Thread by @mcberkman

OK HERE WE GO. I'll be tweeting out a (long) thread of the highlights of today's rushed Committee hearing on Labor's laws against peaceful protest. First up is the Qld Council of Unions (QCU). You can watch live here: tv.parliament.qld.gov.au/Committees?ref…

Michael Clifford, Acting General Secretary of the Qld Council of Unions opens the day. The QCU does NOT support the laws. The search powers, very broad and vague definitions of "dangerous attachment device" and a dangerous slippery slope.

He says: "It is not very difficult to imagine" these laws being used to targets unions who are simply acting on behalf of their members.

QCU: Sweeping police search powers affect every single Queenslander. There are certainly workplace health and safety issues for police and rail workers, but the Bill is not the appropriate way to deal with them.

My Q (one of just two questions): Are you concerned that the new offence involving blocking access to a place of business could be used against workers on strike maintaining a picket line against an abusive employer?
A: Yes, we're concerned. The definitions are incredibly broad.

It's worth pausing here to reflect on the definitions issue. Under the bill, a "dangerous attachment device" includes anything that "incorporates a dangerous substance or thing". A "dangerous substance or thing" includes "any thing likely to cut a person's skin".

That means any object incorporating ANYTHING likely to cut skin (boxcutter, butter knife, screwdriver) can mean 2 yeras in prison if the police don't like the look of you. By the way, police can search you (including a roadside strip search) if they think you've got that object.

We've moved on a bit now. The next witness was Australian Pork - focussed on actions of people coming onto farms.
They couldn't point to a single instance of animal activists using a "dangerous attachment device".

Qld Resources Council are up now. I'm asking about the conversations between QRC and the government before the bill was introduced. Many people have been suspicious that mining companies basically wrote this legislation.

QRC's answer: we didn't receive any written material from the govt, but we've been engaging extensively for years with the government to highlight "inadequacies" in the legal framework.

Next witness (yes, just 15 min apiece) is Alice Drury, Human Rights Law Centre. Her opening statement: This bill is about criminalising peaceful protest. Many great achievements like votes for women & eight hour work day were won with disruptive protests..

Ms Drury cont'd: Peaceful climate demonstrations are a symptom of a broader problem: the unfolding climate crisis that govts are failing to tackle.

Question from LNP MP: what about the rights of people going about their lawful business?
Ans: Disruption is frustrating, but it's part of living in a democracy. There are already many criminal law provisions which already make blocking roads illegal.

Ms Drury: Historical context is important. We wouldn't enjoy the good life we have today without disruptive and sometimes illegal protest.

Ms Drury: This Bill could end up as the first EVER which is declared as contrary to the Human Rights Act. (Remember that the Qld Parliament passed the HR Act just a few months ago). Sadly the HR Act doesn't enter into force until 1 Jan 2020.

Chay Neal, Animal Liberation Qld: The best way to address disruptive climate protests is to take strong action on climate change.

Mr Neal: peaceful protestors face the risk of injury whether they use an attachment device or not. Protesters are already injured when being handled by police. The point of the Bill is simply to avoid *inconvenience* and *disruption* -- not safety.

Labor members are asking Mr Neal very pointed questions about when a protest stops being "peaceful". His answer: when there is violence or threat of violence. This seems to really puzzle the Labor MPs.

They ask: isn't bringing a weapon to a protest violent?
Mr Neal: weapons aren't covered in the Bill.
Labor: What about a tripod?
Mr Neal: That's not a weapon.

It must be incredibly difficult for Labor MPs - often unionists themselves - to sit at this table and ignore the the labour movement's own long, proud tradition of fighting for a better life. They seem brittle, defensive.

Labor MPs are now asking Michael Kane (Mackay Conservation Group) whether he knows of any examples of protestors being charged with booby-trapping an attachment device. He says no. Seems they've forgotten that providing evidence for Labor's laws is.. Labor's job?

We're swinging back round to climate change, after a Labor question. Here's the core of the issue - we're simply not acting fast enough. The Qld govt supports opening the world's biggest untapped coal basin with the Adani mine, and refuses to commit to 100% clean energy.

Labor MPs blunder into quite a good question: what is the **evidence** that civil disobedience actually changes the world?
We could suggest..
- suffragettes
- land rights movement
- civil rights movement
- union movement
- anti-apartheid movement
- the Franklin Dam blockade

We're back after a quick break, questioning Aurizon the train company which carries coal to port. Side note: Aurizon is the privatised QR National, sold off under Anna Bligh. I asked about whether there has ever been physical harm or a near miss involving protestors. Ans: No.

I also asked about how Aurizon calculates their (outlandish) claims about their losses from activists delaying coal trains. This is important because the govt has actually quoted Aurizon in their explanatory notes - one of the few pieces of "hard evidence" in the notes.

They claimed $1.3 million loss from a 14 hour delay of five trains. That's almost twice the cost of simply buying a whole trainload of coal outright. We'll wait on the answer (they took the question on notice).

Next up is Karen Dyhrberg, Lawyer for Climate Action.

Climate change is like a freight train - just as we've heard about endlessly today. It's not too late to take effective action to prevent truly disastrous impacts in my children's lifetime.

Ms Dyhrberg is now going through existing sections of the Criminal Code which cover the actions protestors are taking, including one carrying a penalty of life imprisonment.

Ms Dyhrberg: While the Parliament is distracted with this Bill about "disruption". Just a few nights ago, 100 people spent the night in an evacuation centre, and one family lost their home. That's disruption.

Labor MPs asking whether Lawyers for Climate Action are going to lobby the federal government to act on climate change.

I'm sorry this is so completely bonkers.. YOUR GOVERNMENT WANTS TO DIG UP AND BURN THE WORLD'S BIGGEST UNTAPPED COAL BASIN.

LNP question (actually this was touchingly naive): why isn't lawful protest enough?

Ms Dyhrberg: One example-- it was illegal for women to be served at a bar in Qld, until two women chained themselves to the bar at the Regatta. After that, the law changed.

Karagh‐Mae Kelly, @animaljusticeAU. "We are standing on the edge of the cliff, and yet we're debating whether we should further punish those raising the alarm."

@animaljusticeAU Labor MPs are back on their (frankly weird) track, asking witnesses whether they personally have any evidence that booby-trapped, dangerous devices have or haven't been used.
Ms Kelly: If the government (Labor MPs) has evidence of booby-trapped devices, you should share it.

@animaljusticeAU A snide offhand comment from @mc_millan4 after Ms Kelly pointed out that the government hasn't published any evidence of booby-trapped devices: "Well it'll be interesting to hear from QPS [Queensland Police]"

The govt has had almost two months to publish evidence. They haven't.

@animaljusticeAU @mc_millan4 Now we're on a break, I'll share this absolute gem from the Explanatory Notes. This is supposed to be where the govt justifies their restrictions on peaceful protest.. It's a mix of non-specific accusations, speculation and (as far as we can tell) pure fiction.

We interrupt this broadcast with some important advice for Labor (anyone really)

https://twitter.com/thomas_violence/status/1182472627832549377?s=21

We've moved to @qldlawsociety.
President Bill Potts: "Dissent is not disloyalty" The very fact that we're sitting here talking about this ... means that protestors have made their point.

@qldlawsociety The QLS have offered support for the Bill, based on their assessment that the definition of "dangerous attachment device" are narrow. Many other witnesses have disagreed with this - in fact the definition is very broad. I find this position from QLS extremely disappointing.

@qldlawsociety Mr Potts is telling the Committee that he's been shown photographs by "senior police officers" of a concrete-filled drum containing an aerosol canister and jagged metal. This is exactly the kind of evidence that the govt should release for public scrutiny. Why haven't they?

@qldlawsociety Lunch is finished (some rushed sandwiches) and we're back to the Environment Council of Central Qld: Beverley and Tony Fontes. They're dive operators in the Whitsundays, facing the full force of the climate meltdown caused by coal, gas, oil & our runaway crony capitalist system.

@qldlawsociety Tony and Beverley have lived in Airlie Beach since 1979 working as dive instructors. Tony: "It's a dream job, but it's fast becoming a nightmare". We lost 50% of hard coral cover in 2years. My business is not what it was.

@qldlawsociety Tony: "I've been on many committees, made many submissions, walked many protest lines, and nothing has changed... there are many people braver than me who have taken bolder action" We shouldn't be cracking down on those brave people.

@qldlawsociety Next up is Frontline Action On Coal: Iain Pritchard and Nico. FLAC practices non-violent direct action. It's an act of vulnerability to lock yourself to an object - to immobilise yourself in front of your opponents. Safety is core to our philosophy.

@qldlawsociety Nico adds: If you're going to use "inconvenience" as a rationale for shutting down protest, where will you stop? Does that mean banning street marches during the morning and evening peak hour? Laws must protect personal safety, not convenience.

