Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well. Unions NT claim the COLP government's changes to anti
discrimination laws are going to undermine workers' rights and the
territory lifestyle. The reforms that we know pass through Parliament overnight.
They're going to remove vague language that made it unlawful
to cause offense and replace it with a higher legal threshold,
(00:20):
being conduct that incites hatred, serious contempt to all, severe ridicule.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Now.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
The reforms also restore the ability for faith based schools
to prioritize staff who upload their religious values uphold. I
should say g I'm struggling with my words this morning. Now.
Unions claim that the reforms will erode the rights of
queer and transgender workers, lead to a rise in racist remarks,
(00:46):
and make legal recourse harder. Joining me on the line
is the ASU's assistant secretary, Ella Waters. Good morning, Ella.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
Hi Katie, thanks for having me on.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Yeah, lovely to have you on the show. Now, Ella
tells us, can you break down the union's concerns in
relation to the changes to antidiscrimination laws.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
Yeah. Absolutely.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
We say that these changes take the territory backwards because
they strip away protections that were working really well and
for already marginalized people at greater risk of harm and discrimination.
There's no evidence that this was needed and no real
consultation with the people most affected by these changes, and
we say it's unnecessary and a dangerous step back for
equality in the NP.
Speaker 1 (01:30):
Break down those concerns for us in terms of you
know what, like what you're sort of worried might happen
now with these changes. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Absolutely, So what the government has done yesterday is we
can our hate speech protection, so the offensive or intimidating
behavior will only be unlawful if that incites hatred.
Speaker 3 (01:51):
So that means a lot.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Of harmful behavior that was covered may no longer be
against the law. And on top of that, they've given
to school's new powers to discriminate in employment and workplace conduct,
So now a teacher, admin worker, or support staff member
could be refused a job or disciplined because of who
they are, including who they love, their personal circumstances like
(02:15):
being divorced or a single parent, if it's not in
line with the school's religious ideology.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
We say they're.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
Really unnecessary changes made without evidence, without consultation, and without
listening to the people who know what discrimination feels like
and that it's a step backwards.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
I know, when the changes came into place under Labor
a couple of years ago, there was a lot like
a lot of different groups were coming on the show
and saying that they were really concerned about the changes
and that they were taking things too far. I mean,
what do you say to those that sort of wanted
these wound back a little?
Speaker 3 (02:48):
Yeah, So, I mean, I guess there's two parts to it.
Speaker 2 (02:51):
So for example, with the religious school exemption now previously
to the or I guess with the twenty twenty two amendments,
there was still the ability for people to employ for
these organizations to employ people of their own faith for
genuine religious roles, but where the new changes from yesterday
(03:11):
would see all workers within a school, for example, having
these new changes applied to them. So, for example, you know,
you can imagine a teacher, perhaps in a religious based school,
has gone through a divorce. They're really good at their
job and they love their jobs, but under these changes,
their employer could decide that their personal life doesn't align
(03:33):
with their religious sensibilities of the school and they could
lose their job.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
And I know as well that the unions sort of
raised and I guess, you know, it could be part
of that scenario, you know, raise the fact that there
has to be that higher legal threshold when it comes
to legal recourse.
Speaker 3 (03:49):
Also, yeah, look, we certainly, along with a lot of
community organizations, have questioned the COLP, stay that these changes
will be easier to understand because we don't feel that
the CLP have adequately explained what this change will mean
in their view.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
In practice, we certainly didn't see the sky fall in
under the twenty twenty two changes. There was not a
significance spiking complaints, but there was certainly a strong message
that everyone in the territory deserves respect and protection from
hate speech.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
I know that issued a statement overnight and said that
the incitement model, which is already used in most Australian jurisdictions,
provides a better balance between freedom of speech and the
right to non discrimination and equity. They reckon that labor
tried the will tied I should say, the hands of
territorians and blurred those lines between genuine discrimination and simply
(04:48):
expressing an opinion. And they've changed that. I mean, what
do you say to that claim by the CLP.
Speaker 2 (04:56):
So, until until now, the Northern Territory was seen as
a real leader in anti discrimination law, and the laws
that you refer to were really in line with the
Commonwealth Act. So the twenty twenty two reforms gave us
some of the strongest protections in the country, which we
say were modern and balanced and built after years of
consultation with the community, which I think is really important
(05:17):
to add. Whereas these changes really were done quickly with
very limited consultation for those who are really going to
be impacted by this.
Speaker 3 (05:26):
So every other state and.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Territory, we say, have been moving in the opposite direction
to what the CLP government's doing right now, and it's
a terrible shame.
