A suite of amendments to the Northern Territory's anti-discrimination laws have been passed by parliament overnight, after hours of fierce debate and despite a strong backlash from religious groups.
It marks the first time the legislation has been substantially overhauled since the original act was passed 30 years ago.
The changes include the contentious removal of a clause that previously allowed religious groups to discriminate against a person on the basis of their religious beliefs or sexuality, and an expansion of personal attributes protected under the legislation.
"We are putting equality into our workplaces and we are ensuring that those vulnerable Territorians, when they are vilified, that they have protection," Chief Minister Natasha Fyles said yesterday.
"And I do not think it's too much to ask of this house to pass this legislation and support the most vulnerable in the Northern Territory."
In a statement released late last night, NT anti-discrimination commissioner Sally Sievers welcomed the reforms.
"They enable the Anti-Discrimination Commission to assist more people resolve more matters that impact negatively in their lives, whilst at the same time working proactively to prevent discrimination," she said.
The Country Liberal Party (CLP) voted against the bill, which Opposition Leader Lia Finocchiaro said "erodes freedom of speech and erodes freedom of religion".
'Larrikinism' under threat, opposition says
During the heated debate leading up to the vote on Tuesday, CLP members questioned whether the new laws would erode the territory's "larrikin culture".
In Question Time, Member for Katherine Jo Hersey asked if campaigns and events "that have become part of the Territory way of life" — including the Pig and Pussy Hunt, the Great Jerk-Off and the Muff Festival — could be considered "offensive" under the legislation.
"With radical changes to freedom of speech, Territorians could say goodbye to these events," she said.
"Why do you find Territory icons so offensive, Chief Minister?"
In response, Ms Fyles said Ms Hersey's suggestion was trivial and offensive to marginalised groups in the territory and accused the opposition of "scaremongering".
Courts have previously said this type of law only applies to profound and serious impacts and does not cover "mere slights".
The CLP said that should be explicitly included in the legislation, arguing the reforms were vague enough to potentially land people before the Anti-Discrimination Commission for making a joke.
Religious schools opposed
Some of the reforms have received backlash from the territory's religious communities, including the removal of an exemption for faith-based schools still in force across other Australian jurisdictions.
Under Section 37A of the previous act, religious schools were permitted to exclude job applicants on the basis of their religious belief, activity or sexuality if they did so in good faith to avoid offending the sensitivities of their followers.
A protest against the changes on the weekend was attended by representatives of the NT Christian schools network and the territory's Catholic, Islamic, Sikh, Hindu and Buddhist communities.
Christian Schools NT chief executive Phoebe Van Bentum said the reforms would "completely remove the protections for religious schools to employ people of the same belief".
The same religious groups have also criticised the government for only removing the exemption following the end of the bill's public consultation period.
NT Attorney-General Chansey Paech has said religious organisations will not be prevented from "delivering faith-based elements within the school" under the legislation and that an existing clause allows some hiring decisions to be made along religious lines.
Members of the LGBT community have spoken out in support of the changes, which they said would foster greater inclusivity, especially within religious schools.
Opposition claims freedom of speech at risk
The CLP has also previously raised issues with several provisions it says will infringe on people's freedom of speech.
Section 20A makes it an offence to do something "reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or group of people" because of a personal attribute.
The CLP argued the provision would open people up to liability just for telling a joke.
"Under these changes, telling a joke in the pub could see you hauled up before the Anti-Discrimination Commission because the joke could offend someone," CLP deputy leader Gerard Maley said at a rally on the weekend.
"Anyone hearing, or overhearing, the joke could lodge a complaint because it could offend a person or a group of people."
However, Labor has said the section immediately following section 20A limits its reach in a range of circumstances.
Mr Paech said the two sections together — which Labor refers to as anti-vilification provisions — were modelled on a section in the Commonwealth racial discrimination act and were defined by the courts.
"There is an extremely high threshold, and it is about causing severe harm to another individual," he said.
The CLP has vowed to overturn the legislation if elected in 2024.
