Ms Collins said Catholic schools had an “open mind” about whether the problem could be addressed simply by repealing Section 38(3) and had not yet received clear legal advice on whether a “quick grab of a single provision in the law might have unintended consequences.” Intentional”.
“My only concern is that if it was done in a hurry, it was actually attempted in 2018, we might still not be right,” she said.
Australian Christian Schools and the Australian Christian Lobby oppose the repeal of the exemption and have announced that they will withdraw their support for the bill if it is repealed.
The bill would make it illegal to discriminate against someone because of their religious belief or activity in certain areas of public life, including work, education, access to goods, services, and residence.
The bill’s “statement of belief” provision has also drawn significant opposition from LGBTQI+ groups, as well as some union groups and anti-discrimination advocates, who argue that the laws will give legal protections to offensive and insulting remarks that have a religious basis.
The bill states that a statement of belief will not amount to discrimination when it is truly believed, made in good faith, and is part of religious belief, provided it is not malicious, threatening, harassing, or slanderous. It will repeal all existing federal and state anti-discrimination laws.
In its submission to the investigation, the Australian Council of Trade Unions said it had “grave concerns” that the bill would “increase discrimination against workers, reduce job security, restore hard-won rights and protections in the workplace, and undermine mental health and safety in the workplace”. . work.”
“These provisions, if passed, would remove the worker’s right to file a complaint with the Court of Cassation as he would have had the right to do so,” the ACTU report states.
Equality Australia said the statement of belief could lead organizations to change their internal policies “to adapt offensive, harmful or degrading speech in the workplace for fear of being prosecuted for religious discrimination if they do not”.
The Australian Jewish Executive Council, which supports the bill’s passage in its current form, said it believed criticism of the provision was wrong and that it would protect a “very narrow set of data”.
“It follows in order to protect under [the provision]The council’s chief executive, Peter Werthem, said in a report that a statement of religious belief should be egregious enough to rise to the level of discrimination but not serious enough to include hate, threats, intimidation, harassment or vilification.
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the most interesting daily news, analysis and insights. Register here.