House debates

Wednesday, 6 December 2017

Bills

Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017; Second Reading

6:33 pm

Photo of Julia BanksJulia Banks (Chisholm, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to rise today in this debate on the Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017 in celebration of Australia's resounding yes to marriage equality. I'm particularly proud to note that 82.4 per cent of the people of Chisholm participated in the marriage equality postal survey and that 61.6 per cent of my electorate of Chisholm voted in favour of marriage equality. There was national jubilation on 15 November 2017, upon the announcement of the postal survey result which, in effect, means significant and heartwarming social reform. 2017 is the year when we are embracing this change and it will remain etched in history as the year of one of the most momentous social reforms in our history.

I've always been on the public record as supporting marriage equality. Marriage equality is about equality before the law. It's about fairness, it's about love and it's about family. I'm so incredibly proud to be a member of the House of Representatives under the leadership of our Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, the first Prime Minister in the history of Australia to have always unequivocally and consistently supported same-sex marriage. It was always the Turnbull government that promised Australians a right to have their say. The Labor Party blocked the plebiscite, which could have taken place earlier this year, despite the fact that the Turnbull government had a mandate from the Australian people, being an elected majority government at the 2016 federal election.

During the 2016 federal election campaign, I personally promised hundreds of people that, under the Turnbull government, we would ensure that Australians would have a right to have their say—that their vote would count as much as mine. Notwithstanding the roadblocks consistently put up by the Labor Party to deny Australians a right to have their say, the Turnbull government found a way. At every turn, the Labor Party attempted to block our attempts to enable Australians to have their say with the plebiscite, and then, with the postal vote, our opponents continued to say that the postal vote wouldn't work because there wouldn't be a turnout for the vote. We maintained the integrity of that promise to the Australian people, because that's what the Turnbull government does. We don't break the promises that we make to Australians. We kept that promise and Australia has spoken loud and clear on marriage equality.

Chisholm, and Australia, overwhelmingly voted to assert that two loving people can now get married in our great country. During the postal voting period, some said it was 'courageous' and 'risky' of me to be so vociferous in supporting marriage equality as an MP of a marginal seat of such diverse multicultural communities. But I've always believed that fighting for marriage equality was never about political courage or resilience; rather, it's about standing for equality for all, regardless of gender, race, sexuality or ethnicity. Chisholm is one of Australia's most multiculturally diverse electorates. The results in Chisholm speak for themselves. Cultural background is no barrier to embracing equality and it is wrong to assume that people vote in line with their ethnicity. While a number of people voted no in this debate, the Turnbull government respects and acknowledges their vote, and I have no doubt that they will respect this truly democratic outcome. Respectful debate is the cornerstone of our democracy, and telling Australians how to vote was not the way to go, and some did a disservice to their cause on both sides for their behaviour and overreaching statements. I love that Australians are decent people and known around the world for their goodwill and camaraderie towards others. This is overwhelmingly evident throughout our community in Chisholm.

Fundamental liberal values are premised on family as the priority, and freedom of religion and freedom of speech. The change to the law will amend the definition of 'marriage' and protect religious freedoms. In relation to family being a priority, I also believe wholeheartedly that children only need two things in life: love and stability. Early in my legal career, when I practised in family law, I saw firsthand that love and stability are not automatically afforded to children simply because they have a mother and a father. The presence of love and stability is not limited to traditional nuclear families such as my own. Rather, it's in the homes of single parents, widows, divorced and separated parents, same-sex parents, grandparents, aunties, uncles and special friends, regardless of their gender or sexuality.

This week, I'm incredibly proud to vote yes in our parliament and represent the majority of Chisholm voters. Chisholm has voted, and I am voting, to recognise relationships between same-sex couples as being as legitimate as those of other couples. A 'yes' vote is an acknowledgement that social mores change and should be reflected in a change to the law. Chisholm and Australia overwhelmingly voted to assert that two loving people can now get married in our country. This vote tells us never to underestimate the Australian people and never to underestimate the greatness of our country. The Australian people have resoundingly used their voice to enable all to live their lives in this country with optimism and faith, regardless of their gender, ethnicity or sexuality. Last week, we celebrated the successful passage of the marriage amendment bill in the other place, and I look forward to honouring our commitment to the Australian people that the Turnbull government will work towards having marriage equality in place before Christmas. The Australian people are the greatest people on earth, and they have voted for a fair, equal and modern Australia.

Comments

No comments