Page 1623 - Week 05 - Thursday, 11 May 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The equality conferred by this legislation is practical in the sense that it provides equality under the laws of the territory, but it is, of course, also highly symbolic. It does not merely provide evidence of an existing relationship as a registration scheme can; it creates that relationship. The difference may sound semantic to those who will never seek to formalise their relationship through a civil union but is far from semantic for those who will seek this law out and enjoy the protections it offers. It is real; it is profound; and it goes to the heart of the most important relationships some among us will ever have.
It is easy for those of us personally unaffected by this law to either minimise its relevance or to overemphasise its effect. We have seen both approaches taken over the course of the debate. Some have argued that, because gays and lesbians represent only a small proportion of our community, it is a waste of time and effort to accommodate their rights and entitlements in this way. I wonder: would those critics dare make the same argument in relation to other minorities, say, indigenous people or perhaps those with severe disabilities? This community does not confer human rights and social entitlements and recognition on the basis of numerical superiority—not under this government and not under any government that rejects discrimination and upholds equality.
At the other end of the spectrum, over the course of this debate we have seen the argument that this law fundamentally affects the status of marriage between a man and a woman. How can it do so? How can it have any effect whatsoever on my marriage, on the marriage of anyone in this chamber or on the marriage of anyone in this community? Is marriage so fragile an institution? To suggest so is simply insulting.
I celebrated my 34th wedding anniversary this week with my wife Robyn. We married in 1972. We have four children and will shortly welcome our fourth grandchild. My wife and my family are more important to me than anything in my life. Those of us who have enjoyed rich and enduring marriages might ask ourselves how recognising and respecting enduring relationships of others, without regard to their sexuality, diminishes our marriage or the institution of marriage.
Those of us who enjoy rich and enduring marriages might ask ourselves how we would feel if we were to be suddenly and rudely informed that our love was a lesser love, the support we rendered each other was a lesser support, our right for respect and equality under the law was a lesser right, purely and simply on the basis of our sexual preference. How would we feel to be told that our relationships were lesser relationships, that our families are lesser families? That is precisely the message we as a community have been delivering to same-sex couples and their families. Today I hope that message changes. Today we welcome the opportunity to recognise in others what we cherish in our own lives.
This government has worked hard to eliminate from the laws of the territory discrimination against gays and lesbians. The law before the Assembly today fulfils a pledge Labor made before the last election to seek a way to eliminate this final, overt boundary to equality. Our society is built on primary relationships, relationships between committed couples and relationships between parents and children. They are the basis of our households, the foundation of our suburbs and the substance of our community.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .