Jim Turnour (Leichhardt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Attorney-General. Will the Attorney-General update the House on progress to remove discrimination against Australians in same-sex relationships and their children from Commonwealth superannuation laws?

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will give the Attorney-General the call on the assumption that he was able to hear the question over the interjections on my left.

Robert McClelland (Barton, Australian Labor Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for Leichhardt for his question. I recognise his principled stand on these issues and, indeed, I am sure he would not mind me mentioning and recognising the principled stand that his immediate predecessor also took on these issues. As I noted earlier this week, some three weeks ago I introduced the Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws—Superannuation) Bill 2008 When I introduced that legislation I made clear why the government had intended an implementation date of 1 July. Just to underline the significance of that intention to members, I refer to an email that I received on 15 May this year from Mr John Challis of the ComSuper Action Committee and a long-time campaigner for these reforms. He said:

I’m very pleased that the entitlements for ComSuper death benefits will apply from July 1st, 2008. I only have to stay alive until then for my partner to be provided for; a great relief for an 80-year-old!

I think that underlines the significance of the urgency in passing this legislation with that succinctly made point. Unfortunately, members would be disappointed to hear that the coalition followed through on its threat to delay the passage of this legislation by referring it to a Senate committee.

I note, however, in today’s media, that in a Sydney Morning Herald article titled ‘Nelson’s left flank goes to war over same-sex bill’, it is reported that there was at least a partial backdown in an endeavour to dissuade Senator Sue Boyce from crossing the floor. If that is the case, I would congratulate Senator Boyce and I would also commend the member for Sturt and the member for Kooyong for also taking a principled position in this place by arguing for a 1 July commencement date.

Many opposition members with all the best will in the world have supported backdating the legislation. I previously outlined the legal complications with that and the injustice of causing a hiatus in income, but it appears that even there the opposition is not consistent in its position because earlier this month the shadow Attorney-General was asked whether the opposition would agree to backdating and he said, ‘I am not in a position to give that commitment because no such decision has been made by the coalition.’ Again, the coalition on these simple, straightforward matters of principle—removing discrimination—is at sixes and sevens. I would again encourage those opposite to support the expeditious passage of this legislation. I would also commend those opposite who have taken a principled stand. I would encourage them to continue it; the struggle is not over.