Ever since Australia legislated marriage equality in late 2017, religious discrimination laws have been high on the Christian right’s agenda and they came a step closer early this morning when the Morrison government’s religious discrimination bill was passed in the House of Representatives, its third attempt at getting a divisive piece of legislation up.
But the gruelling session delivered pyrrhic victories for everyone. Five of the government’s MPs crossed the floor to vote with Labor on a critical amendment to the Sex Discrimination Act, which will provide much-needed protection against discrimination for gay and transgender students, moved by Centre Alliance’s Rebekha Sharkie.
And while the opposition celebrated this as a progressive victory, it narrowly lost three votes seeking to amend the government’s bill, despite support from dissenting Liberal moderates.
Labor is adamant it will be able to secure those amendments in the Senate. The crossbench is less sure. But it sets up another showdown today as time runs out for it to pass before the election.
Why Labor voted for the bill
Labor’s support for the bill — it voted with the government to secure its passage after its amendments were defeated — drew a fair bit of flak from some on the left.
“Labor has just supported Scott Morrison’s hate bill, saying it’s terrible but then voting it into law,” Greens leader Adam Bandt said.
Labor’s position is a bit of a tightrope — in principle, the party supports extending protection against discrimination to people of faith. But it doesn’t like the government’s model, and wants to smoothe its harder edges.
“We determined as a matter of principle something that we hold very dear, that we support the removal or the extension of any discrimination legislation to cover discrimination on the basis of religion, or on the basis of faith,” Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese said.
“But we don’t believe that should be at a cost of increasing discrimination against other groups.”
The party is also concerned about the sedge. Labor suffered losses among conservative, religious voters within its heartlands in 2019. There’s fear within caucus that Morrison might use any stiff opposition to the bill against it in an election campaign.
That caution coloured a long internal debate yesterday about how to respond to the final bill. For months, the opposition kept very quiet, insisting on waiting until the final legislation was revealed. Yesterday caucus voted to support the bill in the House if its amendments failed, and seek to introduce them again in the Senate. A handful of MPs called to oppose the bill in the House if amendments failed. This approach wasn’t backed.
What happens in the Senate
Now everything heads to the Senate, where the road is all very unclear. This morning Liberal Senator Jane Hume suggested the government would try to undo the amendments to the act and wind back protection for LGBTIQA+ students. But Assistant Attorney-General Amanda Stoker indicated the government hadn’t committed to that yet.
Labor hopes to reintroduce its amendments in the Senate, where it could remove the highly contentious statements of belief clause. With support from the Greens and crossbench senators Rex Patrick, Stirling Griff and Jacqui Lambie, Labor could defeat the bill outright. To get amendments through, it needs those senators, plus at least one Liberal defector. Liberal Senator Andrew Bragg, who indicated he wanted the statements of belief clause removed, could vote with Labor.
Patrick, Lambie and Griff have all said they opposed the bill throughout the debate. This morning Lambie said most Tasmanians “do not want change” which would override the state’s strong anti-discrimination protections. She also indicated Labor wouldn’t have the numbers to move its amendments.
“Even if we were to vote for Labor’s amendments, they don’t have the numbers, and that’s the truth of the matter,” she said.
Patrick tells Crikey he still opposed the bill but said it was unlikely to be resolved in the Senate today: “I think I would vote for amendments that would improve the bill, but overall I think the bill will still cause more harm than good.”
Today’s Senate order gives only just over an hour for government business. The only way to extend debate on religious discrimination is for the Senate to pass an hour’s motion. Patrick says he won’t support such a motion, and Crikey understands there’s little to no appetite on the crossbench and Labor for another all-nighter on religious discrimination.
After today, the Senate will sit for just two more days during budget week in late March, meaning the government might have run out of time.
The Christian Right is angry
Amid all the uncertainty, the bill’s strongest backers now want it gone. The Australian Christian Lobby, which pushed Attorney-General Michaelia Cash to introduce the bill last year, want it removed after amendments to the SDA removing the right to discriminate were removed last night.
“These protections have enabled faith-based schools to teach their religion and conduct their schools according to their faith values,” ACL’s national director of politics Wendy Francis said. “The loss of this protection would outweigh any benefits that could be obtained by the religious discrimination bill.”
After plenty of debate, nobody is really happy.
Scotty’s mob have pulled the bill from the Senate because Christian conservatives are having an apoplectic fit because Labor, Crossbench and moderate Liberals voted to protect those already marginalised.
How dare they interfere with the “rights” of Christian conservatives to discriminate against vulnerable innocents. Self righteous bigots leading a pathetically weak Coalition government around by the nose.
