Engayment.org » Negative Response http://www.engayment.org It's not the same Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:25:28 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 en hourly 1 Tanya Plibersek – Replied http://www.engayment.org/received/negativeresponse/tanya-plibersek-response/ http://www.engayment.org/received/negativeresponse/tanya-plibersek-response/#comments Thu, 18 Dec 2008 09:30:38 +0000 Andrew http://www.engayment.org/?p=280 THIS IS NOT ABOUT TELSTRA

Point to ponder:  

Maybe the Government doesn’t want to change the law to grant homosexual people equal discrimination rights, because if we were able to make complaints under any discrimination category (rather than just employment), we could then complain to the Australian Human Rights Commision that our human rights have been violated by the Australian Government itself.
Being denied the ability to Marry because of where you are positioned in a social demographic, is a denial of personal liberty and an intentional thwarting of the potential for one’s own individual happiness.

When I discovered that the Australian Human Rights Commission would not hear any sexual preference discrimination complaints (other than employment complaints), I wrote the Minister Tanya Plibersek a Letter.

I was stupid, in that I mentioned the Telstra Ad that had spurred me to look into making a complaint when I wrote the letter, and of course, this is what The World and Tanya focused on. 

I asked Tanya to explain to me why there was a discrepancy at www.humanrights.gov.au surrounding sexual preference discrimination. Tanya had assured me in person a few weeks earlier that there were NO DIFFERENCES between Homosexual people and Heterosexual People in terms of Government Policy (Apart from Marriage). So I was shocked and confused to find this discrepancy on their website.

My issue is that the Australian Human Rights Commission WILL NOT handle a complaint made about Sexual Preference Discrimination (Unless it is specific to Employment, and only employment).

Why can’t they handle sexual preference complaints?

Because it’s the Law.

Who can change the Law?

Politicians.

Who is a politican?

Tanya Plibersek.

What does Tanya Plibersek say about the fact that the Australian Human Rights Commission is bound by a discriminatory law that has supposed to have been fixed?

Dear Andrew, 

Thank you for emailing me with your concerns about the Human Rights Commission’s scope for responding to discrimination based on sexual preference.

 

While I share your opposition to discriminatory advertising, the ability of the Human Rights Commission to respond to complaints is governed by acts of parliament, in this case the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986. Advertising is not a jurisdiction covered by any of the four Acts administered by the Commission – including sex, race and disability.

 

I would recommend you take up your complaint with the Australian Communications and Media Authority (www.acma.gov.au) since they are the appropriate body to represent your interests in this case.

 

Thank you again for emailing me, I appreciate you raising your concerns with me.

 

Best wishes,

 

Tanya
The Hon Tanya Plibersek MP
Federal Member for Sydney

Because I was stupid enough to preface my letter by mentioning Telstra, Tanya went on to give me advice on how to complain about the Telstra Commercial. I really wish I had not mentioned it, because it subsequently meant that Tanya did not answer my question as to WHY the Australian Human Rights Commission is not legally capable of handling Sexual Preference Discrimination complaints that fall outside of the realm of Employment Issues.

I want to know why this law has not been changed?

I will have to respond and ask Tanya again.
 
If you choose to comment on this Article, do me, the world, and yourself a favour, and don’t mention Telstra or their stupid Ad.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT TELSTRA

]]> http://www.engayment.org/received/negativeresponse/tanya-plibersek-response/feed/ 3 Humanrights.gov.au – Response http://www.engayment.org/received/negativeresponse/humanrightsgovau-response/ http://www.engayment.org/received/negativeresponse/humanrightsgovau-response/#comments Thu, 11 Dec 2008 01:08:23 +0000 Andrew http://www.engayment.org/?p=87 They are fast!
This is a response to a complaint I lodged with www.humanrights.gov.au -
You can view my initial complaint here

Karen from www.humanrights.gov.au responded, quickly I might add.
Sadly her response is a palm off. Not her fault, but still…
Here it is:

Dear Andrew

 

The laws we administer only allow us to deal with complaints on the basis of sexual preference in the area of employment. Unfortunately we cant just change our laws to expand their coverage as that is a matter for parliament. We are unable to deal with your complaint because it is not within our jurisdiction to accept complaints not covered by our laws.

If you wish to complain about advertising you may wish to contact the Australian Communications and Media Authority who handle complaints about advertising. The contact details for ACMA are available on its website at www.acma.gov.au.

 

Karen Toohey

Director, Complaint Handling Section
Australian Human Rights Commission
Level 8 Piccadilly Tower, 133 Castlereagh St, Sydney NSW 2000
GPO Box 5218, Sydney NSW 2001
T +61 2 9284 9746   F +61 2 9284 9689
E karen.toohey@humanrights.gov.au   W www.humanrights.gov.au


Human rights: everyone, everywhere, everyday

My favourite part is the quote at the end: “Human rights: everyone,  everywhere, everyday”
Well, no so much Everyone Karen. Maybe you should update your quote to be:
Human Rights: Everyone, Everyone except Gay People, Everywhere, Everday.

So, Tanya Plibersek who told me that the Rudd government has wiped clean all of the human rights discrepancies was either not telling me the truth, or she was wrong.

Time to send her a letter.

]]> http://www.engayment.org/received/negativeresponse/humanrightsgovau-response/feed/ 4