HREOC also risks becoming a laughing stock if they keep supporting 18c cases under the present conditions, you can't have the race discrimination commissioner actively soliciting complaints, as he did in the Bill Leek case.
HREOC actually does good work in other, more important areas such as matters of discrimination based on age and disability, you know, real world problems as opposed to highly subjective or fake claims of "racism".
18c is also now being used to settle factional disputes within the NSW Liberal party, the Trent Zimmerman case clearly shows the true intent of 18c, that it's never been anything but a political tool designed to employ ethnic minority groups in the service of vested interests.

It is an hopelessly compromised organisation having displayed evident bias frequently. Reputational loss is poison to legal determinations. The only way to clean these stables are to burn it down.

Any and all judgements can and will be dismissed without any arguement on merits as it's just "Triggy at it again"; even if its a fare and valid one.

Of course the complaint was vexatious! The complainant was/is too precious and self-absorbed to deal with other human beings. She should also be made to repay taxpayers the costs her that silliness incurred, and the Triggs woman should be sacked, the Commission closed down for good.

The natural resilience of aboriginal people was eroded in the 70s when they were deemed a special interest group and afforded rights and privileges not given to mainstream members of the community.
Before then they had a higher employment rate, better school attendance, a great ability to laugh at themselves and a desire to achieve in life at the same standard as white people.
As soon as they were deemed a special, disadvantaged group they began to lose their self belief that they could compete on a level playing field. Previously unheard of suicides began to happen. Drug and alcohol addiction flourished and identity politics became the driving factor, as opposed to natural ambition and self survival skills.
Pandora's box is well and truly open and I doubt we will ever return to the days of most aboriginal people striving to achieve as equals with the rest of the community. Victimhood is a far easier option, and those many aboriginal people simply getting on with their lives and quietly achieving will continue to be unheard and unrecognised.

What a pile of utter garbage.

What are you doing Leon, trying to build a case to get this conniving Prior woman out of having to pay legal costs of these kids & their families.

It is totally obvious that this smarty saw a chance for a quick buck, & went for the throats. This is proven by the fact she took a few thousand to drop others from the suit. Principle never entered into it.

This was always about the money, & never about anything even approaching a principle. Looked at seriously, the lab itself is an attack on any principle of fairness, or equality.

Even the thought of a taxpayer funded facility being restricted to use by one particular race should be upsetting the bleeding hearts & the aboriginals more than the rest of us. The fact that it doesn't proves that principal has nothing to do with their actions, just a lust & grab for more handouts.

Big Nana & Hasbeen,

Spot on! They are cunning. Remember that when you are asked to vote on the reconise referendum. You will probably get motherhood statements they want you to agree with, but which will be able to be twisted by the senile ex-lawyers on the High Court to hand whatever Aborigines want to them on a plate. One leading Aboriginal activist has admitted to an author that, if they stated what they want in plain, simple language, it would never get past the Australian people. No amount of legislation will overturn a High Court decision. It happened in Canada; it happened in New Zealand. In NZ, all the Chief Justice has to do, is to say that he disagrees with the government's intepretation of wording, and that's the end of the matter. In Canada, the Courts have taken over because of the "vague wording". Besides, we already know that our government duopoly is already willing for 3% of the population to eventually own 60% of the continent; they already have 30.1%, with another 30% plus pending. The latter claims have been accepted, but not ratified, by the Native Title Tribunal, but the Tribunal no longer accepts claims that are not almost certain to be granted.

I'm Not sure s18C has ever actually prevented anyone from saying what they wanted to say, always providing common courtesy and civility were inherent in most public utterings?

That said, it cannot be allowed to be subverted to in effect, allow or encourage reverse racism or apartheid? If there is to be an aboriginal only lab, then it's fair that there also ought to be one reserved just as exclusively for white supremacists? Or very short very round, pointy head people? Roll up, roll up. Enough large posterior pedestals to go round.

If only to underline that fact, that making anything exclusive on race based or pointy head grounds, is wrong!

What's next Mz Prior, blacks only, toilets?

I think this risible rubbish has gone far to far, and while I don't necessarily agree with Big Nana's total take, I think she makes some valid points.

That said, I don't believe that 18 C is inherently bad law, even if the white supremacists want it completely repealed? So they can get back to behaving like resolute, redoutable, redneck, recidivist, revhead racists, repeatedly requiring revenge? Careful, you might get roistered on your own spitard?

We want that Crap flushed as it should be! And the considerable costs against the activist students, who with some humour, pushed the right button, ought to be forgiven or met!

And wouldn't be good if a few of our better off urban blacks passed the hat around to ensure just that outcome?
Alan B.