This bill was created for wedge politics. These are people’s lives those bastards are playing with. Unacceptable interference by religious organisations and a government that just doesn’t give a toss who they hurt and isolate. Appalling.
Yes. It has been removed from today’s Senate agenda, next week the Senate will not be discussing legislation and the only other sitting days scheduled before the election are 29 March (Budget Day) and the following day.
So the various Bills and Amendments to existing legislation will not be passed before the election.
Good result I think.
Good result but for the wrong reason – scheduling.
Principled integrity being a forgotten concept.
Principled integrity from this federal parliament? Yes it would have been better had it never been introduced but, with a PM trying to walk both sides of the street, the best we could have hoped for was a good result, even one for any wrong reason.
This bill should never have come about. It’s unnecessary and harmful. Religious zealots aka Christians seeking to hurt and harm others. Bin the bill.
I totally agree. There is a transgender teenager within my extended family and the harm done by this ill-informed, lop-sided discussion has had appalling consequence on the teenager’s mental health. The parents and grandparents know the suicide stats only too well and have been worried sick.
It is the most unChristian behaviour and the zealots need to go back and consider the original message.
It’s all so ridiculous and offensive, are there maybe some other things they should be attending to?
“After plenty of debate, nobody is really happy.”
I hope they are absolutely miserable. Unfortunately most seem beyond shame. Personally I am furious.
It’s has made me angry as well. Religious freedoms…they’ve always had religious freedom. It makes me sick to my stomach.
But what they want is a Bill that enshrines their freedom to discriminate. I mean, that’s what Jesus did. He supported the Pharisees against the poor, the sick and the… oh, wait.
I’m not a believer but I have family and friends who are. Their Christian practises differ to the point of being total opposite to what I see Christian conservatives and Scotty practice. Demanding a right to discriminate against Australians already marginalised is hardly Christian behaviour.
I am a believe who cringes whenever Morrison claims to be a Christian.
For a start Christians do not lock up refugees vis a vis Second Great Commandment about loving/caring for your neighbours. A command from the boss man himself.
In the army disobeying a direct command would have you in real trouble.
Wait, isn’t Smirky in deep dodo now?
There are people who do not get the full array of religious freedoms that we associate with rich christian churches. It does not follow that the LNP’s RD bill was any good, just that there are people who would have benefitted from the anti-vilification provision in Labor’s amendments, which the LNP (and Green MHR, I think)) rejected. I personally think it is wrong that a muslim or a sikh or a jew or any person of faith can be vilified. The non-Christians are the 10% of australians (53% of residents say they are faith followers, 44% say they are christians), who are vulnerable. The dilemma is – what if you are a gay member of a religious minority which does not think gay people (for e.g.) should be allowed to be themselves? If you are an adult you can leave your place of worship or even your faith; but if you are a child, well – at the moment – you just tolerate being discriminated against by your faith organisation, for being who you are. So, IMHO, there is actually a human rights issue that needs to be seriously addresssed, not weaponised and wedged as the LNP has done, forcing others to be tactical in the face of a mostly dreadful RD Bill and to take sledgehammer political positions (Greens, for e.g.).
Of all the government action to prioritise, compared to their shambolic response to COVID and outright hostility to action on climate change!
Gabrielle. Whoever you may be, I like your ideas and agree with you. The liberal party and the parliament have been infected with power seeking religious humbugs wanting to damage the country.
The Liberal party and religious organisations are taking Australia down the same path as USA. They sow division and hate everywhere they go.
Religion sure changed when it became a moneymaking business. Being the fools that we are we continue to throw taxpayers $$$ whilst also giving them tax exemptions and we wonder why public schools are broke!
Only some are big business
I’m me, I blow hot, cold and bloody furious. I want fairness. I want equality. I want a new government.
Am I asking for too much?
PS – Yes. Apparently I am.
Good riddance. It’s shown the Religious Right that despite their best efforts they haven’t (yet) completely taken over the Coalition and quite simply they don’t have the numbers to get their filth through.
It’s a humiliation for them, and had it gone to the Senate the humiliation would have continued.
Albo has played this well. He’s not taking the bait and knows how to use the processes and time itself to Labor’s political advantage. The wedge was safely defused with the status quo remaining and the no viable way for Scotty and his posse of deplorables to use the Senate impasse back against Labor. This week’s political gimmick will soon be replaced with a new dog and pony show at best; or a policy disaster of Scotty’s own making engulfing the Slob from the Shire.
I suggest that you look a little more deeply into this issue Simon.
Also, if you are expecting any changes of any real significance should Labor win this election, then I suggest that you will be mightily disappointed.
Agree.
Don’t be surprised whe, not if, this abomination is resurrected with a few twists – whoever loses/wins the coming (s)election.
…”when, not if…”
How so Robert? The LNP won in 2019 with policy cupboard completely bare apart from tax cuts. They have legislated exactly that in the meantime. History shows that Labor government’s have indeed made significant reforms each term they have been in government.
Yes Mike, I have to agree with you that the Labor Party has, in the past made some significant reforms when in government, but we have to go back to the time of Gough Whitlam for most of them.
I would congratulate Julia Gillard on the Plain Packaging tobacco legislation in particular and for her attempts at the NDIS. But Mike it has not all been positive with the Labor Party. Recall Hawke and Keating’s embrace of neo-liberalism. That was one of the most treacherous sell-outs of all time.
But really MIke ‘at the end of the day’ the ALP are nothing more than ‘Liberal Party Lite’. Where is the Socialist agenda of old (although I realize now that that was always an illusion, as those in the Communist Party always correctly maintained at the time).
But while we are in ‘positive mode’ Mike, let us also recall that John Howard introduced major gun reform following the shocking and tragic shootings at Port Arthur. Howard also stood up to the Indonesians in a way that Gareth Evans and Paul Keating never would have or could have.
It was cynical politics, but I can see the realpolitik side of it – it’s the government that now has to carry the can for failing to deliver.
According to Genesis, ‘in the image of God he created them; male and female’ .if this statement is true then those who are transgender are closer to the image of god so it begs the question those who discriminate are going against god as it seems that is what god is ?
The funny thing is, these Christianists call on all the nasty stuff in the Old testament to back up their claims. Basically, old Jewish stuff. But the guy whose name adorns their religion, preached against all this bigotry stuff, but he doesn’t get a look in. If Jesus was to come to Earth today, the modern-day “Christians” would crucify him again in a heart-beat.
According to the talmudics, Adam could not cope with Lilith being his coeval equal so she was banished to the outer darkness.
Hence the necessary rewrite of Genesis 1:27 that became verse 2:23 – much better, for some.
and so misogyny that is such a feature of the Abrahmic religions was justified, the hostility to gay and trans people flowing from this as both groups blur the separation of the sexes that God apparently wants.
Who reads the OT? A god of wrath.
Or the God of the NT – love and all are equal
The God of the NT? I guess it’s a crocodile.
I think it is L.A.W. that at least one features on the front page every day?
Revelations is the last book of the New Testament. Hardly love and all are equal, with Jesus returning and believers sitting on the right hand of God while he sets loose plague, fiery judgement, horsemen and the destruction of non-believers and much of the planet. That interpretation/ prophesy according to the end times belief of the Christian Right.
It’s a common error that plague/pestilence is one of Revelations’ Four Horsemen but they are Conquest, War, Famine and Death – Revs 6:1-9.
In the O/T’s Ezekiel 14:21 they are sword, famine, wild beasts and pestilence or plague.
A cartoon I saw recently showed one of the Dire Horsemen querying a fifth who joined as to his Doom – “Misinformation!” was the reply.
Thanks for correction. I left Christianity behind when I was 14. I think in those days there was far less emphasis on the Bible. We Catholics used the Marian Missal. Perhaps it was just my circle.
My apologies if that seemed abrupt – it was meant to be a lighthearted reminder of other common-knowledge stuff like ‘Noah took two of each animal’, ‘Play it again, Sam’, ‘Beam me up, Scotty’ & ‘you doitty rat’.
What’s really getting up the Christian Rights’ collective butts is that Australians are increasingly seeing them as full of sh#@ (the CR, that is, not their collective butts. Or maybe both.) Which means less power and influence, which means less money in the collection plate. Hence the hissy fit. Hence anti-discrimination legislation for which there is no slightest evidence of actual need.
They all should just frock up or eff off.
A dwindling flock struck down by foot-in-mouth.
For me, the most important objective is that the Morrison government is defeated at the election, preferably by an overwhelming margin. This legislation is a performative (thank you Grace) attempt to wedge the opposition. Religious discrimination is nothing more than a convenient cloak. Bear in mind there are several DLP (catholic troglodyte) types in the federal caucus. Morrison’s tactical advisers were hoping for Labor to oppose and for those creatures to abstain or cross the floor. Instead, in what might well become a textbook example of reverse wedging the ALP dead bat approach has had the following effects:
If you don’t believe this has been a stunning victory just look at how the monopoly media are trying to spin it.
Hear hear I agree fully! And if that means the ALP didn’t come out all principles blazing then I can wear that, we just HAVE to get the LNP OUT and all ammunition is required to do that.