his family became permanent residents, he was presenting each of them to me in front of the phone camera and they were waving. He made comment after comment about how much he loved Australia. He made comment after comment of praise for our country.
It was a pretty rare privilege. I've known members of the Jewish community all my life, but it's a community on my electoral roll that I don't engage with often as a local member of parliament. I always have through various portfolios, obviously.
I said to him: 'I know earlier this week, some people tried to tell you don't belong. Today, Australia says to you, "Welcome home."' It was an important moment and a moment that I'm very proud that the Albanese government was able to provide, sending that message that the thugs who wanted to tell that community they didn't belong were the ones who don't belong.
It was the thugs who don't match the values of this country. The bill today is not exclusively about protecting one part of our community from hate. I've dealt, as other people have in their contributions at length—looking at the clock, more than half my speech—specifically with the evil of antisemitism.
But this bill is not exclusively about protecting just one part of our community from hate. For too long, people have been the subject of abuse because of who they are, making them fearful to engage in so many aspects of life that we take for granted. Society has been robbed of their diversity when that happens.
This bill will protect all Australians, regardless of their race, ethnicity, faith, gender, who they love and whether they live with a disability. Government and laws alone can't change behaviour. The Director-General of Security reminded us recently that words matter.
Words really matter. I remember, for 10 years, running a series of protests to make sure that our hate speech laws in this country were not weakened. Walking through the streets of Lakemba, side by side with imams, priests, rabbis and various other religious leaders—all walking together—in a walk that had a simple title, the Walk for Respect, because it should be as simple as that.
People there were protesting against hate speech and protesting against the violence that can flow from hate speech. I had the privilege of organising the Walk of Respect, and the protestors who came—thousands of them turned up—were in a different situation to me, even though we walked together. I'll go the whole of my life in Australia without ever receiving hate speech because of who I am—because of my faith or ethnicity.
That was not historically always the case for Irish Catholics in this country, but it's been a few generations since any of that sectarianism prejudice seriously got in the way of someone's life. It's not something that will affect me. It's not a form of bigotry that I'll receive.
If I receive hate speech in the street, it'll be because of someone's view of what I've done, not because of someone's view of who I am. In commending this bill to the parliament, I want to repeat the words that have been used by Australia's Attorney-General, words that have been said by the Prime Minister and words that I would say to any Australian who receives hate speech because of who they are or because of their faith: 'You have a right to feel safe in the community.
You have a right to feel safe in Australia.' Anybody who says that hate speech is somehow a subset of freedom of speech doesn't understand that words can be bullets. They don't understand the direct line between some of the hate speech that has been levelled at different points to different parts of the community, and the violence that has followed. Australia is a better place when people are simply able to be themselves.
While the debate will focus, I suspect, on penalties and on a series of amendments to potentially adjust the bill in various ways—the focus of the debate often just goes to those amendments and adjustments. Let's not lose sight of the fact that we, as a parliament, are on the precipice now of putting in place the toughest laws against hate speech that Australia has ever had.
That's the moment that's before us. As a government, we want, on that journey, to know that the law itself isn't the end point, because the end point isn't just 'Can you catch someone? Can you lock them up?' We want to be able to do that, but the end point that we're actually striving for here is that we want people to be safe.
The end point we're striving for here is for people to be able to get on with their lives here in Australia without being subjected to this. That's the end point that we all seek. The government believes that part of being able to get there is being able to send that message to all Australians, a message which is not only an enforcement message but also a goodwill message.
It is best sent by us trying to secure the largest possible majority of members of parliament who are able to stand together and send a message to the nation that these forms of hatred are not who we are. I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to.
Bill read a second time.