Speaker 1 (05:34):
Ella. I know that as part of the pressure release
that you guys sent out yesterday, you said that these
changes are going to impact the territory lifestyle. How do
you reckon they're going to do that?
Speaker 2 (05:46):
Yeah? I mean our members at the ASU work in
the social and community sector and they tell us stories about,
for example, people with disability who they support day to day,
people are now well people under this change. Disability advocates
are telling us that their clients and participants have said
that they're concerned about catching the bus, they are concerned
(06:09):
about going out, so much, and they're considering withdrawing from
community life because they're scared of what they might cop.
We say that that's not freedom, that is actually fear,
and it's exactly what the twenty twenty two protections were
meant to prevent. And the Northern Territory, you know, should
have a proud reputation of making people in the community
(06:31):
feel safe and protected.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
Now, we just had a message come through that said,
good morning, Katie. When you speak to the union, can
you ask them to be specific and give an example
of what was covered previously but not covered now. Pedro says,
I get so annoyed with the negative attitudes from the left.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
Oh okay, So I mean, certainly, the increase to incitement
of hatred and serious contempt is a really high bar,
and that was what was changed yesterday. So in practice
it means that not only if someone it's not only
that someone may be sorry intimidating someone or you know,
(07:10):
yelling hate speech at someone. They now the bar, we
understand is that they have to be inciting others to
do so as well.
Speaker 3 (07:18):
So we just think that that bar is.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
Way too high and does not protect people in our community.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
Well, good to speak to you this morning.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Ella.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
I know that everybody's got pretty different opinions when it
comes to you know, when it comes to these changes.
I know some people feel that they go too far,
some people feel they're not going far enough. It's you know,
it's I guess time will tell, right.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
Yeah, Katie, can I just finish by saying that it's
a time when Territorians are really struggling with a lot
of issues like the cost of living and housing. The
government's chosen to focus on taking away rights and protections
instead of helping people. So we think that this is
a terrible use of their time and energy lawering the
thresholds for hate speech, and that they should be focusing
on really important work that protects territory. And so thanks
(08:03):
for the having me on.
Speaker 1 (08:05):
No worries at all, will as you, Assistant Secretary Ella Waters,
thanks so much for your time this morning.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Thank you, thank you,
Well. Unions NT claim the COLP government's changes to anti
discrimination laws are going to undermine workers' rights and the
territory lifestyle. The reforms that we know pass through Parliament overnight.
They're going to remove vague language that made it unlawful
to cause offense and replace it with a higher legal threshold,
(00:20):
being conduct that incites hatred, serious contempt to all, severe ridicule.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Now.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
The reforms also restore the ability for faith based schools
to prioritize staff who upload their religious values uphold. I
should say g I'm struggling with my words this morning. Now.
Unions claim that the reforms will erode the rights of
queer and transgender workers, lead to a rise in racist remarks,
(00:46):
and make legal recourse harder. Joining me on the line
is the ASU's assistant secretary, Ella Waters. Good morning, Ella.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
Hi Katie, thanks for having me on.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Yeah, lovely to have you on the show. Now, Ella
tells us, can you break down the union's concerns in
relation to the changes to antidiscrimination laws.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
Yeah. Absolutely.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
We say that these changes take the territory backwards because
they strip away protections that were working really well and
for already marginalized people at greater risk of harm and discrimination.
There's no evidence that this was needed and no real
consultation with the people most affected by these changes, and
we say it's unnecessary and a dangerous step back for
equality in the NP.
Speaker 1 (01:30):
Break down those concerns for us in terms of you
know what, like what you're sort of worried might happen
now with these changes. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Absolutely, So what the government has done yesterday is we
can our hate speech protection, so the offensive or intimidating
behavior will only be unlawful if that incites hatred.
Speaker 3 (01:51):
So that means a lot.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Of harmful behavior that was covered may no longer be
against the law. And on top of that, they've given
to school's new powers to discriminate in employment and workplace conduct,
So now a teacher, admin worker, or support staff member
could be refused a job or disciplined because of who
they are, including who they love, their personal circumstances like
(02:15):
being divorced or a single parent, if it's not in
line with the school's religious ideology.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
We say they're.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
Really unnecessary changes made without evidence, without consultation, and without
listening to the people who know what discrimination feels like
and that it's a step backwards.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
I know, when the changes came into place under Labor
a couple of years ago, there was a lot like
a lot of different groups were coming on the show
and saying that they were really concerned about the changes
and that they were taking things too far. I mean,
what do you say to those that sort of wanted
these wound back a little?
