Qld: Newman government's draconian industrial relations laws quashed

KIM LANDERS: Last year Queensland's public hospital doctors staged angry public protests and threatened mass resignations when the then Newman government decided to force them onto individual contracts.

Now the doctors are just one of the groups to benefit from the Labor Government's decision to restore collective bargaining rights.

The reversal of the Newman government's industrial relations laws also reinstates the power of unions to enter work sites, sparking criticism about union influence on the now Labor Government.

STEPHANIE SMAIL: When the former Newman government announced it would force public hospital specialists on to individual contracts, they hit back.

QUEENSLAND DOCTOR: We are not going to give in to this threat, we are not going to give in to bullies. We are going to face them down and they do not know the anger that is within us.

STEPHANIE SMAIL: The doctors threatened to resign en masse and move interstate or overseas to find better conditions.

QUEENSLAND DOCTOR 2: This is not a bluff because the conditions are so bad. Doctors are usually conservative but it's made us so angry that we are prepared to walk.

STEPHANIE SMAIL: Last night the Queensland Parliament reversed that decision as part of the Palaszczuk Government's overhaul of industrial relations laws.

The president of the Queensland branch of the Australian Medical Association, Dr Shaun Rudd says doctors will welcome the move.

He says it will give doctors a fair dispute-resolution process.

SHAUN RUDD: Unfortunately we've gone through all this process now, we'll probably to back to where we were before we started so unfortunately the disruption that that it's caused and the angst that it has caused.

STEPHANIE SMAIL: The overhaul will reverse other aspects of the Newman government's crackdown on public servants too.

Parliament has agreed to restore the rights of unions to enter work sites and allow the Industrial Relations Commission to set awards without considering the financial position of employers.

The laws also return protections against contracting out government services.

STEPHANIE SMAIL: Queensland's Public Sector Union argues the overhaul will return fair conditions to workers.

Alex Scott is the secretary of the Together Union.

ALEX SCOTT: I think it's part of the process of restoring fairness to the industrial relations system. There were a range of appalling measures made by the previous Newman government in relation to public sector workers both in terms of the sacking of thousands of workers but also in terms of stripping of conditions in the middle of the night in contrary to pre-election commitments given by the Newman government.

Brian Burdekin defends Gillian Triggs

Australia's first federal human rights commissioner says both Tony Abbott and George Brandis have made a grave political error in maintaining their attack on Gillian Triggs.

The Prime Minister and his Attorney-General have criticised the credibility of Professor Triggs, the president of the Human Rights Commission, in the wake of a release of a damning report into children in detention.

Mr Abbott described the Human Rights Commission report as a "blatantly partisan, politicised exercise" and later said he had lost confidence in Professor Triggs.

Professor Brian Burdekin told AM the sustained attack was "disgraceful" and "politically stupid".

"I think it was not only misconceived, [but], quite frankly, totally inappropriate and disgraceful," he told AM's Elizabeth Jackson.

"I think from the feedback I've been getting - and I still obviously am in touch with a lot of people in the human rights arena: a lot of people in legal circles, a lot of people in non-government organisations who care for the most vulnerable and the most disadvantaged - the feedback has been universally, as far as I can perceive it, hostile to what the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General were trying to do.

"And to that extent I think it's politically quite unwise. I honestly don't understand why the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General felt it appropriate to do it."

Professor Burdekin said Senator Brandis did not appear to have a clear understanding of what his role of attorney-general entailed.

"To be honest, I am deeply concerned that the Attorney-General we have at the minute simply doesn't understand what the remit of the Human Rights Commission is," he said.

"I mean, he's actually talked about the fact that we really just need to rely on the Magna Carta. Well, the role of the Human Rights Commission, as Gillian Triggs has pointed out recently and as I pointed out many years ago, is to stand up for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged groups in our community: the homeless, the mentally ill, Indigenous people, people with disabilities, children in detention.

"You won't find any of that in the Magna Carta, I can guarantee you.

"The things that the Human Rights Commission is obliged to do by law are directly related to those very vulnerable groups and its highest priorities have to be those who are least able to defend themselves.

