Crimes Amendment (Inciting Racial Hatred) Bill 2025

I contribute to debate on the Crimes Amendment (Inciting Racial Hatred) Bill 2025, which I support. What an ugly place we find ourselves in—not physically, but rather in that space in our society where hatred grows against those who are different to us. I know that every member of this House is feeling the weight, and sharing the burden, that many in our communities are suffering because they do not know where they will next experience hatred aimed at them, people they love or, indeed, people they may not even know but for whose welfare they are concerned, as human beings and members of their community. We feel for them. It simply should not happen in a civil society.

Like others, I express my sympathy and support for our State's Jewish community. The racially motivated attacks aimed at them are abhorrent and cannot be tolerated. At the same time, I am concerned for other racial and faith groups targeted by hateful ignorance. With the terrible rise in this type of hate, particularly evident in the antisemitic hate speech too frequently occurring, the Government must obviously take swift action. If that action is not fully supported, then the resolve of this Parliament will be questioned and, indeed, diminished.

I take a moment to reflect on the extraordinary contribution of the member for Heffron. I think most members have heard the speech or heard of it. I have been in this place for a long time, Madam Deputy Speaker, as have you. We have heard lots of speeches on significant matters. It is rare for a member to be able to bring into this place something not just of their lived experience but that is deeply embedded in their family. I know that is not the preferred way for the member for Heffron. He looks at these matters in a very objective way. It was extraordinary for him to be motivated to bring forward his story. It was a privilege to be in the Chamber and listen to it. I think that would be the position of most members who heard it. I thank the member for Heffron for his extraordinary contribution to debate, not on this bill in particular but on these bills generally.

I understand members' concerns with the haste with which this bill is going through the Parliament—those raised by the Opposition and by the Manager of Opposition Business, and shadow Attorney General—but I believe that the abbreviated passage of the bill reflects the Government's best intentions to address these appalling attacks in a timely manner. Yet it must be acknowledged that laws enacted quickly and in response to emergencies have, at times, had undesired and unforeseen consequences. An example was mandatory minimum sentencing, which I spoke strongly against in this place. The relevant cognate bills, which included lockout laws in Sydney, were debated and passed with extraordinary haste in this House in the early days of the relatively new Coalition Government in 2014. It is therefore vital that laws passed urgently have robust review mechanisms to determine whether their application is, in fact, achieving the desired objective. Scrutiny is particularly important in this case, where the bill forms part of a reform package with constitutional, criminal law and human rights implications.

The wording of the bill may be simple on its face, but the underlying concepts are certainly complex. Statutory review of the bill's provisions 12 months after its commencement will give Parliament the opportunity to reflect on whether the offence is necessary and proportionate to achieve its intended purpose of stopping public incitement of racial hatred. That review, together with the general review of hate speech laws announced by the Attorney General, will help to ensure that criminal offences for inciting hatred are fit for purpose and that they properly respond to the evolving social and political landscape in Australia and abroad. I commend the Attorney General and the Government for taking action quickly, even in light of my earlier cautionary words. Legislation is rarely perfect, and hurried legislation is even more prone to fault. However, as I said, the bill is relatively simple, dealing with a complex and urgent matter. For that reason, I give it my support.