MY INITIAL THOUGHTS ON THE NEW QLD HUMAN RIGHTS BILL - PAT COLEMAN

MY INITIAL THOUGHTS ON THE NEW QLD HUMAN RIGHTS BILL- PAT COLEMAN 31/10/18 https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2018/10/my-initial-thoughts-on-new-qld-human.html

(NOTE: 23/10/19 The Electoral Commission of Qld has fucked over all my links to donations returns in my articles. They have changed all links. To make it easier to view these broken links go to my page with the new links in a new browser and scroll down to the relevant return in the article. Page link here: https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2019/10/changed-ecq-donor-returns-links-page.html )

Compare this Qld Human Rights Bill https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/bill.first/bill-2018-076  -to the 1993 EARC Bill of Rights rejected by labor in the 1998 BILL of rights report . It took labor 5 years to lose the “Fitzgerald fire in the belly” for reform and change – if they had it at all .

Compare the EARC proposed environmental rights section to this bill. You cant cos there is nothing there . Go Figure ! http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/committees/LJSC/1997/bill-of-rights/Report-12.pdf   at p 10 and p 121

This is gonna take ages .Did you see how they held off the changes to donor laws till Oct 2 after passing it ?
Free education - S36 doesn’t state public education is free and it doesn’t specifically refer to tertiary education .

PRIVATE PRISONS AND PRIVATE COUNCIL SECUIRITY AS PUBLIC ENTITIES –
https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/bill.first/bill-2018-076


Despite s 14 , s58(1) and (6) means the act doesn’t allow you to clobber private prisons companies contracted by the state , private security hired by the state or local councils  private security, companies contracted by public entities contracted by the state who are public entities under s9 and 10 . In fact s 59(1) and (2) , says “I don’t know what it says’ , and s59(3) says you cant get damages “ha ha no kava for Johnny”. But ,it says- well in s59 (4) –(5) and (6) “we are labor and we are trying to make it like we changed something , we didn’t so use the existing law to sue”- thumbs nose ! The private company which has become a public entity can also tell the minister it doesn’t want to have human rights obligations under 60(3) .

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION –PROTEST AND VOTERS INTENTIONS TO EXHAUST VOTES –
https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/bill.first/bill-2018-076

Whilst the new right to expression means that ONE PERSON now has the protection of 2 under the peaceful assemblies act S(5) FFS , it doesn’t if a council law says different .
https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1992-038  

See Coleman v Australia
https://www.hrlc.org.au/human-rights-case-summaries/coleman-v-australia-hrc-communication-no-11572003-un-doc-ccprc87d11572003-10-august-2006
http://remedy.org.au/cases/8/

It does mean that protest is not ipso facto unlawful now ( when in force) . That is, the criminal and nuisance provisions must give way to the right to protest .

The cops have to ask “does this person have the right to expression ? ” instead of “what can I do to get rid of this person?” . The Anti discrimination act and CTH Racial Discrimination Act remain unaffected.
Despite s13 and 14 saying limitations may only be for what is justifiable in a free and democratic society , s21 setting out the right to freedom of opinion and expression, to impart information in writing and in print , and s22 setting out the right to associate which has a corollary of the right to disassociate and s23(2)9a) setting out that the “free expression” of the will of the electors is guaranteed, its not gonna help with protest law if they are incompatible or make the electoral commission count a vote that a voter has cast in the “optional way” filling out only the boxes they want - to express their opinion as to candidates and disassociate from others . https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1992-028#pt.7-div.5-sdiv.4  

See my 2017 Qld Election Leaflet on Facebook here-
https://www.facebook.com/notes/pat-coleman/why-i-voted-informal-in-the-qld-2017-election/10155981974164759/

So , time and momentum counts before and after an election to get the compulsory preferential provision declared “incompatible” with this new fangled human rights act . Or to get mandamus on the ECQ to count those votes as formal. What happens next?

- The operation of s42 is that a failure to comply with the act in relation to a law doesn’t affect its validity , and the parliamentary override in the normal way in s43-47 :
- And although a provision must be interpreted in a way compatible with rights (s48) , but if the section specifically limits a right there it is - SNAFU .

You can of course. refer it to the supreme court under s49 . And the AG an HRC can intervene under s50-51 , and if there is an override of human rights it cant . But under s53 it can make a declaration of incompatibility to the AG . But of course ,this doesn’t -“create in any person any legal right or give rise to any civil cause of action” under s54 and the AG can buckpass to another minister unless he is the minister and its gonna be 6 months and 6 days before a response is table in the parliament but its not a parliamentary proceeding phew!

Doesn’t mean they are gonna change it at all .