Norman, Kate --- "Book Review - Commissioner for Community Relations: Sixth Annual Report 1980-81" [1982] AboriginalLawB 19; (1982) 1(3) Aboriginal Law Bulletin 16

• Book Review-Commissioner For Community Relations: Sixth Annual Report 1980-81

---

Book Review -

Commissioner for Community Relations:
Sixth Annual Report 1980-81

AGPS, Canberra, 1981 ($5.60)

Reviewed by Kate Norman

Australia's attempt at legislative control of racial discrimination has been modified with the launching of the Human Rights Commission in December 1981. It appears that the Office of the Commissioner for Racial Discrimination has been absorbed into the new structure, but with a much diminished role. The final report of the Commissioner for Community Relations, Mr Al Grassby, has recently been released; it is a document that is important for anyone interested in the past six years of multiculturalism in Australia.

The sixth and final report of the Commissioner is significant, because not only does it review the accomplishments of the Commissioner's team and make recommendations for the future, but as the last publication of an Office now made defunct, this report and the five preceding reports are the main evidence of what is now legislative history.

There is little doubt that the new Human Rights Commission will bring changes in approach. The machinery, for a start, is completely different. It will function as a bureacracy with a 'public service' image - something Grassby would condemn as being a deterrent to the public it is set up to protect. In contrast, Grassby maintained a personalized committment, the antithesis to the usual image of a government authority. He was the last public figure to carry on the spirit of Whitlam idealism and he did it in a public and colourful way. Predictably his zeal frequently led to confrontations, not the least of which is the current challenge to his power and to the validity of the entire Racial Discrimination Act by the Western Australian, Victorian and Queensland Governments. (See John Austin, 'Challenge to the Racial Discrimination Act 1975', (1982) 7 Legal Service Bulletin 38). Throughout Grassby's term, he laboured under successive federal governments whose committment to establish the Human Rights Commission brought with it the threat of redundancy and the reality of staff shortages and financial difficulties. Yet these problems appear to have spurred his Office on to lay the foundations thought necessary.

From the outset, Grassby saw his most important role in public education. Through providing the community with information about the nature of racism, its incidence and effects, he hoped to reshape social attitudes. The complaint machinery established by the Racial Discrimination Act was not given prime importance. The reason for this set of priorities was the legislation itself. The 1975 Act gave very limited powers of enforcement in complaint situations. The procedure relied heavily on conciliation between the parties. The Commissioner had few powers to impose penalties and in the spirit of the legislation, he could only suggest solutions to parties. In cases of recalcitrance, compulsory conferences were arranged with a final sanction of referral to a court. Of the 5,100 cases cf successful investigation and conciliation conducted over the past six years, only forty-three compulsory conferences were called for and from these, only thirteen certificates were issued for court hearings.

To Mr Grassby's great credit, every ;omplaint over the past six years has been recorded, along with the name of the respondent to the complaint, the ethnic group of the complainant, the state where the complaint arose and the complaint as stated.

The final report is designed to provide a ;aide to the newly appointed Human Rights :ommissioners. It lays down what has been :ackled and what has to be done in the future. the report is comprehensive and highly readable. Grassby is candid about his concerns for :he effectiveness of the Human Rights Commission, given. its structure. He notes: 'Our six years experience has led to the view that he bureaucracy are not always primarily motvated towards meeting their clients' interests'. Furthermore he is adamant that the body lesignated to protect and prevent racial discrimination, must be independent from government, a view no doubt based on his own bitter experience. The final report is an important document, especially for anyone whose work involves regular contact with members of the public. Isn't that most of us?