Hansard debates

Tim RICHARDSON (Mordialloc – Minister for Local Government, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Renters) (11:17): Under the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act ‍2006, I table a statement of compatibility:

Opening paragraphs

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, (the Charter), I make this Statement of Compatibility with respect to the Associations Incorporation Reform Amendment Bill ‍2026 (the Bill).

In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with human rights protected by the Charter. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement.

Overview

The purpose of the Bill is to strengthen the regulation of incorporated associations under the Associations Incorporation Reform Act 2012 (AIRA) to ensure that the benefits of incorporation are only available to groups that reflect the intent of the AIRA.

The Bill introduces reforms to provide powers to the Registrar of Incorporated Associations (the Registrar) to exclude associations and registrable bodies that have been declared as prohibited hate groups and listed terrorist organisations from registration under the AIRA, as well as provide the Registrar with a discretionary power to exclude groups from registration under the AIRA where registration is not in the public interest. The purpose of these reforms is to prevent groups whose purposes or activities are fundamentally inconsistent with the maintenance and promotion of community safety, social cohesion and the public interest from benefiting through incorporation under the AIRA.

The Bill also introduces reforms to exclude associations and registrable bodies with an industrial relations purpose from registration under the AIRA. The purpose of these reforms is to ensure that groups with industrial purposes are regulated under more appropriate existing schemes for the regulation of industrial bodies, such as the Fair Work Act 2009 and Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (FWRO Act).

The Bill will amend the AIRA to:

• prevent prohibited hate groups and listed terrorist organisations from registering as incorporated associations by requiring the Registrar to refuse an application for registration

• remove prohibited hate groups and listed terrorist organisations from the register of incorporated associations by requiring the Registrar to direct the association to wind up

• prevent groups from registering as incorporated associations where in the Registrar’s opinion, circumstances exist which, in the public interest, justify the decision to refuse an applicant for registration. In making these decisions, the Registrar must have regard to the association’s purpose or conduct and the effect or likely effect of the purpose or conduct on the public and whether the effect or likely effect on any person or group of persons is because of a protected attribute under section 102B of the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (EO Act)

• provide that in making a decision to wind up an incorporated association on the basis of the public interest, the Registrar must have regard to the association’s purpose or conduct and the effect or likely effect of the purpose or conduct on the public and whether the effect or likely effect on any person or groups of persons is because of a protected attribute under section 102B of the EO Act

• prevent groups with an industrial relations purpose from registering as incorporated associations by requiring the Registrar to refuse an application for registration

• remove groups registered as an incorporated association with an industrial relations purpose from the register by requiring the Registrar to direct the association to wind up unless they are exempt, fall within the meaning of a ‘transferring association’ for the purposes of the Bill or alter the purposes in their Rules to omit any industrial relations purpose

• enable the Registrar to request information concerning the purposes or conduct of an applicant or incorporated association to support these decisions.

Human Rights Issues

The human rights protected by the Charter that are relevant to the Bill are:

• Recognition and equality before the law (section 8)

• Reputation (section 13)

• Freedom of expression (section 15)

• Right to peaceful assembly and freedom of association (section 16)

• Cultural rights (section 19)

Recognition and equality before the law (Section 8)

Section 8(2) of the Charter provides that every person has the right to enjoy their human rights without discrimination. Section 8(3) of the Charter provides that every person is equal before the law, is entitled to the equal protection of the law without discrimination, and has the right to equal and effective protection against discrimination.

Discrimination under the Charter means discrimination within the meaning of the Equal Opportunity Act ‍2010 (EO Act) on the basis of an attribute set out in section 6 of that Act (including, for example, age, sex or disability). Discrimination can either be direct or indirect. Direct discrimination occurs where a person treats, or proposes to treat, a person with an attribute unfavourably because of that attribute. Indirect discrimination occurs where a person imposes a requirement, condition or practice that has, or is likely to have, the effect of disadvantaging persons with a protected attribute, but only where that requirement, condition or practice is not reasonable.