Speaker 3 (02:48):
Yeah, So, I mean, I guess there's two parts to it.
Speaker 2 (02:51):
So for example, with the religious school exemption now previously
to the or I guess with the twenty twenty two amendments,
there was still the ability for people to employ for
these organizations to employ people of their own faith for
genuine religious roles, but where the new changes from yesterday
(03:11):
would see all workers within a school, for example, having
these new changes applied to them. So, for example, you know,
you can imagine a teacher, perhaps in a religious based school,
has gone through a divorce. They're really good at their
job and they love their jobs, but under these changes,
their employer could decide that their personal life doesn't align
(03:33):
with their religious sensibilities of the school and they could
lose their job.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
And I know as well that the unions sort of
raised and I guess, you know, it could be part
of that scenario, you know, raise the fact that there
has to be that higher legal threshold when it comes
to legal recourse.
Speaker 3 (03:49):
Also, yeah, look, we certainly, along with a lot of
community organizations, have questioned the COLP, stay that these changes
will be easier to understand because we don't feel that
the CLP have adequately explained what this change will mean
in their view.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
In practice, we certainly didn't see the sky fall in
under the twenty twenty two changes. There was not a
significance spiking complaints, but there was certainly a strong message
that everyone in the territory deserves respect and protection from
hate speech.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
I know that issued a statement overnight and said that
the incitement model, which is already used in most Australian jurisdictions,
provides a better balance between freedom of speech and the
right to non discrimination and equity. They reckon that labor
tried the will tied I should say, the hands of
territorians and blurred those lines between genuine discrimination and simply
(04:48):
expressing an opinion. And they've changed that. I mean, what
do you say to that claim by the CLP.
Speaker 2 (04:56):
So, until until now, the Northern Territory was seen as
a real leader in anti discrimination law, and the laws
that you refer to were really in line with the
Commonwealth Act. So the twenty twenty two reforms gave us
some of the strongest protections in the country, which we
say were modern and balanced and built after years of
consultation with the community, which I think is really important
(05:17):
to add. Whereas these changes really were done quickly with
very limited consultation for those who are really going to
be impacted by this.
Speaker 3 (05:26):
So every other state and.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Territory, we say, have been moving in the opposite direction
to what the CLP government's doing right now, and it's
a terrible shame.
Speaker 1 (05:34):
Ella. I know that as part of the pressure release
that you guys sent out yesterday, you said that these
changes are going to impact the territory lifestyle. How do
you reckon they're going to do that?
Speaker 2 (05:46):
Yeah? I mean our members at the ASU work in
the social and community sector and they tell us stories about,
for example, people with disability who they support day to day,
people are now well people under this change. Disability advocates
are telling us that their clients and participants have said
that they're concerned about catching the bus, they are concerned
(06:09):
about going out, so much, and they're considering withdrawing from
community life because they're scared of what they might cop.
We say that that's not freedom, that is actually fear,
and it's exactly what the twenty twenty two protections were
meant to prevent. And the Northern Territory, you know, should
have a proud reputation of making people in the community
(06:31):
feel safe and protected.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
Now, we just had a message come through that said,
good morning, Katie. When you speak to the union, can
you ask them to be specific and give an example
of what was covered previously but not covered now. Pedro says,
I get so annoyed with the negative attitudes from the left.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
Oh okay, So I mean, certainly, the increase to incitement
of hatred and serious contempt is a really high bar,
and that was what was changed yesterday. So in practice
it means that not only if someone it's not only
that someone may be sorry intimidating someone or you know,
(07:10):
yelling hate speech at someone. They now the bar, we
understand is that they have to be inciting others to
do so as well.
Speaker 3 (07:18):
So we just think that that bar is.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
Way too high and does not protect people in our community.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
Well, good to speak to you this morning.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Ella.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
I know that everybody's got pretty different opinions when it
comes to you know, when it comes to these changes.
I know some people feel that they go too far,
some people feel they're not going far enough. It's you know,
it's I guess time will tell, right.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
Yeah, Katie, can I just finish by saying that it's
a time when Territorians are really struggling with a lot
of issues like the cost of living and housing. The
government's chosen to focus on taking away rights and protections
instead of helping people. So we think that this is
a terrible use of their time and energy lawering the
thresholds for hate speech, and that they should be focusing
on really important work that protects territory. And so thanks
(08:03):
for the having me on.
Speaker 1 (08:05):
No worries at all, will as you, Assistant Secretary Ella Waters,
thanks so much for your time this morning.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Thank you, thank you,
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.