Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

Let me say from the outset that I have attended same-sex weddings. They happen in Australia often. For those who have not attended one I would say that there are many things you would find familiar. There are vows, rings, thousands of photos, and even confetti. There are proud parents and happy friends dressed up to the nines. The ceremonies get followed by receptions with food, wine, dancing and, of course, those obligatory embarrassing speeches. What they miss is not love, family or commitment; what such ceremonies lack is a legal certificate that our Commonwealth Marriage Act currently prevents them from having. These weddings are unofficial, but that does not stop them from occurring.

The status of homosexual Australians has changed dramatically over the past 40 years. A major part of this has been legal change. We have gone from laws that criminalise and lock up gays to laws that protect their rights. In the sweep of history much of this change has actually been quite recent. Our government has a very proud history in this area. Three years ago, this Labor government changed 85 Commonwealth laws to remove discrimination and to equalise treatment. This covered a broad range of areas, including Medicare, social security, superannuation and many more. These are changes that have a financial impact. They are changes that put government benefits on an equal footing and laws that properly acknowledge caring relationships. Earlier this year I was proud to remove the impediments for same-sex couples to obtain certificates of no impediment for marriage overseas in the various countries that already allow same-sex marriage.

I must admit that I have always believed that these myriad changes in our legislation were the priority for reform—the practical matters that benefited all Australians wanting to be treated fairly and equally. In fact, it was not long ago that many in the gay and lesbian community also had this view—wanting to ensure protection for all who were treated unfairly because of their homosexuality, not just for those who wanted to marry. But the course of this debate has changed. People's views have changed. And the symbolism of same-sex marriage has grown. And that action taken to remove other discrimination has now served to highlight marriage restrictions as an ongoing barrier to equality.

It is time for us to accept that a person's love and commitment for another is a cause for celebration and recognition, not for exclusion and derision. The critics of this bill are concerned about the fabric of our society and our values, but I personally do not see how this bill will do any of those things that are claimed. There will still be the same number of same-sex couples and the same number of straight couples. The only change is that it will remove a legislative statement that straight couples can achieve a higher status of commitment than same-sex couples. In fact, to me, the values that this bill promotes are essentially conservative ones in saying that, if you love someone, you should form a bond with that person for life. I for one cannot and would not say that my love for my husband is stronger or better or more worthy of government recognition than the commitment of our gay friends who want to take this step. I certainly cannot see how their marriage would in any way diminish or affect ours. This change would actually strengthen and encourage commitment. It is saying that Australia promotes monogamous relationships; it is saying that we promote commitment, love and family. Ultimately, these are values that strengthen our nation's social fabric.

However, people of good conscience can have a different view of such things and social change can be difficult and confronting for many. In my electorate I have been lobbied strongly in both directions, both for and against this change. Particularly because of this division, I want to thank the Prime Minister for having the good judgement to allow members and senators of the government and of the Labor Party a conscience vote on this issue. She has shown that she understands that there are diverse views on this matter and is willing for people to express them. This is significantly different from the view taken by the Leader of the Opposition, who has banned, among others, members such as the member for Wentworth and Senator Birmingham from voting in favour of this bill. The Prime Minister's decision and the ALP conference's support have allowed me as Attorney-General, with carriage of the Marriage Act, to voice my opinion which is different from hers and to support this bill. Despite the support of many who have spoken in favour of this bill, I am not confident that this will be the year that same-sex marriage will become law. I believe that it will happen when both sides of politics allow their MPs a free vote on the issue. But I do believe that this change is inevitable. So it is a matter of when, not if, it is achieved, and I would like to support the bill before the House.

See this speech in context