Via Freedomwatch:

“Proposed changes contained in the Reproductive Health (Access to Terminations) Bill 2013 threaten freedom of speech and freedom of conscience,” said Simon Breheny, director of the Legal Rights Project at free market think tank the Institute of Public Affairs.

The bill has passed the Tasmanian House of Assembly and is now set to be debated by the Tasmanian Legislative Council.

“The bill proposes a fine of $65,000 or a 12 month jail term for the newly created crime of protesting in an area within a radius of 150 metres from an abortion clinic. This is an inappropriate limitation on freedom of speech.

As Mr Breheny goes onto note, we already have strong laws against intimidation, and the creation of this offence is indeed a violation of freedom of speech.

Andrew Bolt sums it up perfectly:

Here are hints of the real problem, several drawn from Conroy’s unwittingly revealing interview last night on Lateline.

First, Conroy has already called an inquiry into what the Greens insisted was the “hate media” – an inquiry that focused on News Ltd and journalists reporting on climate change from a sceptical position.  (Conroy really does believe there’s a News Ltd plot against the Gillard Government.)

Second, Conroy intervened to block News Ltd’s winning tender of the Australia Network, giving it back to the more friendly ABC.

Third, Conroy in this election year handed the ABC $10 million for news coverage.

Fourth, Conroy on Lateline cited as a benefit of the $37 billion NBN he’s building the ability to help Crikey, a hard-Left website:

I’m a huge supporter in trying to bring the National Broadband Network, which will allow all of those digital voices to come into people’s homes, but we’re not yet at the stage where Crikey, probably the most well-known blog/subscription model, actually only has about 15,000 customers.

Fifth, Conroy in citing the need for tougher rules against journalists just two examples of alleged error and bias that – surprise! – involve reports critical of the Gillard Government:

I think my colleague Anthony Albanese recently had an experience where a news report went to air on the nightly 6 o’clock news, he put in a complaint to the ACMA. He was upheld completely. All of the points made in the program were wrong….

I myself had an experience where someone complained about the Daily Telegraph’s reporting of the National Broadband Network. And they made three complaints. All of them were upheld by the Press Council. And they were ordered to – by the Press Council, the Daily Telegraph, to correct it prior to Christmas a couple of Christmases ago, and not only didn’t they comply with that, they waited until 27th December and they put it on I think about page 42 in tiny print.

Sixth, in saying on Lateline laws were needed for more diversity of opinion, he in the next breath mentioned News Ltd as an opponent:

So it will be a sad day for democracy if there was a further reduction in the diversity of opinion. So, News Limited have at times been quite hysterical about this.

And, seventh, I know Conroy has threatened a media organisation about giving me a platform, and also know how another media organisation has seen his threats of controls as threats meant to make their coverage more government friendly.

No one, but no one, should doubt that however Conroy dresses up these changes, they are an assault against the freedom of journalists to say what they think, and against the freedom of the public to hear whom they want.

It is astonishing – revolting – that such attacks on free speech should be launched in Australia

Yesterday, the Gillard Government announced not only the creation of a new media censorship and licensing scheme, but the start of “government sanctioned journalism”.

We are on the verge of having the Federal Government dictating what we can and cannot read, and what we can and cannot think.

The brainchild of Senator Stephen Conroy,  the man who said he had the power to make telecom bosses wear red underpants on their head, tried to ban the Bolt Report from being aired, said that the Federal Government should be “going to war” against News Limited, and  wanted to censor the internet, this proposal is an unprecedented and historic attack on freedom of speech.

Outside of wartime, no Australian Government has ever come even close to considering restrictions of this magnitude. Together with upcoming changes to our “anti-discrimination laws”, if passed, they represent an end to freedom of speech as we know it.

Freedom of speech is on life support. We can stop this. But we must act fast. We need to take action TODAY.

There are three main parts to this proposal. Each of them is bad on its own, but together, they spell disaster.

First: It sets up a licensing scheme, granting basic journalistic rights and protections only to those who sign up to a “regulated press standards body”. Those who sign up will be rewarded by the government, through things such as “exemptions from privacy legislation”. Those who don’t will lose these same protections “vital to the capacity of journalists to do their job”.

