Charter of Rights - Brennan to talk to Labor caucus

In a recent report we noted that the federal government had not yet responded to Frank Brennan's committee that had undertaken a 'Consultation on Human Rights'.

Frank Brennan is a lawyer and also a Jesuit priest.

We've since heard that some church leaders have told the Attorney General that such a Charter would be divisive and they would not support it and he seemd to emphathise with that view.

Now James Allan, the Garrick professor of law at the University of Queensland, has written the following article in The Australian.

He points out that Frank Brennan is due to speak to the Labor Caucus next week.
James outlines that Brennan was NOT a disinterested person and had already spoken in FAVOUR of a Bill of Rights before being appointed to chair the Consultation. 

He predicts that whilst a full 'Charter of Rights' might not be enacted, other provisions that will have similar effects will be forthcoming!
So BEWARE!

Read on to find out the full story...

Tony Abbott and parental leave

In a surprise move Tony Abbott has announced that he intends to introduce a paid maternity leave - or parental leave - scheme.

His proposal made in a speech on International Women's Day, proposes that women in the paid workforce would get 6 months pay on their usual salary - up to a salary of $150,000 a year. The payments would be made by taxing big business - perhaps those that have incomes of more than $5 million - an additional tax of 1.7% on their company tax.

Mr Abbott's proposal is far more 'generous' than Mr Rudd's proposal, which is 18 weeks paid leave on the minimum wage.

We are concerned about the provision of paid maternity or parental leave - whether by government or big business - because it creates a huge division between waged and unwaged mothers. Research shows that young children do much better if they have the care of their mother for the first two or three years of life.

Tempe Harvey, who formed Kids First Australia to oppose discriminatory paid parental leave and the funding of daycare that is far higher than payments made for parent care, has expressed concern that this proposal is discriminatory - giving children of mothers who are in paid employment much more funding than children whose mothers are at home when they get pregnant.

A document, called 'The Great Childcare Gap' has been prepared by a nubmer of organisations that analyses the varying payments made to unwaged mothers and to waged mothers under both Mr Rudd's and Mr Abbott's schemes.
Read the 1 page analysis - The Great Childcare Gap

Tony Abbott's parental leave proposal has caused a huge furore:

- The Shadow Cabinet is unhappy that they weren't consulted before the announcement was made.

- Big business is unhappy that they will be charged an additional tax to pay for the scheme.

- On the other hand, small business supports it - because they will benefit and not have to pay for it!

- Some women's groups are supporting the move. Women's Forum Australia has issued a media release supporting his proposal. 

Update - Federal 'Charter of Rights'

The Rudd government is yet to make a response to the Brennan Inquiry report into whether Australia should have a 'Charter of Rights' or a 'Human Rights Act'.

The Consultation recommended a 'Charter of Rights' or a 'Human Rights Act' as well as a large number of legislative and administrative changes which it claims will 'protect human rights'.

We totally oppose a 'Charter of Rights' or a 'Human Rights Act'.

This article is well worth reading:

PM under pressure on the wrongs of human rights
Paul Kelly, Editor-at-large - The Australian - Feb 17, 2010.

See our Campaign page for more information on the Consultation.

Time to act...

It's time to write to all our federal MPs and Senators and tell them we DON'T WANT a 'Charter of Rights' or a 'Human Rights Act' and that we oppose the recommendations of the Brennan Consultation on Human Rights.

Same-sex "marriage" bill defeated

Good news! On Thursday 25 February the Federal Senate soundly rejected Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young's attempt to change the Marriage Act to include same-sex relationships.

Both the government and the Coalition opposed the Bill. The proposal lost 45 votes to five - this means 25 Senators did not vote. Only the five Greens Senators voted for the Bill - showing that they are more about radical social engineering than the environment.

The 'Marriage Equality Bill' was tabled by Hanson-Young last year and the Senate decided to send it to Committee. The Committee called for public submissions and a record number were received. Whilst there was considerable opposition a substantial number of submissions were supportive due to the growing activities and organisation of the homosexual lobby.

The Senate Committee rejected same-sex marriage but made two recommendations that we totally reject, including the formation of a national framework to rejecter same-sex and heterosexual relationships. and that the Australian government provide 'certificates of non-impediment' to homosexuals and lesbians wanting to get 'married' overseas.

The Senate report was tabled late last year and no response to it has yet been made.