Human Rights Commission

Press, 3 April 1980, Page 16

Human Rights Commission

Sir, — If Mr Downey, in his action against Mr Sides, is intending to show that the law is an ass, then good luck to him. If not, then he would do better to allow his common sense to prevail over his zeal for the letter of the law. — Yours, etc., S. D. PEPPERLE. April 2, 1980.

Sir, — Is there such a thing as a bureaucratic ex= planation? After • reading of f- doings of the Human Rights Commission and its diligence in pursuing complaints concerning discrimination, a bureaucratic best of all has emerged in the form of the Equal Opportunities Tribunal which has the , onerous duty of hearing the alleged complaints. It is fascinating to see that the chairman of the tribunal, Mr J. H. Wallace, Q.C., receives $l7O a - day. The other seven members are not ignored at $6O a day while the cost of secretarial services, travel and accommodation have to be met. Surely this is a case of opportunity knocks for there seems no end to the bureaucratic madness. The performance of the chairman of the Human Rights Commission (Mr Pat Downey) on television must have struck an ominous note in the wallet of every taxpayer for he seemed to see endless opportunities in extending the Commission’s activities. To ■ misquote the- late Sir. Wim ston Churchill: “Never jn the history of human endeavour have so many had. it so good for so long.” ' — Yours, etc.,

L. J. STEVENS March 31, 1980.

Sir, — G. K. Friend (April 1, 1980) considers "“the. saddest commentary on this whole sorry affair is that it is an offence to advertise for a Christian, but perfectly in order to advertise for a homosexual flatmate.”. The comparison is invalid. Anybody can share his or her flat with whomever they like. Not everyone,; however, is free to retail petrol. They have to obtain a licence, and

there is only a limited number of licences available; therefore some applicants will be disappointed. If a patrol reseller were free to engage employees on' the basis of their having, or not having, a particular religious belief, this factor would have had to be taken into account by . the authority to ensure that such employees numerically constituted a representative cross-section of the community. If this factor was not assessed when the licence was issued the licensee has no natural right subsequently to int.oduce the factor when considering a prospective, employee’s application. — Yours, etc., PAUL MALING. April 1, 1980.