House debates

Thursday, 7 December 2017

Bills

Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017; Consideration in Detail

9:53 am

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

Somebody has to do it today, so I might as well get it out of the way: 'It's okay to vote no'. The reality is I cannot support this amendment. I want to associate myself with the remarks of the member for North Sydney, particularly on the basis of his critique of the issue around celebrants. I don't quite agree automatically with the position he has come to, which is that civil celebrants are merely agents of the Commonwealth. There is inherit conflict between people's lives, their private views and their freedom—unlimited freedom of conscience and their right to manifest that. We know there's an intersection between people's public duties. I also don't like the idea that somebody of faith could be discriminated against when they are taking a lawful profession simply because of their private faith. As the member for North Sydney has correctly cited, this bill is a compromise of the political situation before us. It is what is necessary to get a bill through the Senate and the House of Representatives and to take the country forward together.

I encourage people to vote against this amendment, and the fact that the Australians Greens, with respect to them, are moving this amendment is a classic reminder of the fact that this bill is not one that they have authored; they have many criticisms of it. It is something that has come from the parliament and from the Senate, and I encourage people to vote against these amendments.

Comments

No comments