Alan B.
Even if these people you describe exist (hint, they don't) what possible use would so called "hate speech" be to anyone?
You labour under the false assumption that denigrating people based on race or religion is a short cut to mobilising a theoretical mass movement of some sort, nothing could be further from the truth.
You people roar with laughter when overtly bigoted groups like Party For Freedom and Rise Up! fail, but continue the fear mongering over "racism" as if it's a realistic and viable political tactic.
The people calling for the repeal of 18c are your IPA and Libertarian types and they most definitely don't make even the slightest effort at appealing to the 'unwashed", classes of people whom they hold in complete contempt.

Alan B, if you believe that 18C is safe then why don't you make a
comment about fair skinned aboriginals getting xxxkkjh ?

Try that on for size,

One apparently spurious case on a university campus is now being used as a basis to throw out 18C?

Curious as to how the original case against 18C was based upon a member of the 'media and social elite' (who complains about 'elites') making errors of fact to make a point about race.

Interesting how libertarians, neo cons, white nativists, related elites and followers like the freedom to dish out the dirt but squeal when it is directed back at them?

Like other cultural issues and elsewhere US, UK, middle Europe etc. immigration, identity etc. are focused upon so obsessively by the same and media, it makes one think it is merely to create fog and a distraction from substantive policy issues of the day i.e. maintain the status quo or worse?

Good case in point, even if Trump won the US election, it will leave the GOP seriously compromised and divided, ditto Tories in the UK over Brexit, who does this actually help?

These machinations seem to be an indicator that conservatives following the radical, neo con and libertarian right are being led down a cul de sac; many of this ilk seem believe their world is ending.... and they are doing the utmost to bring it on.... includes trying to convince everyone else.

Andras Smith, the only people who can possibly be in favour of 18C are those who hate whites, or those who think they can make a quid out of it for themselves, or their clients.

Which would you be?

Andras,

This QUT case was clearly spurious from the very beginning, and the fact that QUT had already cleared them of any wrong doing, the lawyers working for the idiot Triggs should have advised Prior not to proceed. However, they continued and with the students facing huge legal bills was able to shake down most of the students for go away money. Now with Prior having lost the case she is liable for the court expenses and the legal costs of the students, but I guess will simply default.

But so far 18c has been a path to enrichment facilitated by lawyers that used to chase ambulances. It is a serious breach of the rights of people to speak freely and should be scrapped.

This URL should give you the transcript of the judgment:

prior-v-queensland-university-of-technology-ors-no-2-2016-fcca-2853.pdf

Note that Ms Prior is the lone complainant, and that the QUT, as well as eight students, are the respondents. No sign of the AHRC.

So their role is to take up someone's case, assure them that they can win it, get them to complain, then drop out and leave them to it. Clean hands.

So will Ms Prior be sued for damages ?

Meanwhile, the AHRC touts for business in relation to Bill Leak's courageous work. It demands that he explain himself to the AHRC while it waits for a complaint. Presumably it will assure some complainant of legal success, and big bucks, and then piss off again.

How many of us have put some of Bill's cartoons up on our fridge doors, or pin-boards ? He gets across complex issues in an instant, in a world which has evolved to absorb news in seconds and is impatient with wordy explanations, like this one. If that isn't a massive contribution to world literature, I don't know what is.

So I wish to propose Bill Leak for next year's Nobel Prize for Literature. And maybe the Nobel Peace Prize as well.

I'd be so proud ! Talk about punching above our weight !

Joe

the fact that Triggs is still there and the abc is still funded shows exactly why we need a Trump in Australia.

Right wing nutters...section 18C has been in existence since 1995 brought in by Paul Keating. Yes a Labor initiative and any Labor legislation MUST be wrong of course.

However, during the 11 years of Howard's Prime Ministership, the LNP had no interest in changing 18C despite numerous cases.

Had it not been for Bolt and The Australian and the result of his guilty verdict, the issue would have been a non event and as has often been pointed out...Section 18D gives anybody "freedom of speech" in a relevant context; except the freedom to knowingly lie.

Further the AHRC is obliged by legislation to investigate any complaint (please provide evidence that they "tout" for business those making this accusation). Under the governing legislation they are obliged to mediate only and in the event that mediation fails, the complainant has the right to litigate. There is not one shred of evidence that the complainant was "urged" or recommended to proceed to court by the AHRC.

It is probably not surprising that you all have it wrong, even Brandis and Turnbull have not bothered to read/understand the AHRC charter.

The fact that there are people who think we need a Trump in Australia shows us exactly why the ABC should still be funded and Triggs is still needed!

The huge cock up that is Triggs is difficult to justify under any circumstances.