I woke up this morning feeling a little seditious so I let rip with the
following:

Workers have every right to resist by any means attempts by the
bosses and the Government to wind back workplace conditions under the
new and egregious IR laws which are the product of a morally bankrupt
regime, which has shown it is beyond contempt and will stop at nothing
to drive a wedge through society, including engaging in an illegal war
abroad and defaming and demonising refugees from the very corner of the
world it now claims to be liberating.


OK, it’s a mouthful that no respecting sub would tolerate but it does
show that in one sentence it is possible to tick every box in the list of DON’TS under the sedition provisions of the proposed
anti-terror laws.

From those eighty words it could be construed that I’ve promoted ill will
and hostility between different groups, urged violence against the Government
and assisted an enemy at war with Australia. While the promoting ill will and urging violence bits of my
tirade are obvious to see, you might think that I’m too vague with the
assisting an enemy stuff to be in breach of the law.

Not so. The proposed law states that it is an offence to “urge another
person” to engage in any conduct intended to assist “by whatever means” an
organisation or country at war with Australia.

Now that the enemy is allegedly living within our midst, it could be argued
that my written condemnation of the Government’s role in Iraq amounts to
incitement to a reader to assist the enemy.

The problem with these proposed laws is that they are so vague they can
mean whatever a vindictive and mendacious government wants them to mean.

For John Howard and Philip Ruddock to say “trust us” in relation
to the sedition provisions would be laughable if it wasn’t so chilling,
given their track record for whipping up hysteria. Giving the
Attorney-General final say on whether a sedition prosecution proceeds
is not a
safeguard. Giving such power to a politician only reinforces the notion
that sedition is a political crime, and putting that power in the
hands of Philip Ruddock is about as comforting as his Amnesty lapel
pin.

They say we will have the defence of good faith. I don’t want a good faith
defence when talking about a Government that in so many of its dealings has
operated with bad faith and ill will.