Comment on Albanese government rejects all UN recommendations on improving LGBTQIA+ rights
MisterFrog@aussie.zone 4 days agoI am definitely not stretching it on the point of discrimination and employment law.
That is super-duper squarely federal.
ryannathans@aussie.zone 3 days ago
www.qhrc.qld.gov.au/…/other-contraventions
State
MisterFrog@aussie.zone 3 days ago
Federal lawcouncil.au/…/anti-discrimination-laws
And federal supremacy clause en.wikipedia.org/…/Section_109_of_the_Constitutio…
So, yeah, the states can legislate for discrimination, but if there’s any conflict, federal takes president.
I am not a lawyer, and freely admit I am not an expert on this, but it feels like you’re pretending like the federal government doesn’t have these powers as an excuse for why they ignored all the recommendations. But they DO legislate on matters of discrimination, that is simply true.
And unless you’ve got something extra up your sleeve, I think you’re making excuses.
It’s okay to disagree with the Party you support, provided you agree with the majority of their positions. It’s a bit annoying if you make excuses for them though.
ryannathans@aussie.zone 3 days ago
See the other comment regarding federal overrides of state responsibility
MisterFrog@aussie.zone 3 days ago
Had to go looking, you mean this?
This is a cop out, because certain issues should be legislated for the whole country (opinions, and constitutionally where the power lies, varies)
Nek minnit you’ll be telling me the states should take back their right to legislate workers rights (which they used to).
It absolutely makes sense for it to be uniform across the country. This isn’t the USA, most people don’t believe in states rights. Depending on the topic, opinions will vary on what should and should not be prerogative of federal vs state.
What is true is that devolving too many things creates a mess. Engineering registrations are hodge-podge even though we regularly work between jurisdictions. Chemical regs are also not harmonised, meaning you a nation-wide company has to follow different rules for every state… (taking examples from my industry, but you get the point).
Transport infrastructure makes sense to be state by state, since we’re such a big country with a relatively sparse population.
Unless you just want to be rid of the federal government entirely, what exactly do you think is the point of the federal government?
In conclusion, federal Labor absolutely should and importantly could have implemented at least some of the recommendations… and you saying “oh it’s dangerous!” seems unconvincing to me.