Search results

COMMISSIONER OZDOWSKI: Welcome to everyone. I would like to formally open this public hearing, the first of a series of hearings to be conducted around Australia. My name is Sev Ozdowski and I am the Human Rights Commissioner of Australia, and I have with me two Assistant Commissioners; to my right Professor Trang Thomas who is Professor of Psychology at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, and to my left Dr Robin Sullivan who is Queensland Commissioner for Children. I also have two counsel assisting.

In its final recommendations, the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation proposed that there be a legislative requirement for the Social Justice Commissioner to monitor progress towards reconciliation on an annual basis. In the Social Justice Report 2000 it was noted that while legislative amendment to this end was desirable, this task could be undertaken under my existing functions. Accordingly, I undertook to provide an annual evaluation of progress towards reconciliation as part of the social justice report.

To develop a nationwide picture of existing government initiatives that address family violence, the Social Justice Commissioner sent correspondence to all State, Territory and relevant Australian government departments[1] requesting information on their policies and programs during the period 2006-2007.

On 27 July 2000, the Commonwealth government and the Northern Territory Government signed an agreement for the establishment of a juvenile pre-court diversion scheme in the Northern Territory (NT). This agreement arose specifically as a response to the continued criticism of the NT’s mandatory minimum imprisonment laws and their impact on juveniles and Indigenous people. By establishing the pre-court juvenile diversionary scheme, the NT has belatedly joined most other states and territories in Australia in providing such options for dealing with juvenile offenders.

This chapter explains how the provisions of international human rights treaties protect same-sex couples and their children, in the context of accessing financial and work-related entitlements. In particular, this chapter focuses on the right to non-discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation. It also describes how the breach of that right can interfere with a range of other basic human rights, for example, the right to social security. The chapter also explains how discrimination against parents on the grounds of sexual orientation can impact on the rights of their children.

This report contains a summary of observations by the Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) following its July 2009 visit to Australia’s immigration detention facilities on Christmas Island. It follows the Commission’s 2006, 2007 and 2008 annual reports on inspections of immigration detention facilities.[1]

Part 1: What are the new arrangements for the administration of Indigenous affairs?

“The discussion about a new National Representative Body is about our place at the table in making the decisions that impact on our communities, on our men, our women and our children.

The first twelve months of the federal government's new arrangements for the administration of Indigenous affairs has ended. The primary focus of this period has been on abolishing the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) and creating new processes to engage with local Indigenous communities and coordinate mainstream delivery of services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Twelve months on, the new arrangements remain in a transitional phase. It will be a number of years before they are fully locked into place.

This is an Inquiry into discrimination against same-sex couples regarding access to financial and work-related entitlements and benefits. Many of Australia’s laws exclude same-sex couples from financial and work-related entitlements and benefits that are enjoyed by heterosexual couples. For example, same-sex couples do not enjoy the same tax and health concessions as other de facto couples and they may not have the same rights to pensions and other social security benefits as heterosexual couples.

Securing sustainable and just economic outcomes for Aboriginal traditional owners and residential communities in the remote regions of the Northern Territory has been an elusive goal for national and Territory governments, various public agencies and community groups for many years. The increasing value and intact environmental nature of much of the Indigenous estate across the North of Australia in a carbon trading context offers opportunities that could create sustainable on-country development for traditional owners in the region through new and exciting economies.