Linda Burney (Barton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017. I rise to speak in support of this bill on behalf of the many, many, many in the LGBTIQ community that have fought for over 40 years for such equality, and for the fellow travellers that have been there to support the community. We have watched and we have been with you for a very long time. This bill and the decision that we will make on this bill have been a long time coming. I really do pay my homage to all of you—for those of you in the parliament, for those of you that have lobbied and for those of you that are watching on television today.

I have long been a supporter of marriage equality. I have never had a second thought. It seemed to be so obvious to me. My track record in this space is a long one. When I was the Minister for Community Services in New South Wales, I supported gay adoption. Prior to that, a single gay person could adopt, but not a gay couple. I made sure, as Minister for Community Services, that that changed.

I support marriage equality as someone who has, and has had, loved ones who identify as LGBTIQ. To them, marriage equality would mean so much. I honour these people and, in particular, my late son, Binni. And I support marriage equality as someone who is a member of a community that has experienced great discrimination and injustice and understands what it means to be rejected, understands what intergenerational trauma feels like and what hurt and distress does to you. Just as the 1967 referendum fundamentally transformed the way we talked about, perceive, value and treat Aboriginal Australians, I truly believe that the passage of the marriage equality bill will make a similar positive transformation of our nation.

I have seen firsthand the confusion, anxiety and pain that many of our young people experience in dealing with their sexuality. The reality for LGBTIQ Australians should not have to be to hide your sexuality and your gender when accessing services at social community events and at work. That is wrong. They should not have to experience verbal homophobic abuse, and over a quarter report physical homophobic abuse and other types of homophobia, including cyberbullying, graffiti, social exclusion and humiliation. Homophobic bullying of LGBTIQ young people occurs in schools, and that has a profound effect on their wellbeing and their education and how their life continues. We heard so well about that from the member for Herbert.

What marriage equality says to our young people who are anxious about their sexuality is that, whatever you feel, you shouldn't be afraid anymore. You are equal. We embrace you and we love you as a nation. I say to the children of the LGBTIQ couples: be proud, and I'm so sorry that you've had to put up with the pain of the past.

I am mindful of the fact that there are a range of views in the electorate of Barton, which did return a 'no' vote on the postal survey. And I want to say to the electors of Barton: I respect those views. But you know, and I know, that it was very clear a long time ago, in the lead-up to my election, long before I was elected to the parliament, that I was always going to support marriage equality and that I would vote in favour in this parliament.

I did not like the postal survey. It was expensive, divisive and hurtful. But what I found most disgusting about it was that it forced LGBTIQ loved ones to beg for their own civil rights, a truly humiliating and shameful exercise. I think it was particularly hurtful, unethical and in complete contradiction to the principles of the Westminster parliamentary representative democracy to put the question of basic civil and human rights to a popular vote, or a survey, as if it were some kind of reality TV show. I see parallels in the 1967 referendum, and I've spoken about this in the past. But, of course, the 1967 referendum proposition to count Aboriginal people involved an amendment to the Constitution and required constitutional reform. Marriage equality did not require a referendum. It should have been straightforward, and it should have been done a long time ago.

We saw the most disturbing, disgusting and misleading homophobic political material circulated in the seat of Barton and in several other electorates in the country. We knew this would happen. Medical experts warned us that this would happen. And that's why I was in no way surprised that many of our LGBTIQ Australians reported fear, anxiety and other mental health difficulties during this difficult time. This issue should have been resolved by this parliament. We should have just simply done our jobs as members of parliament. However, we are where we are now. And, by Friday, this country will have equality for our friends in the LGBTIQ community.

I understand that many opponents of marriage equality are tied to the notion of traditional marriage being between a man and a woman. To them I would say: I acknowledge that your concerns may feel real to you, but this is not the first time marriage has been redefined, and it will not impact you. It used to be that people of different races couldn't marry each other. Today, they can, and life goes on happily. I know that there are some elements within this parliament who may try to make issues of religious freedom amendments. I join with my colleagues who will support this bill, and we will not entertain those amendments. To that I will say to those elements who desperately try to employ tactics to delay and distract from this debate: you will not be successful. I have a large, diverse religious community in Barton and I love them. If they raise genuine concerns with me, of course, I'll consider those concerns. But what I won't do is engage in delaying tactics from extreme elements of the parliament who are essentially proposing to roll back antidiscrimination measures. I will not vote to remove one form of discrimination to be replaced by another. The world has come a long way since the days of signs saying, 'We will not serve this race or this community.' My vote for marriage equality will not be about popularity; it will be about what is right and what is wrong, what is fair and what is unfair.