Justice Michelle Gordon appointed to High Court

The appointment of the highly regarded judge has been widely welcomed by the law community. 
Constitutional law expert Professor George Williams from the University of New South Wales said the Government should be commended for its choice, despite the quirky family connection.
"I think people were wondering before the appointment whether the Government would make it in light of her family connection," he said.
"Surely that is not something in this day and age that should be a relevant factor.
"Her appointment should be considered on its merits and there's no doubt that it's a very strong appointment indeed."
Justice Gordon has already had a high-profile career as a Federal Court judge, especially in commercial and tax law.
Last year she heard the consumer watchdog's case over claims Coles had used unconscionable conduct towards its suppliers, ending with a $10 million penalty against the company.
Justice Gordon also ruled against ANZ on late payment of credit card fees.
This ruling was recently overturned by the full bench of the Federal Court, and is already slated for a High Court challenge.

Human Rights Lawyers support Prof. Triggs

Before an audience of human rights lawyers in Melbourne on Friday night, Professor Triggs did set her sights on a raft of national security legislation that has been passed by successive governments since the September 11 attacks in the United States.

Professor Triggs told the forum a "growing threat to democracy" was the diminishing of human rights and expansion of "discretionary, often non-compellable ministerial powers". 

"Respective governments have been remarkably successful in persuading parliaments to pass laws that are contrary, even explicitly contrary, to common law rights and to the international human rights regime to which Australia is a party," she said. 

She said counterterrorism laws were passed with "unseemly haste" last year and the proposal to strip citizenship from foreign fighters who are "potentially dual nationals" was an example of executive power which had gone too far.

"This proposal strikes at the heart of Australia as a largely migrant country," she said. 

"Not only may this idea violate Australia's international obligation not to render a person stateless, but also the detention may be at the discretion of a minister without recourse to judicial processes."

Professor Triggs has support from the president of the Court of Appeal of Victoria, Justice Chris Maxwell, who labels the attack on Professor Triggs as "despicable". 

"Tonight we have been privileged to have amongst us, one of our foremost warriors, as we have been pleased to see Gillian, you might be bloodied, but you are certainly unbowed," he said. 

Paul Bonjourno: Abbott attack on Gillian Triggs backfires

On national security, it’s the government’s way or the highway. That’s why its latest attack on Gillian Triggs is more than just an ongoing vendetta.

The Abbott government’s attack on the president of the Human Rights Commission Gillian Triggs as “blatantly partisan” has backfired spectacularly.

Former Howard government cabinet minister Amanda Vanstone has lined up with those appalled by its latest affront to the rule of law.

That’s the rule that guarantees our freedoms against tyranny as another senior Liberal, Malcolm Turnbull, reminded the nation last week.

“You can imagine my profound disappointment, bordering on despair, when I see someone on ‘my team’ thinking it is OK for a minister alone to take away citizen’s rights – indeed take away citizenship – in the blink of an eye,” she wrote. “No appeal, no judicial process, just a ministerial decision. What were they thinking?”

The anger and the language used by Ms Vanstone was much stronger than Professor Triggs’ latest foray into the marketplace.

The Commission president, whose job is to blow the whistle on governments straying from their stated and accepted obligations, has been attacked for doing just that.

“The overreach of executive power is clear in the yet-to-be defined proposal that those accused of being jihadists fighting against Australian interests will be stripped of their citizenship if they’re potentially dual citizens,” she warned.

The government didn’t like that statement, or this one:

“Have we thought about what the consequences are of pushing people back to our neighbours, Indonesia? Is it any wonder that Indonesia will not engage with us on other issues that we care about, like the death penalty?”

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton on Friday demanded Professor Triggs front the cameras and retract “this outrageous slur”.

On Sunday, with a little prompting from conservative commentator Andrew Bolt, the minister said the president should contemplate whether to stay in the role, “when you reduce the position to basically that of a political advocate”.

The approach completely fits in with the political modus operandi of the Abbott government. There is no nuance. There is no place for anyone to question. Especially in this area. If Ms Vanstone, Mr Turnbull or anyone else has concerns they are as bad as the Labor party.

There has been a cold calculation that voters’ sensitivities about their individual liberties pale into irrelevance compared to their fears of terrorist attack.

And just in case people don’t think the threat is real, Mr Dutton, like Tony Abbott, keeps reminding them.

“I think people realise now this is a significant threat,” he said. “It is the most significant national security threat we face.”

No doubt that perception is fed by the Lindt Cafe siege late last year.

Never mind that the government and its agencies were caught napping on that one. Laws and alerts already in place were not even applied.

The political imperative is to sound tough and look like you are doing something.

So far there has been no explanation how stripping citizenship from anybody will make us safer.

What we do know, thanks to Professor Triggs, is that what is proposed will make us less free.