VICTORIANSCHOOLS
CONSTITUTIONALCONVENTION2006
LegislativeAssemblyChamber
ParliamentHouse
Melbourne
9October2006
Topic:
TheAustraliangovernment’santiterrorismlegislationisundemocratic.Itshouldberepealed.
Chair:MsMaryGillett,MLA,VictorianParliament
Welcome:MsAnneBarker,MLA,VictorianParliament
Topicintroduction:JudgeElizabethGaynor,CountyCourt,Melbourne
Thecampaign:
[For]MrMarkTaft,barrister,Melbourne
[For]MrPhilipBarker,publicdebatesofficer,UniversityofMelbourneDebatingSociety
[Against]MrDesMoore,Director,InstituteforPrivateEnterprise
[Against]MrJamesPaterson,YoungLiberalMovementofAustralia(Victoriandivision)
Delegates
9 October 2006Victorian Schools Constitutional Convention1
Ella ADAMS, University High School
Ambika AGNIHOTRI, Westbourne Grammar School
Jed ANDREWS, St Patricks College
Saad ASSAAD, Australian International Academy
Madeliene AUSTIN, Elwood College
Tom BALLARD, Brauer College
Luke BAMPTON, Mazenod College
Jillian BEALE, Caulfield Grammar
Peter BLAKE, Bairnsdale Secondary College
Cecily BLAKEY, Strathcona Baptist Girls Grammar School
Andrea BOJCETIC, Lalor Secondary College
Samantha BOMBOS, Westbourne Grammar School
Alison BROWNING, University High School
Michayla BUSH, Wanganui College
Miriam CONRICK, University High School
Ellie COOPER, Fintona Girls School
Christopher CORNESCHI, Thomastown Secondary College
Sally CROUCH, Caulfield Grammar
Erin D’AGOSTINO, Lalor North Secondary College
Matthew DALY, Mazenod College
Claire EATS, Baimbridge College
Emily EVANS, Fintona Girls School
Jack FAINE, University High School
Khaled FERGUSON, Australian International Academy
Virgina, FILOPOULOUS
AshleyMathieu FRENKEN, Melbourne High School
MatthewFRIZZELL, Notre Dame College
Lucienne GALEA, Taylors Lakes Secondary College
Ellie GREATOREX, Fintona Girls School
Andrew GREEN, St Patricks College
Ruth HAMBLING, University High School
Hilary HARDEFELDT, University High School
John HEARN, St Patricks College
Jesse HEATH, Melbourne High School
Mark HOLMES, Lalor Secondary College
Kayte JAMA, Northcote High School
Slavco JOVANOSKI, University High School
Meg KELLY, Notre Dame College
Oliver KHOURY, Swinburne Senior Secondary College
Tyrone LIU, Balwyn High School
Zoe MARKOPOULOUS, Lalor Secondary College
Thembane MASHIYA, Bairnsdale Secondary College
Emmanuel MBALA, Thomastown Secondary College
Nina McDOWELL, Westbourne Grammar School
Emma McKENZIE, Bairnsdale Secondary College
Lyle McLEAM, Cann River P12 College
Cynthia MECHALAANI, Antonine College
Chloe MEKKEN, Orbost Secondary College
DanielMILES, Westbourne Grammar School
James MILNER, Elwood College
Brwa MOHAMMED, Thomastown Secondary College
Celia MURRAY, Fintona Girls School
Donny NGUYEN, Thomastown Secondary College
Ana NIKOLOVSKA, Lalor North Secondary College
James OLDFIELD, Wanganui College
Ryan PEREGRINE, Elwood College
Mounica PINNINTI, Lalor North Secondary College
Johana RADI, Antonine College
AzbjaaziRAHIMOVSKI, Lalor North Secondary College
RobertRAHIMOVSKI, Lalor North Secondary College
Jane RAM, Lalor Secondary College
Andrew RENATO, Notre Dame College
Jessica RICHARD, Strathcona Baptist Girls Grammar School
Nadine SAOUD, Antonine College
Shugha SATARI, Australian International Academy
Nathan SEGAL, Koonung Secondary College
Jaspreet SINGH, Taylors Lakes Secondary College
Noni SPROULE, Northcote High School
Jessica STOJKOVSKI, Westbourne Grammar School
Nuradan TABAK, Australian International Academy
Kalani THOMAS, Caulfield Grammar
Jessica WALDEN, Elwood College
Clara WARD, Baimbridge College
Sasha WILMOTH, Caulfield Grammar
Robert WOJNAR, Mazenod College
9 October 2006Victorian Schools Constitutional Convention1
Welcomeandintroduction
TheCHAIR(MsGILLETT)— Good morning and welcome everybody. My name is Mary Gillett. I am the member for Tarneit, which is out Werribee way, the Parliamentary Secretary for Women’s Affairs and the Parliamentary Secretary for Commonwealth Games. It is my pleasure to be here to help you today to have a wonderful and lively discussion and debate about a most important topic. But without further ado, I introduce my friend and colleague and Parliamentary Secretary for Training and Higher Education, Ann Barker.
MsBARKER(Oakleigh)— Thank you very much, Chair. I have to say before I start, I am not that used to standing here at this chair, and to be somewhere near the Premier’s chair is a first for me. I am not quite used to the microphone, but I will get it.
Officially, to Mary Gillett, the member for Tarneit and chair of the convention, to our speakers arguing for and against in the debate— Judge Liz Gaynor, MrDes Moore, MrMark Taft, MrJames Paterson and MrPhilip Barker— members of the Victorian Schools Constitutional Convention planning committee, teachers, parents and student delegates, I would like to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which we are meeting today, the Wurundjeri people. In keeping with a tradition of the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation, I acknowledge their unique culture and the important role that indigenous people have played in the life of this region.
I am very delighted and honoured to be here to open the Victorian Schools Constitutional Convention 2006. These conventions provide young people from across Victoria with a wonderful opportunity to get together and to share ideas and opinions on the political and social issues that affect us all. Across the various regions and now at the state level you have the opportunity to air your views and hear the views of others. Just to emphasise how important an occasion this is today, the proceedings will be reported as though the Victorian Parliament were in session. The Hansard reporters, whom you will see just up at the back, are official parliamentary reporters, and persons extraordinaire, having made sense of everything else that is said in this place— not by you but by the members of Parliament. They are here to report what each of you has to say in this chamber. I understand every state member of Parliament will have access to the record of these proceedings, and I know they will read it with interest.
As you know the theme of this year’s state convention is: should the antiterrorism legislation be amended or abolished? It is a theme that is very much in the news, and I am sure I do not need to tell you that. I understand you have all received copies of background papers outlining some of the arguments for and against the legislation, and I hope that material helps you to form your views. You will be finding out at firsthand some of the ways in which governments work as you focus on a theme that is obviously of great importance.
As well as being a matter of concern to the general public, this is an issue high on the agendas of both federal and state governments. Tighter security at airports, public events and in public buildings is a daily reminder of the vigilance that is needed to safeguard the community. As we know only too well, Australians have been the targets and have been victims of terrorism. The bombings in Bali, Indonesia and the London Underground are salient reminders of the intentions of terrorists. With these events in mind and with greater attention to border control, migration and citizenship, the notion of what constitutes a free and democratic Australia has been at the centre of much recent debate and discussion.
With increased security comes the question of rights: what rights are we prepared to give up? It is interesting to note that while the Australian Capital Territoryhas a Human Rights Act, Victoria is the first Australian state, as distinct from a territory, to enshrine human rights in one act of Parliament. The Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities will take effect from 1January 2007. This charter protects basic human rights, such as freedom of speech, freedom of association and protection from cruel and degrading treatment.
It will be interesting to place today’s topic in the context of this act. The speakers you will be hearing come from a wide range of backgrounds and will offer you equally wideranging views and ideas for consideration later in your small group discussions. Please do not hesitate to ask speakers the important questions, even if the answers are not easy in coming.
The threat of terrorism and the laws and conditions under which governments can best protect citizens are critical issues that require careful and intelligent consideration. By participating in this debate and making recommendations on behalf of young people you will be affirming our ideals about democracy, equality, freedom of speech and social justice. I feel sure that you will also be inspired by debating and hearing the debate in this historic building where we are gathered today. Many of you may know, but some of you may not, that this Parliament House is the only building in Australia that has hosted a colonial Parliament, a state Parliament and a federal Parliament. The federal Parliament was held in this building for more than 20years, from 1901 to 1927 prior to the first Parliament House being built in Canberra. Back then federal members of Parliament would have sat in the seats you are occupying now, and in sitting in those seats they made many of the decisions that created the Australian nation that we know today. Now, of course— not again for a little while; we have actually risen— state members of Parliament deliberate in this same chamber, making the same vital decisions and laws that affect our lives as Victorian citizens. Today in your deliberations remember you are sitting in a place where historic decisions have been made and continue to be made.
The schools constitutional convention is an important forum for the youth of Victoria and one of the peak events on the civics and citizenship education calendar. Some 40secondary schools from the Catholic, independent and government sectors, from rural and regional Victoria as well as metropolitan Melbourne are here today. The convention promises to be a wideranging, stimulating and highly productive forum. You can all ensure its success by listening, by contributing to the debate, by respectfully challenging the views of others and by giving your fellow students an equal chance to have their say.
It is the responsibility of all here today to contribute to the success of this convention, and it is just as important that when you leave here at the end of the day you think about the best ways of telling your school friends, your family, your school generally and the local community about this issue.
I would like to thank the state planning committee and the teachers from the host schools of the regional conventions for their very hard work in organising this event and similar events in your local areas throughout Victoria. Now I am sure you are looking forward to this very interesting day, during which you can start the important debate and a very challenging parliamentary session. The other thing I hope you will consider after today’s convention is that you will apply to be a Victorian delegate at the national convention in Canberra in March next year. I think that would be a very important step to take. I wish you very well in your deliberations. I thank very much our speakers for today. I am sure that they will provide you with some very informative, interesting and stimulating ideas to go on with. I thank you again for the privilege of being here to open the convention, and again I wish you well. Thank you very much.
TheCHAIR— It is a great privilege to have Ann here with us as the Parliamentary Secretary for Training and Higher Education. Ann, you are welcome to stay with us for as long or as little as you can. We are going to move delegates into the introduction of the topic. We are privileged to have with us today County Court Judge Liz Gaynor. I just want to remind you that the purpose of the introduction is to provide you with an overview of the key issues and considerations you need to keep in mind when listening to all of our speakers and when you are working later in your discussion groups. If you keep the ideas that you have gained from your preconvention reading in your mind, it will help you to sort the facts from the opinions when you listen to today’s speakers and decide upon your personal position on the issue. It is about keeping an open mind and listening to everything that you are going to be told by the speakers.
I introduce to all delegates County Court Judge Liz Gaynor. Judge Elizabeth Gaynor graduated with an artslaw degree from Melbourne University in 1978. After completing her articles Judge Gaynor worked for the Australian Associated Press as a journalist, covering general, industrial, police, court and state rounds. She also did a stint in Canberra as a parliamentary reporter— and I take my hat off to her for that! Returning to law in 1983 Judge Gaynor spent time with Victoria Legal Aid as a duty solicitor at the Prahran Magistrates Court and the Children’s Court at Melbourne, Dandenong, Springvale and Ringwood. In June 1985 Judge Gaynor signed the Victorian bar roll and commenced a criminal trial defence practice lasting for 17years. Judge Gaynor was appointed to the County Court bench in 2002, and we look forward to her contribution with great interest.
JudgeGAYNOR— Now that you know I finished university in 1978 you have all worked out that I am about 345years old! It is terribly depressing hearing your CV read out when you get to my age because everything seems so long ago. I have teenage children, and they spend their time going, ‘Were you really born in 1955 like the cars that were invented then?’. I am sure you have done the same thing to your parents. Whenever I have to address teenagers, as I often do, I try to cover the immediate ground. I am sure you all think, as I remember thinking at your age— although I know none of you are particularly young; everyone here is at least at year11— how is this person going to be of any assistance to us; she is so old? I am happy to tell you that my job today is not to talk about the rights or the wrongs or the arguments for and against of this issue; what I am talking about today is the overview and what you need to look out for when you are considering what is an incredibly important topic. It is such a subtle and interesting topic.
The antiterrorism bill is basically what you would call a wartime bill. The reason it is a wartime bill is that it is moving to take away some of the fundamental rights that attach to any person you may meet in our community. They are ancient rights, and they always apply. In a society like ours the only time that they do not is in a war situation. Traditionally that has been the case. George Bush, the American President, says we are facing a war on terrorism. What is interesting about that in your considering the questions that you have to today is, no.1, are we at war? It is not a conventional war. It is not as if England has declared war on Germany for invading Poland, as happened with the Second World War, and everybody joins the army and goes off and fights.
It is what you would call a subtle war. It might not be said that terrorist bombings such as we saw on September11 or in Bali or in Spain are subtle, but there is no formal declaration of war, there is no conventional war as we know it. What we do know is there is hostility between certain parts of certain movements towards other countries to which we might feel we belong in more a social sense, such as America. However, is there a state of crisis such that we should give up fundamental rights that normally would apply to every citizen?
A very fundamental right that is affected by this legislation is one that was brought about in the 1100s with King John— the evil King John you always see with Robin Hood, who was seen as always busy oppressing the Saxons. He got to be king after RichardI died. He was a very oppressive king of England. There were so many abuses against so many people, including the noblemen who normally were not affected, that ultimately he was presented with what was probably the first bill of rights— the Magna Carta— where they said, ‘Listen, King John, if you want to stay on the throne, baby, you have to abide by a few rules’. They are fundamental rules that have been enshrined in our law ever since.
One which I think is incredibly important is that you cannot be detained in a jail unless you have been charged with a criminal offence. You might think that is pretty obvious but if you do not have that, if you do not have a system whereby you cannot go to jail unless you are charged, than the government of the day, the king of the day, the ruler of the day can pick you up off the street and say, ‘I do not like you, you are in jail’.
What is really important about having to face a charge is that it must be supported by evidence. There are all sorts of protections that go down the line behind that fundamental principle that you cannot be detained without charge. If you are only able to detained on a charge, you presume that at some stage you are going to have to face a court. The question of whether or not you are guilty of that charge has to be resolved so a whole lot of processes get put in place and all those processes mean you cannot languish in jail indefinitely at the whim of whoever is in power at the time. That is a fundamental rule.