How chuffed we all must be to know that Susan Ryan will be granted a leave of absence from the ALP pantheon in order to guide us. As one of the authors of the Sex Discrimination Act who can question her pedigree.

Might we appeal to her to expand the title of her document to read ‘Rights and Responsibilities Act’

George, I've never seen a convincing case made for a Bill of Rights, but I have seen convincing cases against. I would be surprised if there is serious popular support for such a move, at either state or federal level.

Until quite recently I used to be opposed to a bill of rights, on the eminently UNoriginal basis that rights were better enunciated within the common law than within any document.

That belief, however, required a basic faith that there were some things that a government - regardless of political stripe - would not do. I now have to revise that basic faith.

We have a government which seems quite happy to over-ride basic rights and a compliant opposition which barely raises a murmur. Habeus Corpus is now a privilege not a right. Don't believe me? Look at the ASIO Act or alternatively, ask David Hicks what he reckons.

Freedom of speech is heavily under attack. A country which never saw any need to ban violent Nazi or Communist propaganda, rightly assuming that most people would dismiss it for the nonsense it was, now sees the need to ban Islamic writings. Don't get me wrong - any pro-jihad writing is utter bullshoit by definition, but freedom of speech gives people the right to espouse utter bullshoit. If it steps over the line and becomes inciting criminal activity - well, we already have laws to cover that.

We have privative clauses in the Migration Act, to stop people from getting due process, for the government's convenience.

If ever we needed a bill of rights to protect us from our government, we need it now.

Anth

George should get full marks for his persistence on a Bill of Rights. He is obsessed with the damn thing.

George, like other proponents of a Bill of Rights, makes no secret of the fact that the Bill they have in mind has absolutely nothing to do with Australians, but is meant to cover ‘all people in Australia’. Those of you, who care enough, can check that out on OLO. Judy Cannon let the cat out of the bag in one of her articles on the subject and Susan Ryan’s part in it.

‘All people in Australia’ is really code for those who cannot accept democracy and the rule of law – George even refers to some of them: people in detention centres. Others not mentioned are ordinary criminals, terrorists and sundry other flotsam wanting to meddle with the democratic process for their own ends.

A Bill of Rights is a sure fire way for malcontent minorities and downright dangerous people to circumvent the democratic process. The really sad thing is that the average, dopey Australian will probably allow them to get away it

You said "While we need better protection for human rights in these jurisdictions, we also need a national human rights law".

No, absolutely not. Nobody has yet shown me a convincing case for a Bill of Rights at either the State or Federal level. What I have seen only convinces me that this is a blatant attempt at social engineering through stealth.

If you want a Bill of Rights, the "right" way to do it would be via referendum - not, for example, Steve Bracks moving through phony "community consultation" from preconceived ideas to foregone conclusions.

Put you arguments up and convince the electorate in a referendum - but expect me, at least, to be passionately arguing against it.

Anth,

For heavens sake get your facts right. The Communist and Nazi parties and all their publications were both banned at the start of World War 2 (remember the nazi-soviet pact?) and the ban was only rescinded on the Communist Party when Hitler attacked them.

The move to ban the communist party failed in 1951 because we were not in a state of war. The High Court in its judgement said that that if we had been at war the ban would have been valid.

We are now in a new type of war to which many people have trouble adjusting. In addition, the burgeoning world population, the main cause of all our troubles, will continue to push more illegals onto our shores, and this will not be tolerated by the Australian people.

I have just returned from overseas, and while there was congratulated six times on the wonderful Prime Minister we have. They only know one thing about John Howard; that he stopped the illegal immigrants.

I personally am strongly opposed to a bill of rights, because it will put too much power in the hands of lawyers. I can vote to throw out politicians if they fail to act as I would wish, but it is much harder to get rid of judges.

Unfortunately, the current state of quasi-war, together with the fall in living standards which must come over the next few years, means that many rights we normally enjoy will have to be suspended temporarily. This is much to be regretted, but the alternative would be much worse.

Thank heavens we are self-sufficient in food, minerals and energy, and have a sea boundary.