Andrew Barr

Speech on Civil Partnerships Amendment Bill

Submitted by Andrew Barr on 11 November 2009 - 9:48pm
 
Wednesday 11 November 2009
 
MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Planning, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation and Minister for Gaming and Racing) (10.37):
 
I rise to speak in support of the Civil Partnerships Amendment and the government amendment. From the outset, I think it worth placing on the record some key statements of principle that need to be aired in this debate.
 
I have been on the public record and have had some concerns that there was a lot of politicking going on in relation to this issue. However, I would like to take this opportunity to put on the record my view that those issues have been addressed and that I have been very pleased with the change in the tone of this debate from when it was first raised as some sort of internal Labor Party power issue, about the relationship between the ACT branch of the Labor Party and the federal branch of the Labor Party.
 
Now this debate has turned to what it should be about, and that is recognising and supporting loving, caring relationships, regardless of the sexuality of those involved. That is what this debate should be about. And I am very pleased that that is the direction that it has taken.
 
This is the third time, in my short period in this Assembly, that I have had the opportunity to speak in support of legislation that makes a significant difference to the lives of gay and lesbian Canberrans. However, I am frustrated that we have to come back here again and debate this matter.
 
I said, in May of 2008, when the compromise civil partnerships legislation was passed, that it was just that - a compromise. It was something that caused a great deal of angst and pain for those of us who championed reform going back over many, many, years.  I first moved a resolution in ACT Young Labor in the year 2000 to start this law reform process.
 
On one level, there is a tremendous amount of pride in what has been achieved over the course of this decade, that so many territory laws and, now, so many federal laws have changed.
 
I do want to acknowledge the contribution that has been made by Mr Stanhope as Attorney General and Mr Corbell locally and the support of the Greens party and indeed the Democrats, when they were in this place, towards that significant law reform process.
 
It is something that I know was personally difficult for some members, but they stuck through all of the hatred and all of the insults that are thrown at progressive members of parliament who seek to make this social change.
 
I have said before in this place many times that good governments seek to lead on important social issues. Good governments set the agenda for their communities, they govern as leaders, and not as followers. So I am very proud to be a member of a government, indeed very proud to be a member of a parliament that believes that all loving and committed relationships deserve to be treated equally and to be celebrated.
 
It is a matter of considerable pride that this parliament has taken that action and continues to support loving, caring relationships. Strong relationships deliver important benefits to us all.
 
I think we all define ourselves in some way by who we chose to share our lives with, and that love, trust, intimacy and commitment are found at the heart of all good relationships.
 
I am very proud to live in a community that encourages, that empowers and protects couples who want to make their relationships loving, who want to make them long-term, stable and committed.
 
I am proud that this parliament today will send a signal that my relationship with Anthony is equal to any other in this city.
 
But I am frustrated that here in November 2009 there is still a debate and we still have to compromise on achieving full legal equality. Now a civil partnership is not a wedding, and the laws that we hopefully will pass today have been framed to avoid conflict with the Commonwealth Marriage Act.
 
I am left wondering why it is that same sex partners are not able to stand up in front of their family and friends and to receive the formal blessing of the state for their union.
 
Gays and lesbians are part of our community, we are not nameless, faceless people, we do not live on the margins of society, we deserve respect and the same dignity that is afforded to others, and we deserve equality.
 
Legal equality is not only functional and practical, it is highly symbolic.  It allows us to hold our heads up high as equal members of the community and to celebrate our relationships.
 
Fundamentally, it is about dignity.  I can see no good argument for allowing only opposite sex couples to formalise and celebrate their relationships and then to deny that right to same sex couples.
 
I often hear those who oppose gay marriage or civil partnerships talk about its alleged dire effect on families.
 
This ignores the fact that gay men and women have families too. We are sons and daughters, we are brothers and sisters, we are cousins, we are aunts, we are uncles and we are parents.

So let me say how pleased I am that this parliament will seize the opportunity to support family and to plainly say that no-one deserves to be excluded simply because of his or her sexual orientation.
 
This is about drawing a line in the sand. It is about standing up for your principles.
 
What I find remarkable in the contribution from (the Shadow Attorney-General) Mrs Dunne was that there was no real comment on the principle at stake here.  The Liberal Party should clearly state their view on the substance of the issue, and not seek to hide behind politicking around the relationship between the ACT and the Commonwealth.
 
That is a pretty weak position to adopt.
 
The relationship between the ACT and the commonwealth is robust enough to survive this debate.  
 
Principles are what matter. In the end, the Commonwealth Government will respect the fact that this parliament and that this government are prepared to stand up for those principles.
 
But what I must say before closing is: let us hope that today is not the final word on the recognition of same sex relationships in Australia.
 
As I said at the outset, a lot has changed in the ACT and it has been really positive. But this only represents one part of this country, and it is still the case in the amendments that the Attorney-General Mr Corbell will be moving that there is a distinction between marriage and civil partnerships.
 
I know there are many who will continue to campaign for full legal equality and for the definition of marriage to be opened up to all couples in this country. That fight will continue, the decisions that we take today send an important message, not only to the Canberra community but to the rest of the country that these issues will not go away.
 
The direction of social change is only one way, and that is another positive to take from today’s debate.
 
I am thrilled that the Tasmanian government is taking further steps to recognise same sex relationships in their jurisdiction, the changes that they propose have greater constitutional protection than we have as a territory, and that is important.
 
I called 18 months ago for Victoria and Tasmania as the two other leading jurisdictions in this country to take further steps, and both governments, both Labor governments have and it is to their great credit.
 
Same sex couples elsewhere in Australia will rightly feel disappointed that their state governments in Queensland, in New South Wales and South Australia, and in Western Australia, are not following the lead of the ACT, Victoria and Tasmania, and that of course remains unfinished business in those jurisdictions.
 
Finally, may the message we send today resonate across this country that this issue will continue to be fought for, that we will continue to argue for full legal equality, and I thank members very much for their support of this legislation and in particular Mr Rattenbury for bringing it forward, and the Attorney-General Mr Corbell for his considered amendments.
 
I think it is a triumph for the progressives over the conservatives, and that can only be good for Australian society.
 
»