Page 1613 - Week 05 - Thursday, 11 May 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
as a relationship between a man and a woman. However, we still believe in the right of all who have loving and caring relationships to be recognised and supported by law. We support the notion that the commonwealth Marriage Act 1961 recognises.
However, the opposition’s Registration of Relationships Bill would recognise both significant same-sex relationships of a sexual nature as well as caring relationships in which friends or relatives are living together providing personal care and support. There would be financial and other benefits flowing from the removal of this discrimination. The bill introduced by Mr Stefaniak still reflects the spirit of tolerance in Australia without putting the ACT at odds with the rest of Australia, as does the Stanhope bill.
Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 8.00 pm.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Minister for Planning) (8.00): Mr Speaker, there has been a great deal said about the Civil Unions Bill that we are debating this evening. In particular, there has been a lot said about what the bill does and does not do. It has been variously said that it breaches commonwealth law and is inconsistent with the commonwealth Marriage Act 1961. We have heard that claim from those opposite again this evening. Indeed, Mr Stefaniak, in his speech when introducing the Registration of Relationships Bill 2006, also somewhat vaguely referred to the lack of a residency requirement and the fact that the bill will allow young people of 16 and 17 years of age to enter into a civil union as being unsatisfactory and problematic.
I would like to take this opportunity this evening to look at some of these issues critically and logically. The Civil Unions Bill is a reflection of the government’s commitment to the principle that all people are entitled to respect, dignity and the right to participate in society and to receive the protection of the law regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Plainly and simply, the Civil Unions Bill allows a couple to establish a domestic partnership by making a formal declaration of their intention to do so. The bill provides that a civil union is then to be treated in the same way as a marriage under territory law.
The government developed the Civil Unions Bill following an extensive public consultation process. In May 2005 the government released a discussion paper for the purpose of obtaining views on, firstly, whether formal legal recognition should be given to same-sex relationships; and, secondly, if so, which of three models—registration, civil union or marriage—was most suitable. Of the submissions that indicated support for the notion of formal legal recognition, there was a distinct preference for the civil union and marriage models. Specifically, only 33 submissions expressed support for a registration model, while 145 expressed support for the civil union model and 133 for the marriage model. While a number of submissions expressed support for more than one model, there was nevertheless a clear preference for either the civil union or marriage model.
I am sure that members will all be aware that there are differing legal opinions on whether the states and territories have constitutional power to pass same-sex union legislation. While these legal opinions are of a great deal of interest, the government accepts that marriage provided for by ACT legislation would never have the same social or legal status as marriage under the commonwealth Marriage Act 1961. As such, it
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .