Trent Zimmerman (North Sydney, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Neville Wills celebrated his 98th birthday a few weeks ago. He's lived in his apartment in Greenwich, in my electorate, overlooking our glittering harbour for much of his life. During the course of those 98 years, Neville has borne witness to many of the events that have shaped our nation. He's lived through the terms of 23 prime ministers and the reign of four monarchs. The Great Depression, a world war and the Cold War, the construction of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, the advent of the computer age and the growth of Sydney to become one of the world's great multicultural cities have all been part of his life story. And, as someone who happened to be born gay, he has been part of the incredible transformation in the way in which our society has regarded homosexuality.

For two-thirds of Neville's life, simply being gay was effectively a crime in New South Wales. As a young man, it would have been beyond his wildest imagination to dream of an Australia in which his sexuality was accepted without shame or ostracisation, where his rights were protected and not prosecuted, an Australia that's parliament included openly gay members, including his own representative, and an Australia in which he could choose to marry the person he loves. Yet all of these things will be achieved in his lifetime.

Thirty-nine years ago—in fact, on an anniversary celebrated just yesterday—Neville met the person who was to become his lifelong partner. He and Ian Fenwicke have shared their lives together since that day. They have loved, honoured, comforted and protected each other and will do so as long as they both shall live. Yet, for those 39 years, they have not been able to proclaim and share their commitment in love in the same way as every other Australian. Our laws have treated them differently. This week, in this parliament and with the overwhelming support of our fellow Australians, we have the opportunity to change that. And, early next year, once we have done so, Neville and Ian will marry.

I reflect on their story because it encapsulates the reasons marriage equality is at long last being debated in this House and why I have been a co-signatory to the bill before it. Their hopes and aspirations reflect the importance of marriage in our society for so many people yet denied to some simply because of their sexuality. This legislation and the outcome of the postal survey which preceded it are an important part of our nation's journey towards acceptance and respect for those of us who are gay, lesbian, transgender or intersex. The significance of both cannot be understated, not just for members of the LBGTI community and their families and friends but for those millions of Australians who hold, as our birth right, the nation of a fair go, where our laws treat all Australians equally and fairly. These are principles that are not revolutionary. They are part and parcel of our liberal democracy and the promise that extends to all its citizens—the right to live their lives according to their own hopes, values, talents and ambitions. They are at the core of the belief structure which makes me a Liberal. Marriage equality is simply a logical extension of those ideals.

Despite our own progress, in so many parts of the world gay and lesbian people remain persecuted. We have seen, for example, gay men publicly flogged in the name of sharia law in one of our nearest neighbours. In the troubled Middle East, the mad men of ISIS have taken pleasure in executing homosexuals, often in the most barbaric of ways. In Chechnya, members of the gay and lesbian community have been systematically rounded up and arrested, tortured and often killed by their own government. In so many countries, being gay is still considered a crime. We as a nation, therefore, should be proud of our liberal democracy, our commitment to individual rights and all we have achieved. So, for me, marriage equality should be regarded not, as some have asserted, as a threat to the values of Western civilisation but as rather their triumph.

For much of human history, marriage has been a stabilising and important bedrock for relationships and for families. While not every Australian in a relationship will choose to marry, for many it remains a powerful affirmation of love, commitment and shared responsibility. It is an act of devotion sanctioned by the law and proclaimed through wedding ceremonies witnessed by families and friends. For many years, support for marriage as an institution took something of a battering. Yet, today, we have a part of our community knocking on the door and seeking to be admitted.

For me, as a Liberal, today's debate is about ensuring our law treats each other equally. For those who come to this debate from the conservative tradition, I want to say that marriage equality should be seen as a victory for this ancient institution. Who would have thought we would see the day when the Socialist Alliance and Lee Rhiannon would be marching on the streets for marriage? It will grow stronger and more popular as more have the opportunity to join its ranks. I know there are some who have typified this debate as fundamentally altering an institution which has been immutable since ancient times. This has certainly been the tenor of the correspondence of some of those who have emailed and written to me arguing against marriage equality. Yet the reality is that, like all strong and continuing institutions, marriage has changed and adapted over the centuries. It is simply wrong to say that marriage is the same today as it was 50 years, 100 years or even longer ago.

My friend Paul Ritchie chartered some of those changes in his outstanding book, Faith, Love and Australia: The Conservative Case for Same-Sex Marriage. In its long history, the concept that marriage is about two people who come together through love is a relatively new one. Paul Ritchie quoted in his book the significant 18th century jurist, Lord Blackstone, who said of marriage, 'By marriage, husband and wife are one person in law', and that person is the husband. That does not sound like a concept of marriage which would resonate in Australia today, thankfully. And for so long, interfaith and interracial marriages were regarded as taboo, often with the enforcement of the law, as Aboriginal Australians experienced in parts of our own nation as late as the mid-20th century.

No institution survives and flourishes without change, but the irony of this debate is that gay and lesbian Australians don't actually want to change marriage; they simply want to be allowed to join it. They want to marry to partake in the same benefits and happiness that other Australians enjoy and which the advocates of marriage so rightly extol.

During the course of the last 18 months, I've received some beautiful letters and emails from couples longing to marry and I want to quote one of those today, which to me summarises why gay and lesbian Australians have been fighting so hard for this week to come. The email came from a Western Australian who I do not personally know. He wrote:

We have been together for seven years. I am truly blessed to have him in my life. We are more in love today than ever before.

