The Aboriginal Legal Service (Australian Capital Territory/New South Wales) was not allowed to speak to a Senate committee examining the Turnbull government’s bill designed to improve free speech by watering down race hate laws.

The managing lawyer Michael Lalor attended the only public hearing of the inquiry into 18C amendments to the Racial Discrimination Act in Canberra on Friday but was turned away.

Speaking to Guardian Australia, Lalor said he was simply keen to work with all lawmakers to help them understand the unique position of Aboriginal communities in the 18C debate.

“Right across Australia, there are Aboriginal people in jail for offensive language,” he said.

“In many instances, that would be swearing at police and in those cases, it is hard not to see that police arrested them because they were offended by their language.”

The legal and constitutional affairs legislation committee inquiry was established by the Senate on Thursday afternoon and reports back to parliament on Tuesday when the bill will be debated by the Senate.



There were only five witnesses scheduled to give evidence on Friday because of the short time frame but when Lalor attempted to give evidence, he was not permitted to speak.

The Liberal chair of the committee, Ian Macdonald, was prevailed upon by Labor’s Louise Pratt and Murray Watt to allow Lalor to speak but he ruled against taking Lalor’s evidence.

“The committee was of the general view that once you start having one group of any type – in this case an Indigenous group who have a particular view – then do you call other members of that same group who might have a different view,” Macdonald said.

“It is for that reason we decided to restrict it to the ones we have.”

Watt suggested that Macdonald could invite an Indigenous group that supported the changes to appear but it was important for an Indigenous view to be heard.

“I think it would be extremely unfortunate if we consider a far-reaching change to the Racial Discrimination Act without inviting one Indigenous person to give evidence,” Watt said. “I think that would be disgraceful, frankly.”

Senator Derryn Hinch disagreed with Watt and supported Macdonald by saying the issues had been heard at a previous inquiry.

“We have had umpteen hearings, everything that can be said about 18C has been said over months long inquiries and public hearings all over Australia,” Hinch said.

“Everyone in Australia has had a chance to put their view, all the views are known, this is a short-term thing. Normally I would agree with you but on this one I don’t agree.”

Lalor wanted to comment on the bill, which was released only on Wednesday after it was approved by the Coalition party room.

The proposed law would remove the terms “insult”, “offend” and “humiliate” and insert the higher definition of “harass” into section 18C. The bill would change the Human Rights Commission processes in a way that the Turnbull government said would ensure frivolous claims were removed early.

The bill also changes the test of whether unlawful conduct has occurred from the experience of a member of the targeted group to a “reasonable member of the Australian community”.

Labor, the Greens and Nick Xenophon oppose the bill, which means the government does not have a majority to pass it on current indications.

Lalor said he wanted lawmakers on all sides to consider the historical context of discrimination against Aboriginal people over the last 200 years.



“This goes all the way back to the royal commission into deaths in custody and the bottom line is language is a weapon that has always been used against the Aboriginal community after the country was taken and colonised,” Lalor said. “Black so and so. Insert whatever word you want.”



He said the legal definition of harassing behaviour in the ACT and NSW had connotations of continuing conduct rather than just one instance, such as that which occurred in cases of stalking or breaching apprehended violence orders.

Lalor was concerned that it might remove instances of discrimination such as those seen on public transport because they were one-off incidents.