Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017 and oppose the amendment. I'd like to acknowledge the contributions made since I've been in the chamber. The member for Parramatta and the member for Bowman made very persuasive, well-informed and considered contributions to this debate. I believe this debate is very important. It's a momentous week for the LGBTIQ community. It's a momentous and historic week for this country, and it's overdue. It is time we remove discrimination and ensure marriage equality becomes the law of the land.

Before I get into the substance of the debate, I want to acknowledge the efforts of members opposite—indeed, some Liberal senators, including Senator Smith. I'd like to also pay tribute to all the members and senators who were involved in the culmination of the bill that was debated in the other place and is now being debated here. I believe that there was a great effort by the authors of this bill to take into account the concerns that were expressed by people in relation to religious freedom and other matters, and I think that's important.

My electorate does support this change; however, I do accept and acknowledge that there was a very significant proportion of constituents in my electorate that did not support the survey. I accept, also, that the survey was successful in this sense: an overwhelming number of Australians participated, even though it was voluntary. And I support the result. However, I still believe that there was some harm done. People were affected by that debate. I don't support plebiscitary democracy. I believe in parliamentary democracy. There was no reason to have that survey, and there were constituents of my electorate that were adversely affected by the debate.

I received a letter from a young gay man who had not disclosed his sexuality to his family, and he indicated to me that the impact of the survey on him had been harsh, had been difficult. He wrote to me, and I responded to his letter, informing him that I was sympathetic to the difficulties he confronted as a result of the process. I also indicated to him that I was going to support the change to the law. In fact, in 2004, when the then Prime Minister John Howard sought to amend the Marriage Act, I said that I thought this change was some way off but would eventually happen. I do recall saying in 2004, at this dispatch box, that Australia had evolved. It wasn't that long ago—two generations ago—when people thought a mixed marriage was a Catholic marrying a Protestant. People had concerns about mixed-race marriages of heterosexuals. There were concerns about people living in heterosexual de facto relationships. But all of these things became increasingly more accepted, as they should be.

The discrimination towards this community had to end. It's not just on the statute books; it's decades of discrimination. It is decades of violence towards many people in the LGBTIQ community and it has to stop. It won't just stop by us changing the law, but I do believe that the debate in this place will go a long way to preventing the intolerance, the bigotry and the hatred that has, unfortunately, been part of our history. The member for Grayndler referred to Paul O'Grady, New South Wales Labor's first openly gay member of parliament. He was courageous in his stance and in his campaign to see equality and justice for himself and for same-sex couples.

This has moved relatively quickly. I remember my relatives in Ireland informing me that they believed the referendum—that did have to take place in that country to change the constitution—was going to be successful. I have to say I was somewhat sceptical. It is a rural country, predominantly Catholic. I was sceptical that the result would be overwhelmingly supportive of marriage equality, and I was proven wrong. When I saw that result in Ireland, two things struck me. One was I didn't believe that Ireland would get there before Australia. The second was I realised that this would eventually happen in this country, despite those who sought to impede its progress. That's what's going to happen this week, and that's a wonderful thing.

I also want to acknowledge a couple of other people, including, certainly, Senator Wong and Senator Pratt. I've mentioned the member for Grayndler and the member for Whitlam. There was an occasion just as recently as 2012 when we were debating this matter. I want to place this on the Hansard. I was away for that vote because of a very serious family illness, but I sent out a press release indicating that, if I had been present in this place on that occasion, I would have voted in favour of marriage equality on that day. It's important for us to understand how important this matter is to so many people in this country. I've been asked to acknowledge Leah Newman, who was the creative talent behind the 'yes' campaign. I'm happy to do that, to acknowledge the creative skills she brought to this campaign. And there are many others. There is no doubt that campaigning by the union movement assisted. Campaigning by people across this country for change led to such a positive result in this country.

Mr Katter interjecting—

I accept that the member for Kennedy and I have different views on this. My point is that, overwhelmingly, Australians have said they want to see change happen. I believe this could have happened already. I don't believe everyone was motivated in a particularly healthy way to have the survey occur before this vote. Anyway, we're here now. This parliament gets to do what it should have done originally and earlier—that is, vote on a bill, which is how we do things in this contrary. Tomorrow, I believe, we will have the opportunity to vote for this change. I won't be supporting the amendments that have been moved by members in this place. I do support the bill as passed by the Senate, and I do believe that after this debate this vote will be a very welcome change to the law in this country. And it should be a day of joy and a day of celebration for people who have been discriminated against for too long. People who have loved each other have not been able to formalise that love. The state did not recognise that relationship in the way it should have, and I'm glad to say that we are very close now to seeing the end of that discrimination. That's a very good thing.

After all the things that we've dealt with this week and indeed this year, it's nice to think that we'll end on a very positive note, one that will end discrimination. It's been an overdue change, and I pay tribute to all the campaigners throughout the country and indeed all the members and senators who support the change.

See this speech in context