Page 2644 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 10 August 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
had six years and did not do anything. The federal Labor Party—this is a federal issue—did not do anything on this issue when it was in government and is now criticising the Liberals for not doing anything. It has said there should be a plebiscite and is now saying there should not be. You cannot go from that position to then say this is some sort of an abomination.
In terms of the debate, as I said, I think it should be respectful. I am not at this stage intending to take any sort of leading role in it. As I said, I think this should be a bottom-up process and I do not think the Leader of the Opposition or the Chief Minister should be dictating to members of their party, “You must vote this way.” I know there is at least one candidate for the Labor Party who does not support same-sex marriage, so there has to be a free position.
I noted that Ms Burch made some sniping comments—that is the best way to characterise them—and I have said let us not have that derogatory language from either side. I have heard Mr Barr characterise conservatives as Neanderthals. If we are going to have a respectful debate, which we all want, it has to be measured, it has to be equal. We cannot say one side is allowed to say what they want and call their opponents Neanderthals. That is very demeaning and derogatory and is not helpful at all. Equally, we must make sure that people are respectful on the no side as well.
In light of what I have just said and the Canberra Liberals’ position on the best way to go, that is, to let the people of Canberra exercise their free will—which is the intention of the plebiscite—I have circulated an amendment which I will move shortly. It notes that the plebiscite is due to be conducted either later this year or early next year—that is the reality—and that we support a respectful discussion on marriage in the Canberra community on both sides. Let us have no mudslinging and rock throwing and let us respect all individuals in our community. That includes MLAs and it includes ACT government employees. They should be free to exercise their own free vote in the plebiscite, and good luck to them.
I will be voting yes, as I said. I am talking in this respect as Jeremy Hanson. As I have said before and as has been made clear by the High Court, this is no longer a matter for us as MLAs legislatively. It is not in our jurisdiction legislatively, so we are dealing with this as individuals. And I am saying that Jeremy Hanson will be voting yes, and I hope it comes to fruition. But if it does not and if there are those who feel differently, I fundamentally respect that. I respect that there are people with a different view form mine and it does not mean that their view is in any way less legitimate than my own.
I hope we can lead by example in this place with this debate and make sure we show that, regardless of our difference of opinions either on the actual issue itself or the process, we debate the issue respectfully, we do it collegiately and we say, “Look, let’s show some leadership to our community about how this debate should be conducted henceforth.” I move the amendment circulated in my name:
Omit all words after “That this Assembly”, substitute:
“(1) notes that a national plebiscite on same sex marriage is due to be conducted by the Federal Government later this year or in early 2017;
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video