Hate group reform

Clauses 6 and 9 of the Bill promote the right to recognition and equality before the law by amending section 7(2) and 13(2) of the AIRA to require the Registrar to refuse an application to incorporate a body if that association is a listed terrorist organisation or prohibited hate group specified by regulations made under the Commonwealth Criminal Code. The purpose of clauses 6 and 9 is to prevent groups which have been declared as unlawful by the Commonwealth government, and whose purposes and activities are contrary to community safety, social cohesion, and the public interest, from accessing the benefits of incorporation under the AIRA. Clause 11 of the Bill also promotes the right to recognition and equality before the law by introducing section 127(2B) into the AIRA to require the Registrar to wind up an incorporated association by certificate if the Registrar certifies that the association is a prohibited hate group or a listed terrorist organisation. This clause has the same purpose as clauses 6 and 9, but applies this purpose by empowering the Registrar to remove such groups which are already accessing the benefits of incorporation under the AIRA.

By removing the ability for groups with a hateful purpose to have access to the legal and financial benefits of being registered as an incorporated association under the AIRA as well as the social licence that can be created by the decision to register a body, the Bill promotes the right by taking steps to diminish or eliminate conditions that may result in groups of people suffering disadvantage. The Bill aims to help protect groups of people with a protected attribute under section 102B of the EO Act from disadvantage by ensuring that groups with a hateful purpose cannot promote their views or discriminate against those persons by using the legal and financial benefits provided by incorporation under the AIRA.

Clauses 6 and 9 of the Bill may engage the right to recognition and equality before the law by amending sections 7 and 13 of the AIRA to require the Registrar to refuse to register a proposed association or registrable body on the grounds that it is a prohibited hate group or listed terrorist organisation, as defined by clause 4 of the Bill. Clause 11 of the Bill may also engage the right by inserting section 127(2B) into the AIRA to require the Registrar to wind up an association which is a prohibited hate group or a listed terrorist organisation. The refusal to register or the winding up of a prohibited hate group or listed terrorist organisation may engage the right because the decision of the Registrar may affect an individual’s ability to practice their religious or political beliefs under a recognised collective association and therefore draw distinctions between peoples based on attributes listed in section 6 of the EO Act.

I am of the view that clauses 6, 9 and 11 of the Bill do not limit the right to recognition and equality before the law because they do not limit an individual’s ability to practice their religious or political beliefs and membership of prohibited hate groups and listed terrorist organisations is unlawful under the Criminal Code. The Bill is not directed at preventing Victorians from enjoying religious practices or political belief or activity, but rather seeks to prevent groups with a hate purpose from obtaining the legal and financial benefits of incorporation under the AIRA.

Industrial relations reform

Clauses 6, 9 and 11 of the Bill may engage the right to recognition and equality before the law by amending sections 7(2) and 13(2) and inserting section 127(2B) into the AIRA to provide that the Registrar must refuse to register groups with an industrial relations purpose as incorporated associations or, if they are already registered, direct them to wind up.

By excluding associations with an industrial relations purpose from becoming, or remaining, registered under the AIRA, clauses 6, 9 and 11 may engage section 8(2) of the Charter by impacting an individual’s ability to engage in industrial relations activity through membership of an industrial association. Industrial relations activity, including forming or joining an industrial association, is a protected attribute on the basis of which discrimination is prohibited by the EO Act. The effects of impacting an individual’s ability to engage in industrial relations activity may be compounded where individuals with protected attributes who may face discrimination and disadvantage in the workplace seek to form an industrial relations association to further, protect or represent their industrial interests.

I am of the view that preventing associations with an industrial relations purpose from incorporating under the AIRA does not constitute a limit on the right under section 8 of the Charter. Clauses 6, 9 and 11 do not prevent individuals from forming and joining organisations with an industrial relations purpose under another legislative framework. The purpose of these clauses is to ensure that groups with an industrial relations purpose seek registration under a legal structure more appropriate for those purposes, rather than under the AIRA, which provides a general framework for not-for-profit community associations to seek incorporation. Associations with a primary purpose of industrial relations can register and be incorporated under the FWRO Act. Registration under the FWRO Act confers a range of statutory rights, such as bargaining on behalf of an association’s members and initiating protected industrial actions. Incorporation under the AIRA does not confer similar rights and this creates a risk that individuals joining associations incorporated under the AIRA may mistakenly believe that in doing so they avail themselves of full industrial relations protections.

Clause 13 of the Bill engages and may limit section 8(3) by amending section 222(1)(d) of the AIRA to provide that regulations may prescribe an association or class of associations with an industrial relations purpose that may be incorporated under the AIRA. The purpose of clause 13 is to ensure that the application of the Bill is appropriately confined and does not capture associations outside of the intended scope of the Bill. However, the application of clause 13 may allow for certain groups with industrial relations purposes to use incorporation under the AIRA to further, protect or represent their industrial interests while other groups are excluded. I do not consider that clause 13 constitutes a limitation on the right to recognition and equality under section 8(3). This provision does not itself impose differential treatment but instead creates a mechanism for specifying classes of associations in a manner that will be subject to parliamentary oversight.

Clauses 4 and 11 of the Bill engages and may limit section 8(3) by providing for a category of association (a ‘transferring association’) that is not required to be wound up despite having an industrial relations purpose. Clause 4 amends section 3 of the AIRA to provide that an incorporated association that applied to be registered under the FWRO Act prior to 1 July 2026 is a transferring association, while clause 11 amends section 127 to provide that the Registrar is not required to wind up such associations, despite them having an industrial relations purpose. Specifying a retrospective date for the operation of the transferring association provisions preferences members of associations with an industrial relations purpose who have already commenced transferring to the FWRO Act scheme.

However, clause 12 of the Bill will introduce new section 128A into the AIRA which provides that if an associations’ application to register under the FWRO Act is refused, the Registrar will be required to issue it with a fresh show cause notice under section 128 of the AIRA. This will mean that the association will have a period of two months within which to lodge an application to alter its rules. This period will enable the association to comply with the alteration of rules requirements set out in section 50 of the AIRA. The effect of the clauses of the Bill will mitigate any potential discriminatory distinction between persons based on the attribute of their industrial activity.

In the circumstance, I consider that any limitation is small as it likely to disadvantage a small number of associations seeking to apply to the FWRO Act scheme and for a limited period of time while their application is being determined.

Public interest test reform

Clauses 6 and 9 of the Bill promotes the right to recognition and equality before the law by amending sections ‍7(3) and 13(3) of the AIRA to allow the Registrar to refuse to incorporate a body if reasons exist that mean it is in the public interest to refuse incorporation. In considering the public interest, the Registrar must consider the purposes and conduct of the body and the effect or likely effect of the purposes or conduct on the public, including whether the effect or likely effect on any person or group of persons is because of a protected attribute as defined under section 102B of the EO Act. Clause 11 of the Bill also promotes the right to recognition and equality before the law by introducing section 127(2A) into the AIRA to require the Registrar to consider as part of the public interest test to justify the winding up of an incorporated association the purposes and conduct of the body and the effect or likely effect of the purposes or conduct on the public, including whether the effect or likely effect on any persons and groups of persons is because of a protected attribute as defined under section 102B of the EO Act.

The purpose of these provisions is to protect groups of people with a protected attribute under section 102B of the EO Act from disadvantage by ensuring that groups with a hateful purpose cannot promote their views or seek to discriminate against those persons by using the advantages provided by incorporation under the AIRA. By allowing the Registrar to remove registration of associations in the public interest and requiring the Registrar to consider the effect of the conduct and purpose of the association on people with protected attributes listed in the EO Act, the Bill restricts the ability for groups with a hateful purpose to have access to the legal and financial benefits of being registered as an incorporated association under the AIRA, or the social licence that can be created by the decision to register a body. Accordingly, I consider that the Bill promotes the right to recognition and equality before the law by taking steps to diminish or eliminate conditions that may result in groups of people suffering disadvantage.

Clauses 6 and 9 of the Bill may also engage the right to recognition and equality before the law by amending sections 7 and 13 of the AIRA to provide that the Registrar may refuse to register or wind up an association if circumstances exist which, in the public interest, justify that decision. The Registrar is required, when forming that opinion, to have regard to the association’s purposes and conduct and the effect or likely effect that the purpose or conduct would have on the public, including whether the effect or likely effect on a person or group of persons is because of a protected attribute listed in section 102B of the EO Act. Clause 11 of the Bill may also engage the right to recognition and equality before the law by amending section 127 of the AIRA to require the Registrar to consider as part of the public interest test in making a decision to wind up an association the purposes and conduct of the association and the effect or likely effect of the purpose or conduct on the public, including whether the effect or likely effect on a person or group of persons is because of a protected attribute as defined in section 102B of the EO Act.

The refusal to register or the winding up of an association on the grounds of the public interest may engage the right because the decision of the Registrar may affect an individual’s ability to practice their religious or political beliefs under a recognised collective association and therefore draw distinctions between peoples based on attributes listed in section 6 of the EO Act. I am of the view that clauses 6, 9 and 11 do not limit the right to recognition and equality before the law because they do not limit an individual’s ability to practice their religious or political beliefs. The purpose of the Bill is not directed at preventing Victorians from enjoying religious practices or political belief or activity. Rather, it seeks to prevent groups whose purposes and activities may cause serious harm to the public from obtaining the legal and financial benefits of incorporation under the AIRA.

Accordingly, I consider that these clauses under the Bill are compatible with the right to recognition and equality before the law under section 8 of the Charter.

Reputation (section 13)

Section 13 of the Charter provides that a person has a right not to have their reputation unlawfully attacked.

Clauses 6 and 9 of the Bill may engage the right of persons not to have their reputation unlawfully attacked by amending sections 7 and 13 of the AIRA to require the Registrar to refuse to register a proposed association or registrable body on the grounds that it is a prohibited hate group or listed terrorist organisation, as defined by clause 4 of the Bill. Clause 11 may also engage cultural rights by amending section 127 of the AIRA to require the Registrar to wind up an association which is a hate group or a terrorist organisation.

Clauses 6, 9 and 11 of the Bill may also engage the right of persons not to have their reputation unlawfully attacked by amending sections 7, 13 and 127 of the Bill to provide that the Registrar may refuse to register or wind up an association if circumstances exist which, in the public interest, justify that decision. The Registrar is required, when forming that opinion, to have regard to the association’s purposes and conduct and the effect or likely effect the purpose or conduct on the public, including whether the effect or likely effect on a person or group of persons is because of a protected attribute as defined in section 102B of the EO Act.

By excluding from registration under the AIRA an association that is a listed terrorist organisation or prohibited hate group, or an association whose incorporation is considered by the Registrar not to be in the public interest, the Bill may engage the right to reputation of individual members of those associations. Individuals publicly tied to an association in these circumstances may be subject to public condemnation, causing adverse impacts to their personal and professional life, such as a loss of employment or exclusion from social settings.

However, the choice to identify and tie oneself to an association is made by the individual. Further, given the range of conduct that is already prohibited by the various offence provisions in the Code that prohibit directing, supporting, or being a member of a prohibited hate group. Also, the Bill does not alter the existing operation of the AIRA, which sets out which information about associations is publicly available. Individuals applying as members of an association that do not meet the conditions for registration are not identified publicly, as a decision to refuse registration is not published. Similarly, while the AIRA provides for a public register of incorporated associations, individual members of those associations are not identified publicly. The Bill also does not allow for a person’s reputation to be attacked in a way that is unlawful.

As there is no public identification of any individual belonging to a group not permitted to incorporate under the AIRA, I consider that the Bill does not limit any person’s right not to have their reputation unlawfully attacked.

Freedom of expression (section 15)

Section 15 of the Charter provides that every person has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to hold an opinion without interference and seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through a variety of mediums. The right may be subject to lawful restrictions reasonably necessary to respect the rights and reputation of other persons, or for the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morality (section 15(3) of the Charter).

Clauses 4, 6 and 9 of the Bill may engage the right of persons to freedom of expression by amending sections 7 and 13 of the AIRA to require the Registrar to refuse to register a proposed association or registrable body with an industrial relations purpose, as defined by clause 4 of the Bill. Clause 11 may also engage the right of persons to freedom of expression by amending section 127 of the AIRA to require the Registrar to wind up an association which has an industrial relations purpose.

Under the AIRA, persons are currently able to form an incorporated association for the purpose of seeking, receiving and imparting information and ideas relating to a wide range of lawful purposes, including industrial relations. Incorporation allows the members of the association to pool and deploy property for the purposes of communicating ideas and information. For example, an incorporated association can enter into contracts, lease property, or open a bank account, with limited financial liability to individual members. Where the Bill has the effect of preventing specified associations from incorporating under the AIRA, it has the practical effect of the lessening these groups’ ability to communicate ideas and therefore may engage members’ right to freedom of expression.

The right to freedom of expression may be further engaged where a group with an industrial relations purpose is refused registration or directed to wind up and is unable to access incorporation through an alternative framework. This outcome is likely to occur where an association (or registrable body) is captured by the broad definition of ‘industrial relations purpose’ inserted by clause 4 of the Bill, but this is not the group’s sole or dominant purpose. Such groups may be ineligible to register under the FWRO Act (for example, if they have fewer than 50 members), or to register under the Corporations Act if they are excluded on the basis of being a trade union. While such groups may continue to operate as informal groups or unincorporated associations, they would be unable to access the benefits of incorporation, and this may affect members’ ability to impart ideas and information, and thus their right to freedom of expression.

Under the Charter, the right to freedom of expression may be subject to lawful restrictions, which may be assessed according to the considerations provided in section 15(3) and the proportionality test set out in section 7(2). With reference to section 15(3), it is not clear that the limitation on this right is reasonably necessary to respect the rights and reputation of other persons, or to protect national security, public order, public health or public morality. However, with reference to section 7(2), the nature and extent of the limitation on the right to freedom of expression is reasonable, as affected individuals can continue to impart information without incorporating or can seek membership of an organisation incorporated under another framework (such as the FWRO Act).

Therefore, while the Bill may impose some limits on the right to freedom of expression, I consider that these limitations are reasonable in accordance with section 7(2) of the Charter.

Accordingly, I consider that these provisions under the Bill are compatible with the right to freedom of expression under section 15 of the Charter.

Peaceful assembly and freedom of association (section 16)

Section 16(2) of the Charter provides that every person has the right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions.

Industrial relations reform

Clauses 4, 6 and 9 of the Bill may engage, and in some circumstances limit, the right to freedom of association, including the right to form and join trade unions, of individual members of associations. Clause 4 amends section 3 of the AIRA to introduce a broad definition of an ‘industrial relations purpose’, which is then used in amendments made by clauses 6 and 9 to sections 7(2) and 13(2) of the AIRA to require the Registrar to refuse registration where an association or registrable body has an industrial relations purpose. Clause 11 may also engage this right by amending section 127 of the AIRA to require the Registrar to wind up an association that has an industrial relations purpose, except in certain circumstances.

Although corporations do not themselves hold rights under the Charter, these provisions may limit the way in which natural persons choose to associate for collective purposes. While the Bill does not prevent natural persons from associating with one another, forming or joining unions, or collectively pursuing industrial relations or other lawful activities, it does limit the ability to do so as an incorporated entity. Incorporation provides a range of benefits to individual members of an association, including limiting their financial and legal liability for activities undertaken by the association. The Bill removes access to incorporation under the AIRA, which is a general framework for not-for-profit community associations. Given this, the AIRA typically has lower registration fees, broader eligibility criteria and less onerous regulatory oversight than alternative frameworks.

