The right to hold—and communicate—religious beliefs is one of the most fundamental in any democracy. Spirituality is the domain of the individual, not the state. We need government for many things. Determining whether our religious beliefs are “reasonable” is not one of them.
The Albanese Government’s Misinformation Bill represents a clear and present danger to the open communication of religious beliefs in Australia. Remarkably, Mr Albanese and his Communications Minister, Michelle Rowland, want this bill to become the law of Australia by the end of the year. This must not happen.
There are many serious problems with the Misinformation Bill, but it is notable how many religious groups have zeroed in on the risks it represents to people of faith.
The core problem is that the bill empowers digital platforms and government bureaucrats to determine whether or not a religious belief is “reasonable.” This point is well made in a submission on the bill by the combined faith leaders, representing a large number of faiths including the Anglican, Presbyterian and Baptist Churches and the Shia Muslim community. The submission notes that:
“Digital providers will be assessing whether the content of a religious belief is reasonable in determining whether or not it is misinformation. This is the same as saying that providers are empowered to determine whether the teaching is reasonable in itself.”
As the submission states, “this ‘reasonableness’ test is highly inappropriate to be applied to religious speech.”
Under the bill, digital platforms face the risk of very large fines if they do not take enough steps—in the eyes of government regulators—to “prevent and respond” to misinformation.
This creates a large financial incentive for the companies to err on the side of caution, and censor religious statements which might be deemed to be “misinformation”. This problem is compounded by the broad definition of what “misinformation” is in the bill. There is no penalty for censoring too much material under the bill, but digital platforms face very large penalties if they do not censor enough material as defined by the law.
As Christian Schools Australia have outlined in their submission on the bill, “Social media companies are incentivised to broadly interpret the definition of ‘misinformation’, and narrowly interpret content that is reasonably disseminated for a religious purpose.” CSA also notes that;
“Social media companies will be able to exercise discretion about how to interpret their obligations and whether content by faith-based schools is reasonable dissemination for a religious purpose.”
Disputes under the Misinformation Bill are ultimately subject to court rulings. This creates the disturbing scenario where a court may determine whether or not a religious belief is reasonable, as outlined by the Australian Catholic Bishops’ Conference.
The bishops note that the bill;
“Leaves open to a judicial authority to decide what is and is not ‘reasonable’ when it comes to expressing a religious belief, and whether the expression of a religious belief is always for a ‘religious purpose’. As the conference has stated in numerous submissions on other items of legislation, it is suboptimal to have courts and tribunals adjudicate on the reasonableness of religious expression.”
Noting the fundamental problems with the bill as it relates to religious expression, the NSW Council of Churches argue that if the bill is implemented: “The likely outcome is a large section of the Australian faith community believing that they have been seriously hindered in the basic human right of religious expression.”
The Albanese Government’s Misinformation Bill makes digital platforms and government bureaucrats the arbiters of whether or not a religious belief is reasonable. This flies in the face of the separation of church and state and is completely unacceptable.
It is of the highest importance that this bill is defeated in the federal parliament, and does not become law.
David Coleman is the Shadow Minister for Communications