He is a saint in my eyes—he completes me and he makes me a better person. He is my rock, my best friend, my wisest counsel and my confidant.

So thank you for fighting for us to be recognised as being as good as anyone else, and thank you for fighting to affirm that our love—our great great love affair—is as valuable and worthy of being cherished and affirmed like anyone else's.

It is this love, this commitment and this union of minds that so many parents, brothers and sisters, friends, relatives and work colleagues see in the lives of gay people they know which led them to vote yes for marriage equality in such overwhelming numbers. This bill will deliver the marriage equality Australians voted for when they gave the parliament not just a mandate greater than any government has received in our nation's history, but, in effect, a direction to get it done. It has its genesis in the unanimous cross-party findings of the Senate select committee, and the bill was released by Senator Smith, the members for Leichhardt, Goldstone and Brisbane and I in August.

Importantly, the bill protects those religious freedoms we hold dear and which properly relate to the functions of the Marriage Act. This has been a key consideration for us, and in this bill we protect the rights of religious organisations and their ministers. We ensure that religious bodies may refuse to make facilities available or to provide goods and services for marriages that do not conform with their own religious beliefs and we offer similar protections to existing celebrants who choose to register as religious marriage celebrants. These will sit alongside existing Commonwealth laws which make clear that our schools can hire and teach according to their own religious values and that no person can be discriminated against in the workplace because of their religious beliefs.

Not one clause or one word of this bill will change the existing rights of any Australian in relation to their religious freedoms. And nowhere does this bill seek to restrict the right of any Australian or organisation to hold beliefs or present the case for a traditional marriage. This bill restricts itself to issues relating to marriage, not an unreasonable proposition for a bill that actually seeks to amend the Marriage Act.

But I know that many have argued the need for a broader discussion about religious freedoms in Australia and this is a call that I support. I welcome the Prime Minister's decision to bring together an expert panel led by our esteemed former Attorney-General Philip Ruddock to consider and report on these issues. Its deliberations will allow us to determine whether broader reforms are needed. The Marriage Act is not the legislation for achieving that goal, it's not the place for a partial bill of rights, it's not the place for the Commonwealth to assert new legislative powers over the states in relation to our schools and it's certainly not the place to respond to Australia's vote for a greater equality by winding back existing antidiscrimination laws. We have a good bill, now endorsed by the Senate, and I hope that this chamber will lend it its support.

In the coming week, we will bring to a close an issue which has been discussed in the Australian community for over a decade. We would not be able to do so without the leadership provided by many in this parliament, on both sides of the House, and in the broader community. In this chamber I want to acknowledge particularly the member for Leichardt, whose tenacity and leadership have just been extraordinary. Who would have thought a crocodile farmer from Far North Queensland would become a gay icon, although he does occasionally look like a member of the Village People!

I also recognise the members for Goldstein and Brisbane. As new members in this place, the last 12 months have, on occasion, taken their toll and tested our mettle. I don't think we have been found wanting in standing by our convictions.

To my friend in the Senate, Dean Smith, your determination and very senatorial attention to detail and process have brought us here today. We've known each other for 25 years, and it's fair to say that, when we first knew each other, there wasn't much love, because of the divide in the Young Liberals, but I'm glad that is no longer the case. I thank the Prime Minister and members of his cabinet for providing a pathway where none seemed possible. I thank the thousands of Liberal Party members and supporters who joined together under the banner of Libs and Nats for Yes, led so ably by Andrew Bragg and Luke Barnes and supported so eloquently by many others. I particularly acknowledge Christine Forster in this regard for her powerful advocacy, and I'm so pleased that she and Virginia will no longer require the British consulate for their own wedding early next year.

Outside this place I record my appreciation for the work of the Equality Campaign and people like Alex Greenwich; Tom Snow; Anna Brown; the mum from Mosman, Janine Middleton; and of course the face and voice of the 'yes' campaign, Tiernan Brady. How could anyone say no to that Irish lilt? I also acknowledge my own community in North Sydney, 72 per cent of whom voted yes. Almost every conversation I had with members of the community, both those voting yes and those voting no, was conducted respectfully and genuinely. I cannot describe how much it meant, during some of the darkest moments, when complete strangers would approach me and simply say, 'Good on you for standing up for what you believe.' Most importantly of all I thank Carlos, the man I love, for being the best example I could have as to why we all aspire to find the person who will unconditionally love us and be at our side.

Finally, I recognise the role of young Australians. The outcome of the postal survey was, more than anything else, a victory for the new generation of Australians who have grown up beside gay and lesbian friends or family members, who know their dreams and ordeals are no different to their own and who wondered why marriage equality should even be an issue at all. They enrolled to vote like never before, they formed the core of the campaign teams that fanned out across the nation, and they convinced so many of their parents and grandparents that it was time for change. At shopping centres and at train stations I saw their excitement and enthusiasm at the thought that they could make history and change Australia for the better. I say to them: 'You have done just that.'

Those young Australians, along with yes voters of all ages, have helped ensure that every loving relationship is valued and treated equally. They have sent the message that our community embraces each of its citizens, no matter what their sexuality. Too many Australians have lived a life of denial and too many of us have experienced that great debilitating shadow that comes from the fear of discovery or rejection. Many still do today, but Australians, through their vote, have helped bring about change. They have said every Australian should be able to be simply who they are. For that, I thank them. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context