40,000 voices, but the one that really counts is staying quiet
The Womp
* Michelle Grattan
* Source:
http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/40000-voices-but-the-one-that-really-counts-is-staying-quiet-20090706-daei.html?page=-1
THE inquiry, chaired by Jesuit lawyer Frank Brennan, into whether
Australia should have a human rights charter has had to seek a month's
extension, until the end of September.
One reason is its staff of 13 is struggling with a welter of
submissions � about 40,000 to be precise.
Most are of the mass-produced variety. Amnesty, GetUp, the Australian
Christian Lobby and others have mobilised large numbers. But a couple
of thousand are more substantial, some running to hundreds of pages.
The rights issue is a boutique one but views run deep, and sometimes
counter-intuitively. As shadow attorney-general George Brandis says in
the Federal Opposition's submission, "The non-Labor side of politics
is virtually united in its opposition to the proposal. The Labor Party
is divided." One of the strongest Labor opponents is former NSW
premier Bob Carr, who wrote in The Age recently: "More judicial review
is the last thing Australia needs."
Victoria's new Police Commissioner, Simon Overland, has been positive;
the Police Federation has worries. Retired Victorian federal court
judges Ron Merkel (pro) and Peter Heerey (anti) have put opposing
views, as have former Victorian governor James Gobbo (against) and
high-profile barrister Julian Burnside (for). One-time federal justice
minister and now priest Michael Tate is opposed. Like Brandis, he
leans to more parliamentary oversight.
Last week the inquiry (formally called the National Human Rights
Consultation Committee) held a three-day conference in Canberra, which
heard a combination of advocacy and personal experiences, including
from Mustafa Najib, who was on the Tampa and incarcerated on Nauru.
Besides Brennan, other committee members are former police chief Mick
Palmer, former TV presenter Mary Kostakidis, indigenous activist Tammy
Williams and (for some of the time) Philip Flood, a former Foreign
Affairs Department secretary.
Even this late, it is unclear precisely how the committee's report
will come out, but some trends are becoming clear. Numerically, most
submissions favour a charter. But there are significant warnings even
from some pro-charter quarters.
The Victorian Government waves the flag of vested interest. Victoria
has a charter, and supports a federal one � provided it keeps to its
own sphere, applying to "federal public authorities only" and
preserving the Victorian charter's operation. Victoria also argues for
gradualism. The federal charter should protect "civil and political
rights", considering economic, social and cultural rights later.
The Rudd Government has already circumscribed the inquiry, ruling out
constitutional change. Given it is unwilling to bite on the republic
issue any time soon, it is unsurprising the Government didn't want to
even think about a constitutional charter; anyway, a referendum would
be a dry gully.
But this exclusion has prompted contrarian criticism from the
Opposition. In its submission, Brandis argues that "while the
Opposition would not favour that option", the Government's removal of
a constitutional bill of rights from the deliberations means the
discussion has been "pre-emptively narrowed".
Brennan initially said he was a fence-sitter on whether a charter was
desirable. It is believed he now favours a charter but one that is
minimalist � that is, confining itself to federal matters and civil
and political rights, and keeping judges to their traditional role
rather than being able to order politicians to revise valid laws. It's
harder to pick where other members of the committee sit.
Brennan told The Age the public hearings (which have been going on for
months) had been very useful in highlighting "the complexities that
would be involved in a federal charter". Brennan says: "Many people
from marginal groups who appeared strongly supported a charter.
Whether or not there will be a federal charter giving a greater role
to judges overseeing legislation for human rights compliance, there is
strong support for greater parliamentary scrutiny for legislation to
ensure such compliance and a pervasive sense that public servants and
public authorities need to be made more attentive to human rights
considerations."
"Whether that's best done by involving the courts � the public jury is
out on that."
The committee has finished its hearings and is tying up the odds and
ends of its consultative process. Yesterday, Brennan, who wrote to all
federal parliamentarians seeking input, met Mark Arbib, new minister
and power figure from the NSW Right, who is close to Prime Minister
Kevin Rudd. The NSW Right is known to have strong reservations about a
rights charter � Attorney-General John Hatzistergos is bitterly
opposed.
Assuming the committee recommends a limited charter, what will the
Government do with such a proposal? Not much in the short run,
probably. This isn't something that Rudd is thought to be passionate
about and he has enough else on his plate. But a charter would bring
Australia into line with other countries and so, provided it was not
going to cause the Government trouble, it could well become a
second-term item.
Michelle Grattan is political editor.
--
Clean Feed, it "cleans" the Internet in the same way that Ethnic
Cleansing "cleanses" the population.