Page 1602 - Week 05 - Thursday, 11 May 2006

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


This bill is about recognising and strengthening relationships. It is about supporting loving, caring relationships regardless of the sexuality of those involved. Just last week I stood in this chamber and spoke about how good governments seek to lead on important social issues. This government believes all loving, committed relationships deserve to be treated equally and to be celebrated.

This government is standing up for what it and the citizens of the territory overwhelmingly believe in. The Civil Unions Bill forms part of the Stanhope government’s commitment to reform all areas of ACT law that discriminate on the grounds of sexual preference or gender identity. It is a commitment that the government has taken to two elections and it is a principled commitment that has drawn strong support from the community.

One of the reasons the people of Canberra voted so strongly for the Labor Party at the last two elections was that we stand for progressive social reform. Good governments set the social agenda for their communities. They govern as leaders, not as followers. It is the duty of the government to reflect the much wider interests of our society and the common values of fairness and tolerance that bind us all together.

Gay and lesbian Canberrans are part of our community. We are not nameless, faceless people who live on the margins of society. Gay and lesbian Canberrans deserve the respect and dignity afforded to others; we deserve equality. This bill affords us equality under the law. This equality is not only functional and practical but also highly symbolic. It allows us to hold our heads up high as equal members of the community and to celebrate our relationships. It is about dignity.

Despite the Stanhope government taking this reform process to the electorate on two occasions and winning the support of the community quite decidedly, the federal government is threatening to intervene in this territory’s law-making process. The federal Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, has made a series of outrageous statements about the federal government’s intention to overturn this ACT legislation. This is in spite of his earlier comment that “the matter of civil unions is a matter for states and territories”.

Mr Ruddock’s first instinct was correct: civil unions are a matter for the states and territories, and the amendments that have been circulated by my colleague the Attorney-General will address the concerns raised by the commonwealth. If the federal government now seeks to intervene and say no to civil unions, it will be endorsing discrimination against people who choose, for whatever reason, not to marry or who in fact cannot marry.

Saying no to civil unions is to say that some relationships are more legitimate than others; that some loving, committed long-term relationships are, for some inexplicable reason, of lesser value. I find that an unacceptable proposition—and so too do many Liberal MPs. Dr Mal Washer, the federal Liberal member for Moore, said:

This country is civilised enough to get beyond the fact people are different. If same-sex couples have a commitment to one another it’s reasonable for us to allow them recognition of their union.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .