Page 3750 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 22 November 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the act should be removed. I am very happy to support the motion and will be very happy to see some action federally.
What has brought the issue into sharp focus for the people of the ACT is the use of this power to overturn the Civil Unions Act. The result was a moment of great sadness for the ACT community, particularly for a number of members within that community who fought so passionately and for such a long time to see their relationships recognised.
In the Senate, through the disallowance motion, there was at least some opportunity for the upper house of the commonwealth parliament to debate this issue. It is interesting to look at what Senator Humphries had to say in his speech at that time. Those opposite have accused us of pulling a stunt and seeking to target Senator Humphries. As I have said to him privately, I admired his stance in crossing the floor. It is a pity that there were not a few more Liberals who privately agreed with the decision and the democratic act of this parliament and also with Senator Humphries. It is a pity that there were not a few more federal Liberals who had the courage to do what Senator Humphries did.
Let me turn to Senator Humphries’ speech on the disallowance motion. It is worth quoting a small part of it in the time I have remaining. Mr Humphries said in the debate that the Chief Minister, Jon Stanhope:
… won a clear majority in the 2004 election and became only the second government in the 17 years of self-government in the Australian Capital Territory to have such a majority ...
There is a bit of semantics there as to whether the first majority government was in fact drawn from a number of parties, but let us put that aside. Senator Humphries went on to note that, with Tasmania, the ACT has the fairest electoral system in the country. He said:
I also acknowledge that Jon Stanhope went to the 2004 election with an explicit promise to legislate to recognise in law relationships between people of the same sex and to remove legal discrimination against gay and lesbian territorians.
And here the democratic process—which of course was conferred on the ACT 17 years ago by this parliament—
the commonwealth parliament—
provides a clear formula for what happens next: the ACT government is entitled to pass laws, in an area of its legislative competence, to effect an explicit promise made to the ACT community.
Senator Humphries continued:
I am familiar—as we all are—with that formula. It was the same formula that allowed me to present and pass many bills as a minister in the ACT Legislative Assembly over many years. It was the same formula that allowed me and many of my federal colleagues to rise in this place—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .