Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

The Australian Christian Lobby and crossbench MPs are raising concerns about a new Victorian LGBTQ+ hate crime inquiry, questioning its scope, timing, and implications for free speech.

The Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) is questioning the scope of a new LGBTQ+ Victorian hate crime inquiry.

Proposed by the Greens, the motion passed 22-15 on 18 February.

A New Parliamentary Inquiry

According to the terms of reference, Victoria’s “Legal and Social Issues Committee will investigate and report by 1 September 2026, on the scale and scope of anti-LGBTQIA+ hate crimes occurring in Victoria.”

Influencers, social media, and digital platform owners are a key focus.

For example, the inquiry will put special emphasis on “those creating and sharing online content steeped in [so-called] racism, misogyny, transphobia, homophobia, far-right ideology and unhealthy [toxic] masculinities.”

In total, the LGBTQ+ inclusion inquisition will assess nine areas of “relevance”.

Some of these include “hate crime prevention initiatives, and the effectiveness of safety initiatives supporting those who identify as LGBTQIA+.”

Also listed is a look into how alleged LGBTQ+ hate crimes “impact indigenous Australians, people with disabilities, and multifaith initiatives and multiculturalism.”

Packing into the inquisition is the creation of strategies and methods to combat “heteronormative oppression” across borders.

It is worth noting that bureaucrats won’t escape inspection.

The work of the “Commissioner for LGBTQIA+ Communities, government advisory groups, and law enforcement” will all be tested on their (presumably) unquestioning allegiance and devotion to the LGBTQ+.

These departments will be assessed on their effectiveness and relevance.

Equal Protection or Unequal Attention?

Noticing some red flags, while noting that laws against violence already exist, ACL said,

While “violence against any person is unacceptable, this inquiry raises a broader question about how protection is applied.”

“Christians are increasingly facing faith-based prejudice, workplace exclusion and legal action because of their beliefs.”

“These experiences rarely attract the same level of political attention, yet they are real for those affected,” ACL argued.

“If Parliament is examining hate crimes, it should take a clear-eyed look at the full landscape of hostility and discrimination in Victoria.

“The strength of this inquiry will not be measured by how loudly it affirms one group, but by whether it reinforces equal treatment under the law for all Victorians,” they asserted.

Joining Moira Deeming in voting against the inquiry, the Libertarian Party’s David Limbrick was suspicious of the timing and agenda.

Limbrick suggested that Labor was jumping the gun.

New anti-vilification laws haven’t yet come into effect, and yet the Victorian Greens, with support from Labor want an inquiry about whether more “anti-hate” laws are needed.

They’re not waiting to see whether those new laws have any impact.

“What this committee is seeking to look at in many ways has already been looked at and acted on by the government over the past few years,” Limbrick recalled.

“The problem that I see with going into an inquiry at this point, and as has been pointed out by the government and the opposition, is that the civil component of these, which is probably the most significant to what we are talking about here today, has not even come into effect.

“Let us wait and see how these laws work.”

Timing and Legislative Overreach

Also, Limbrick said, “There are already a vast number of organisations that deal with support for LGBTQIA+ groups such as the official LGBTIQA+ Taskforce and LGBTIQA+ Justice Working Group.

“There is also a new helpline, the Rainbow Door helpline, set up by the government.”

The list is long, and it goes on and on, Limbrick added.

“I think that these issues have been explored already by both this Parliament and the government.

“The government has chosen to act on this through their anti-vilification laws.

“They have brought them forward not in response to LGBTQIA+ hate crimes but rather in response to an [Islamic] terror attack.

“The most appropriate thing to do is to wait and see how these laws play out.

“I think that they will backfire spectacularly just as many of the government’s other actions have in the past,” Limbrick determined.

He then said, “I think that the government should reflect on that.”

“There is no empirical evidence by which one could look at the government’s proposal of the anti-vilification laws, which have yet to come into effect on the civil side, and think that they will work,” he continued.

“In fact, one can only form the logical conclusion that it will make things worse, as I believe is what will be the case.”

“The government’s own track record on combating hate is appalling.”

Limbrick concluded that the government’s efforts to stamp out “hate” had failed.

Speaking to Sky News in December, Limbrick said, “One of the things we need to do when faced with extremists is to focus on core principles of Western liberalism, such as free speech.

“Clamping down on speech is a surrender to extremism. We end up going in an authoritarian direction.”

Government should be “defending the principles of freedom, like free speech, not sacrificing freedom for security.”

More laws, committees and regulations, he firmly implied, make things worse, not better.