In political life, and I have been in it for 14 or 15 years now, there are very few opportunities where we vote with our conscience. They are precious moments. And my conscience is this: I have spent my entire life fighting for fairness. I have fought for the rights and welfare of first peoples. I have fought and will continue to fight to close the gap for recognition and for reconciliation. I have fought against government efforts to make it more difficult for residents from non-English-speaking backgrounds to attain Australian citizenship, a proposal which will impact many voters in the electorate of Barton. I have fought against unrelenting attacks on those that need income support and against robo-debt. I have fought about the 55 million unanswered calls and increased wait times in Centrelink. I have fought for the aged, I have fought for our students, I have fought for all Australians with a disability who are finding it difficult to claim support, get jobs and have a life that's valued. I have fought for fairness in education. I have fought for truth for my entire life. I have fought for fairness in health. I will fight for fairness by voting in favour of marriage equality.

I represent one of the most multicultural electorates in the nation. I note that some media reports suggest that the 'no' vote correlated with the ethnic enclave in suburban Sydney, but I would issue great caution against this interpretation or analysis of the postal survey results. Even if all the voters from non-English-speaking backgrounds in my electorate and in Australia voted no, it would still not account for the entirety of the 'no' vote. So, let's just get a little perspective on these results. I am proud of my electorate. I am proud of the fact that the electorate of Barton is one of the most multiculturally diverse in this country. And they are proud of me. It wasn't this diversity that was the cause for the 'no' vote in Barton. Voters want conviction from us as politicians; they want truth. My conviction, my life and what it stands for is equity, and that means yes to this proposition. It means yes in eloquence; it means yes, and it's heartfelt. It means yes because it is the decent and the right thing to do. It will help us grow up as a nation; it will broaden us as a nation. It would also say to a community that has experienced enormous hurt and enormous discrimination, including legal discrimination, that finally, 'We love you, we embrace you and you are as equal as anyone in Australia.'

I thank all of those involved in finally bringing this to a vote, from both sides of the House, from the upper house and from the lower house, and also those people who have been mentioned in particular by the member for Herbert, who spoke just prior to me. I can't wait for February and March in Sydney; what a great Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras it's going to be in 2018! We will have the eyes of the world on us. The eyes of the world are watching what we are doing now. What we are doing now is making the right decision. We are providing equity, we are providing an embrace, we are providing love and we are righting a great wrong that has been perpetrated in this country for a very long time.

We are giving people who love each other the right to marry, just like other people do in this country. This is not only a legal right; marriage, of course, is much more than that. It is about how you feel in your heart. It is about a commitment to someone for reasons that are soaring reasons to want to marry. It is also, of course, something that this parliament will be able to hold its head up about from today onwards. And when we take this final vote, despite the ongoing amendments that will come, I know that this chamber and this House will finally do the right thing by the LGBTI community, and that is to say: 'You marry, just like everyone else. You are equal.' I cannot say just how proud I am to be able to be part of a parliament that will finally make the decision that should have been made, as I said, a long time ago.

I reiterate that whilst the electorate of Barton may have voted one way—and, of course, that's been reported—they know what I stand for and I know what the electorate of Barton stands for. Above all, it is not about this issue; it is about the issue of equity and equal treatment, and those two thoughts are what will carry us through.

Finally, more than anything else, this debate is about love. It is about finally recognising that love is love, and love is the thing that makes this world go around. Finally, this world will go around properly for all people in Australia, no matter who you are, where you are or what you believe in. There could be no more joyous moment and no prouder moment than the moment that this House will experience when we finally pass this bill in the next 24 to 48 hours—certainly before the end of this week. I am a very proud member of the Labor Party and I am very proud to be able to give my thoughts in this debate. With enormous respect, it's about time.

See this speech in context