12 March 2014 LABORS RACIST SLUR ON CAROLYN HABIB Double standard at their best........ TRANSCRIPT – Doorstop Interview, Melbourne Subjects: South Australia election; privacy principles; mandatory sentencing SENATOR THE HON GEORGE BRANDIS QC ATTORNEY-GENERAL MINISTER FOR THE ARTS DEPUTY LEADER OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THE SENATE 12 March 2014 TRANSCRIPT – Doorstop Interview, Melbourne Subjects: South Australia election; privacy principles; mandatory sentencing E&OE SENATOR BRANDIS: This morning, the Liberal Party in South Australia discovered that the Labor Party is circulating, in the seat of Elder, a leaflet, authorised by the State Campaign Director of the Australian Labor Party, which is an overtly racist leaflet, attacking the Liberal Party’s candidate, Carolyn Habib. The leaflet depicts Carolyn Habib in silhouette against what appears to be a bullet riddled wall, using only her surname, with the injunction – “don’t trust Habib”. This is, in our view, a thinly veiled racist slur. For years now we have been hearing prominent Labor Party politicians from South Australia, both in the State Parliament, and people like Senator Wong in the Federal Parliament, protest against racism. Then in the dieing days of the South Australian election campaign, the Labor Party has itself reverted to campaign tactics that have no place in Australian politics. The Premier of South Australia, Mr Weatherill, should condemn this leaflet, he should insist that it be withdrawn, he should apologise to Carolyn Habib for the Labor Party’s conduct in trying to suggest a racist slur against her, and he should ensure that all copies of the leaflet in possession of the Labor Party be destroyed. What this conduct demonstrates is that this government, the Weatherill Labor Government, is a tired government, exhausted of ideas, that will stoop to nothing. It’s just another reason why the people of South Australia should feel the time has come to change the government next Saturday. The Labor Party don’t want to talk about their record anymore because they haven’t got a record to be proud of. Instead, in the last days of the campaign, they’ve decided to stoop to the cheapest racist slurs on a good Liberal candidate who will be a wonderful candidate for the seat of Elder. There’s another matter I want to mention, and that is the fact that today the new Australian privacy laws come into operation. These principles were developed during the period of the previous government and they come into operation today. Privacy is a very important issue. The privacy of individual citizens and consumers needs to be respected and the Australian government expects privacy principles will go some distance to enhancing the privacy protections Australians enjoy particularly in relation to credit reporting. That having been said, the Abbott Government is a government committed to cutting the red tape on business and we don’t want the privacy principles to be used in a way which would pose additional, unnecessary burdens on business without protecting the privacy of Australians. So I’ve asked the Privacy Commissioner, Timothy Pilgrim, who is the custodian of the operation of the privacy principles, to adopt a light-touch approach to enforcement that seeks to ensure that the operation of the privacy principles is superintended in such a way that doesn’t impose unreasonable burdens on compliant businesses. QUESTION: How can you be so concerned about this attack on Carolyn Habib in light of what went down in the seat of Lindsay some take back? Isn’t that a pretty dramatic double standard for you to be having a go? SENATOR BRANDIS: I don’t condone what happened in the seat of Lindsay in 2007 I think it was. You’re not the first person to draw a comparison between what happened in the seat of Lindsay in 2007, which the Liberal Party condemned at the time and moved swiftly to stop, and what has occurred in the seat of Elder this morning. The difference is, in fact, that when the Liberal Party found out about what was going on in the seat of Lindsay it condemned it immediately. Mr Weatherill, having being alerted today about what was going on in the seat of Elder, has not only failed to condemn it, he’s condoned it. He should be ashamed of himself. QUESTION: Can you give examples of political attack advertising that only refers to a candidate’s last name and asks if they can be trusted? Aren’t you drawing a conclusion here that a lot of people mightn’t see? SENATOR BRANDIS: If you look at the way in which the pamphlet concerned is configured, showing the candidate only in silhouette, against what appears to be a bullet riddled brick wall, and using only her surname, the implicit racist smear within that leaflet is pretty obvious. QUESTION: A County Court judge today has said that he was forced to give a sentence that was more severe than was warranted because of mandatory sentencing of people smugglers. What’s your view [inaudible] SENATOR BRANDIS: I’m not familiar with the case that you are referring to but I can assure you that the Abbott Government, led in this respect by Scott Morrison, has shown that firm policies to stop the plight of people smuggling, can succeed. QUESTION: Does it concern you though that a County Court judge says he’s had to impose [inaudible], should there be more flexibility? SENATOR BRANDIS: Sentencing isn’t merely a matter for courts and judges, it’s also a matter for parliaments. It’s parliaments, not judges, that define sentences in acts of parliament and in appropriate cases, in order to protect the public and serve other public needs, parliaments decide on mandatory sentences. That is entirely properly a matter for the Parliament. QUESTION: [inaudible] reconsider it? SENATOR BRANDIS: This Government will not be lightening the sentences on people smugglers. And in that context, can I tell you that I have recently rescinded a direction that my Labor predecessor, Nicola Roxon, gave two years ago to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecution not to prosecute certain categories of people smugglers. We are determined to end this viscous, cruel trade, and we will use whatever legislative tools that are available to us to do so. QUESTION: [inaudible] in which a man was convicted of people smuggling for assisting five members of his family to reach Australia. He’d already been deemed a genuine refugee. He was an Iraqi born Kurd. They’ve all since been given refugee status as well and the judge in this instance said that the magnitude of his crime simply did not warrant a five-year gaol term. SENATOR BRANDIS: Well, as I say, I haven’t read the judgement, I’m not familiar with the particular case. But I just make the general point that it is for the parliament to define the sentencing range and for judges to apply the law as passed by the parliament. [Ends]
Posted on: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:25:38 +0000