These reforms may limit individuals’ rights to freedom of association where an affected association is unable to access incorporation under another framework. While groups seeking to operate as trade unions may seek registration under the FWRO Act, some may not meet the strict eligibility requirements under that framework. Additionally, groups may be ineligible for other regulatory frameworks; for example, trade unions are ineligible to register under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Consequently, the amendments made to exclude associations with an industrial relations purpose from the AIRA may result in affected groups being unable to incorporate. While individuals remain free to associate privately or through an unincorporated body, they will be subject to greater individual liability and may be unable to take actions as a body, such as legal action in courts.

The limitation of individuals’ rights to freedom of association is more likely where associations are captured by the broad definition of an ‘industrial relations purpose’ inserted by Clause 4 of the Bill. This definition may capture organisations where an industrial relations purpose is not the sole or dominant purpose, but rather one among other purposes. Where such associations are refused registration or directed to wind up, they may be ineligible or not suitable for registration under the FWRO Act or Corporations Act 2001, and therefore prevented from pursuing their purposes as an incorporated body. This also risks limiting individuals’ rights to freedom of association in relation to purposes outside those targeted by the reforms, if those purposes are related to an industrial relations purpose.

The engagement of the right to freedom of association may in the future be ameliorated by the regulation-making power introduced by clause 13 of the Bill. The Bill provides for regulations to be made to prescribe associations or classes of association (or registrable body) with an industrial relations purpose that may register under the Act. However, as there is no obligation or requirement to make such regulations and this regulation-making power has not yet been used, it is not yet possible to assess how such regulations may affect any limitation of individual rights under the Charter.

I am of the view that the proposed limitation is reasonable because it does not prevent collective activity and ensures that individuals seeking to associate for an industrial relations purpose can have their activity regulated under the legislative framework designed for that purpose. However, there is some question of whether the limitation is justified in the circumstance that an association prevented from registration under the AIRA is not eligible or appropriate to incorporate under an alternative framework. In that circumstance, individual members’ freedom of association will be limited to the extent that they cannot undertake actions that are limited to incorporated bodies. Affected individuals will still have the option to associate informally or join an existing incorporated body with a similar purpose.

Accordingly, I consider that these provisions under the Bill are compatible with the right to freedom of association under section 16 of the Charter.

Cultural rights (section 19)

Section 19 of the Charter protects the cultural rights of all persons with a particular cultural, religious, racial or linguistic background, and acknowledges that Aboriginal persons hold distinct cultural rights that should be protected.

Hate group reform

Clauses 6 and 9 of the Bill may engage cultural rights by amending sections 7 and 13 of the AIRA to require the Registrar to refuse to register a proposed association or registrable body on the grounds that it is a prohibited hate group or listed terrorist organisation, as defined by clause 4 of the Bill. Clause 11 may also engage cultural rights by amending section 127 of the AIRA to require the Registrar to wind up an association which is a hate group or a terrorist organisation.

I am of the view that clauses 6, 9 and 11 do not limit the cultural rights of individual members of prohibited hate groups and listed terrorist organisations as membership of these groups is unlawful under the Criminal Code. To the extent that these clauses affect the ability of members of other associations with a hate purpose to practise or promote their culture, language or religious beliefs, they engage, but do not limit, the cultural rights of those members. This is because the purpose of these clauses is not to prevent Victorians from enjoying cultural life, but to prevent groups with a hate purpose from obtaining the legal and financial benefits of incorporation under the AIRA.

Clauses 6 and 9 of the Bill promotes the broader cultural rights of the Victorian community, including the distinct cultural rights of Aboriginal persons under section 19(2) of the Charter by amending section 7(2) and 13(2) of the AIRA to require the Registrar to refuse an application to incorporate a body if that association is registered as a listed terrorist organisation or prohibited hate group under the Commonwealth Criminal Code.