Second: These bodies will be overseen by a powerful taxpayer-funded super-regulator: the Orwellian “Public Interest Media Advocate”. Whose interest do you think this government-appointed super-regulator will really be advocating? (hint: it won’t be the publics).

Third: A new “public interest” test will be applied for media ownership – and it’s pretty clear: “public interest test” means “political interest test” and will be used by the government “to punish outlets they don’t like.” This is a desire to punish outlets they don’t like, and prevent freedom-oriented media from flourishing.

But that’s not all.

In a further attack on democracy, Senator Conroy will be presenting the Bill to Parliament on Thursday – and is demanding it be passed next week. That’s right: no time for scrutiny, no time for debate, no time for MP’s to even thoroughly read or understand the bill. Sound familiar?

Former Press Council Head Professor Flint compared this to “Soviet regimes” saying “”It is dangerous … it will give the government a power it should never have, the power to determine the content of the press.”  News Limited Chief Executive Kim Williams said “This government will go down in history as the first Australian government outside of wartime to attack freedom of speech by seeking to introduce a regime which effectively institutes government sanctioned journalism” and that it “removes the capacity of journalists to do their job – it is a not-too-sophisticated endeavour to gag the media:” Even traditionally pro-Government Fairfax CEO Grey Hywood said ” We can’t see the purpose of further regulation of news publications.”

A few people have written to me saying “well, at least it’s not as bad as the Finkelstein Report recommended – at least this isn’t going to censor every blogger, user of social media etc”. DO NOT fall into this trap! This is a DELIBERATE strategy by the government: announce something so utterly outrageous, so draconian (like the Finkelstein report), then, when the actual legislation is released they are praised for “compromising”. They have done it before, and we can’t let them get away with it again. Don’t let them con us twice.

There is a chance we can stop this. The bill is not yet guaranteed passage through parliament. They do not have the votes – yet. If enough Australians contact their MP’s and the cross-benchers, we WILL prevail.  

This website let’s you contact not just your MP, not just your senator, but also all the cross benchers so you can DEMAND they oppose this outrageous proposal.

Please, from the bottom of my heart I beg you: take action now – before it is too late.

I can not help but think about the legacy of the brave men and women who made the supreme sacrifice for us. They paid for our freedom in blood. Did they make the ultimate sacrifice to have a country where the government dictates what we can and can not read or think? Is this what they really bled for? Is this why they fought and died?

Freedom is not just a buzzword. It is not an empty slogan. It isn’t a word to be thrown around without meaning. It is something at the core of what we stand for – or used to.

Freedom was the reason we were so proud to call ourselves Australians. Freedom was the reason my grandparents fled the oppression of Soviet Union to move here. Freedom was who we were.

Don’t let them take it away from us.

The Senate Legal and Constitutional Senate Legislation Committee yesterday handed down their report on proposed changes to anti-discrimination legislation that would make it illegal to offend someone and reverse the balance of proof to make you guilty unless proven innocent.

After a lengthy campaign, led primarily by the staunch freedom fighters at the Institute of Public Affairs (If you havn’t joined already, they are presently running a promotion for new members), some of worst excesses of this bill will likely be removed and the Coalition presented a dissenting report calling for it to be scrapped entirely.

It is also worth noting that the Committee received close to three and a half thousand submissions regarding the bill. Of these, the overwhelming majority opposed the bill: close to 3000 submissions were in opposition, while less than 200 were in support. I would also like to thank the over 500 of our members who contacted their Member of Parliament outside of the committee process to demand they oppose this bill.

It is clear that the Australian people overwhelmingly oppose this bill, and the government has responded by removing one of the most publicised features.

But it’s too early to celebrate: the majority report remains a significant attack on freedom. In fact, in some ways the proposed changes make the bill even worse!

Make no mistake: This is a deliberate strategy on the part of the anti-free speech authoritarians.

While everyone is focussing on congratulating them on the “concession” they made, the really nasty bits sneak in. So they get the long-term outcome they want, while looking like they ‘compromised’.

In fact, I’m starting to think that this was a deliberate ploy by the government. So egregious and stupid was the plan to make offending someone illegal, that surely they could never have believed it would have passed. So, it was inserted as a lightning rod to divert attention to the real intention of the bill.

We can’t let them get away with it. If you have not done so already, please contact your MP using our form and DEMAND it be rejected in its entirety.

A full analysis of the Majority Report coming shortly…