@qldlawsociety Hearing from Steven Jones from the @QldBar Association. I asked him for his view on the govt's justification for the Bill: "It has been reported some people have claimed ..."
A: You're right. It doesn't offer evidence. QBA hasn't seen any photos or other evidence either.

@qldlawsociety @QldBar This is the definition of a "dangerous attachment device" we've been arguing about all day. Mr Jones agrees that the definition is unclear until clarified by a court.

@qldlawsociety @QldBar Hearing from Bridget Burton and Faye Austen-Brown from Caxton Legal Centre: this Bill encroaches on the right to peaceful protest, and our existing laws already cover locking on, blocking roads and railways, including with heavy penalties.

Caxton hits the nail on the head. "There seems to be some suggestion that evidence will be provided at the end of today." That is highly unusual. Labor MPs ask witnesses what they'd think **if there was evidence** of harm, then make mysterious noises re evidence that might exist.

The Qld govt Human Rights Commission are up. Commissioner Scott McDougall: the truncated process for considering this bill has meant the implications of the Bill for human rights have not been adequately considered.

Commissioner McDougall: existing laws have dealt rather well with the protests that occurred this week. So far no evidence has been produced to justify the claims that devices have been booby-trapped.

My Q (in the last min remaining): could the Commission prepare an analogue of a Statement of Compatibility under the Human Rights Act?

Commissioner: Yes, if requested we could try, within time constraints (2 wks).

Labor Chair disagrees, noting the HR Act hasn't commenced yet

We're on a short break now. Worth revisiting this definition from earlier.

https://twitter.com/mcberkman/status/1182513959322017792?s=20

Here's a list of suspect things, if "incorporated" into a device:
- Paper
- Soil
- Box cutters
- Paint
- Screwdrivers
- Forks
- Hat pins
- Red hot chilli peppers (not the band)

Hearing from the Qld Police. Usually briefings from govt agencies happen before we examine other witnesses, so they can provide evidence and justification for the government's policy. It's mystifying why the government put them last today.

The police are here, but key witnesses like Qld Fire and Emergency Services and Qld Ambulance Service haven’t even been invited to give evidence, despite Labor using their safety as an excuse to crack down on peaceful protest.

Police opening statement still going.. Acting Deputy Commissioner has tabled a collection of photographs. This is the first time the government has offered any evidence to support any of their claims, since announcing the laws in late August.

The police ADC is now pointing to comparable legislation in NSW (created by the Liberals) designed to stop farmers and activists from protesting against CSG and fracking.. not an amazing look.

An officer has been taking us through the techniques for removing attachment devices. The Chair Peter Russo asks that the photos be marked up with labels. None or very few of the photos have labels, locations, date or time stamps.

The ADC noted that he didn't see these particular photos until a few hours before now. This is supposed to be the pivotal evidence on which the Bill is based, and it's deeply confusing.

A quick question to Insp Williams: how many protestors are injured during the removal process.
Ans: "In my experience, none."

Back in August, the Police Commissioner briefed the Premier, after which Labor announced these new laws. I asked QPS who initiated that briefing and whose idea these laws were. Chair ruled my question out of order.

Earlier today, Qld Law Society President Bill Potts revealed he had received a confidential briefing from "senior officers". Very strange, since the Police Commissioner refused my request for a briefing, saying it would not be "appropriate". QPS took my question "why?" on notice.

Recalling all the witnesses who pointed to the total lack of evidence supporting the laws: a Labor MP asks is there any reason why the police might choose not to share information with the public? QPS says: we're worried about copy-catting.

What a strange answer. Legislating restrictions on the right to protest is serious business, and evidence needs to be weighed publicly. It's simply not good enough to play silly buggers with the public.

As I keep digging, it seems like Cabinet approval was required to release the photos tabled today, which is why we only saw them now.

I finally got around to asking about those "gas canisters" that the Police Minister, Premier, QRC, Courier Mail have repeatedly referred to.
Q: Has that ever happened?
A: Once, in 2005, a protestor said there was an aerosol can inside a barrel.
Q: Was there?
A: We don't know.

My 2nd last Q: on 9 October the Courier reported that at a recent a briefing w/ the Premier, the Commissioner said officers were “frustrated” that protestors weren't being incarcerated. How did the CM learn what was said at that highly confidential briefing? Answer: No idea 😇😇

Last Q: how did you go about balancing the fundamental right to protest against the rights and interests of others? (I.e. a crucial question).

Chair ruled it out of order..

And like that, the hearing is done.

I'm heading over the river to @abcbrisbane now, should be on air at 5.05pm with @SteveAustinABC (if I manage to find an e-scooter to get myself over there on time!)