Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This week in this parliament and in this House there has been a lot of debate both in party rooms and on the floor about marriage equality, and all of us have been engaged on that issue. It is also an issue that people in our communities have been engaging with and debating, whether it be through social media or whether it be through talkback radio. I myself, in my office, have received a number of emails from people calling on this parliament to act, to say it is time.

One of the emails that I received is from Josh, and I asked Josh if I could read his email out to the parliament so that they could understand how personal this issue is and how important this issue is to people in my electorate and in other electorates around the country. Josh agreed. He believed it would be important for his friends that these thoughts were placed on the record:

Dear ms chesters. Yesterday a dear friend of mine died yesterday. In the midst of my sadness at her loss of life, I am angry and frustrated that she never had the chance to do something I had the chance of doing......marrying the person she loved. I don't know your personal opinions on the issue but thank you for publicly standing up for the wishes of the people you serve. Marriage is a social construct and society is saying its definition needs to change and be more inclusive. Thank you for continuing to represent me and the people of central Victoria.

Josh sent me some other words that he would also like to be placed on the record:

My friend was in her early 30s. She got engaged last year to her partner.

I think that if the Australian government is going to recognize marriage, it should be for all citizens. This is not about changing marriage "in the eyes of God". At my wedding it was all about the love between me and my wife. My marriage certificate was not issued after having a fertility examination. This is about allowing my friends and family from partaking in this universal right. I think if you change to scenario from two men, to two people from different religious or ethnic backgrounds, the objections become absurd.

As I said, thanks for doing your job in representing you electorate and it will be an honor for you to share my thoughts in Canberra.

Best wishes

Josh.

Josh's emails are just two of the many that I have received—personal reflections and stories about how people in my electorate, in my community, believe it is time for this parliament to get on with the job of correcting this issue and allowing marriage equality. It is an issue of equity before the law.

Now the government and government ministers are trying to distract, talking about expensive referendums and plebiscites—plebiscites which we do not know will have any binding effect on this parliament, because my understanding of the rules is they will not—to try and delay and stall what is a very simple issue that this parliament could deal with right now. We have two private members' bills on the books. It is time. It is time for Australia and it is time for this parliament to get on with marriage equality.

The Marriage Act is an act of this parliament and it is up to all of us as parliamentarians to consider the bills before us and allow a vote to occur. I call on the Prime Minister to respect the wishes of Josh, respect the wishes of so many in our community and allow a vote to occur.

A few weeks ago 85 small businesses took out two full-page ads in my local paper. These small businesses were calling for marriage equality, putting on the record their support for marriage equality. This is not just a niche issue or an inner-city issue; this is an issue that unites Australians around the country. They are saying: let's end the discrimination before the law. Let's make sure that all people can marry for love—not gender but love. It is about two consenting adults having the opportunity and the choice. It is time that the Prime Minister got out of the way and allowed there to be a vote of this parliament in the coming weeks.

Question agreed to.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 12 : 18