Clause 11 of the Bill also promotes broad cultural rights, including the distinct cultural rights of Aboriginal persons under section 19(2) of the Charter, by introducing section 127(2B) into the AIRA to require the Registrar to wind up an incorporated association by certificate if the Registrar certifies that the association is a prohibited hate group or a listed terrorist organisation.

Groups with a hate purpose give rise to a range of risks to community safety as they may engage in physical violence or other hate crimes, or cause psychological harm or fear, inhibiting expression of a person’s culture. Preventing such groups from receiving the benefits of incorporation under the AIRA, such as limited personal liability for individual members, is likely to support a safer and more inclusive environment in which cultural practices and traditions may be enjoyed free from hatred. This may be particularly significant for First Peoples, and for people from multicultural and multifaith communities, whose ability to feel safe to enjoy and maintain their culture and traditions may be adversely affected by the actions of groups with a hate purpose.

Public interest test reforms

Clauses 6, 9 of the Bill may also engage cultural rights by amending sections 7 and 13 of the AIRA to provide that the Registrar may refuse to register an association if circumstances exist which, in the public interest, justify that decision. Clause 11 of the Bill may also engage cultural rights by amending section 127 of the AIRA to require the Registrar to consider, when forming an opinion that it is in the public interest to wind up an incorporated association, to have regard to the effect or likely effect that the association’s purposes and conduct would have on the public, including a person or group of persons because of a protected attribute as defined in section 102B of the EO Act.

I am of the view that clauses 6, 9 and 11 do not limit the cultural rights of individual members of organisations who are refused registration under the AIRA or wound up in the public interest. To the extent that these clauses affect the ability of members of associations to practise or promote their culture, language or religious beliefs, they engage, but do not limit, the cultural rights of those members. This is because these clauses are directed not at preventing Victorians from enjoying cultural life, but at preventing groups whose purposes and activities may cause serious harm to the public from obtaining the legal and financial benefits of incorporation under the AIRA.

Clauses 6 and 9 of the Bill promote cultural rights, including the distinct cultural rights of Aboriginal persons, by amending sections 7(3) and 13(3) of the AIRA to allow the Registrar to refuse to incorporate a body if reasons exist that mean it is in the public interest to refuse incorporation. Clauses 6 and 9 of the Bill insert sections 7(3A) and 13(3A) into the AIRA to require the Registrar to consider, as part of determining the public interest, the effect or likely effect of the purposes and conduct of the association on the public, including their effect on any person or groups of persons because of a protected attribute as defined in section 102B of the EO Act. Clause 11 of the Bill also promotes cultural rights, including the distinct cultural rights of Aboriginal persons, by inserting section 127(2A) into the AIRA to require the Registrar to consider, as part of determining the public interest test for the decision to wind up an incorporated association, the effect or likely effect of the purposes and conduct of the association on the public, including their effect on any person or groups of persons because of a protected attribute as defined in section 102B of the EO Act.

I consider that the public interest test reforms promote cultural rights, including the distinct cultural rights of Aboriginal persons, because the prevention of groups with a hateful purpose from receiving the benefits of incorporation under the AIRA, such as limited personal liability for individual members, is likely to support a safer and more inclusive environment in which cultural practices and traditions may be enjoyed free from hatred. This may be particularly significant for First Peoples, and for people from multicultural and multifaith communities, whose ability to feel safe to enjoy and maintain their culture and traditions may be adversely affected by the actions of groups with a hateful purpose.

Accordingly, I consider that these provisions under the Bill are compatible with cultural rights under section ‍19 of the Charter.

Conclusion

For these reasons, in my opinion, the provisions of the Bill are compatible with the rights contained in the Charter.

The Hon Tim Richardson MP

Minister for Local Government

Minister for Consumer Affairs

Minister for Renters