Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to begin by respectfully disassociating myself from the comments made by the previous speaker that things should be done swiftly. I resolutely agree that we should get this done as quickly as possible, but I was elected to parliament to get the best law for this nation. If that takes time, that's also appropriate. In saying that, that's also why I am voting against this amendment.

The previous speaker made the case around the Senate inquiry, so I won't seek to repeat that point, but this amendment is inconsistent with the Senate inquiry and I don't think that it is necessary. Those people serving in these capacities are employees of the state and, as a consequence, I believe they have a responsibility to fulfil their functions as employees of the state. I realise, recognise and respect the fact they may have their own private views, but, as the member before me outlined, ultimately, they wouldn't take up the office if they felt so, appropriately.

When it comes down to it, we have to remember the purpose of having this function in the act. It is for those brave men and women who serve our nation overseas, defend our interests and fight for freedom across the world, to make sure they have the opportunity to marry, regardless of where they're located, and for that to be respected in Australian law. When you think about some of the times that happens, it doesn't always happen in nice circumstances. Sometimes people in the past made the choice to get married to their loved one in the moments before they went off to battle. I know, Deputy Speaker, you will have some appreciation of that in a way that I don't, as I don't have firsthand experience. But I think it is absolutely critical that we recognise that those people who serve our country should be given those full rights and freedoms and shouldn't have to go out and scurry around to try to find somebody who might marry them, whether they happen to be two Defence Force personnel being deployed or one Defence person seeking to marry somebody else under a Defence Force arrangement. In the end, people can do these things and then go off and risk or sacrifice their life.

The idea that we have people who represent our nation—they defend the interests of our nation and are prepared to sacrifice their lives for our nation and for exactly the freedoms we're debating today—who seek to go and marry a person that they love, but are turned around by somebody who simply says, 'I don't want to do that; I'm sorry if it causes you an inconvenience,' to me, is absolutely abhorrent. I understand the concerns some people have on the other side of this debate around this particular amendment, but, when people are going to take these risks, it isn't a gross infringement on people's liberties, particularly when they have accepted the office of a marriage officer. They should also recognise and respect the risk and the sacrifice of those people in our country who are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice. It should be put into proportion. So I urge all members to defeat this amendment and to support our troops.

See this speech in context