Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

In rising to speak on the Sexuality and Gender Identity Discrimination Bill 2003 [2004], I can say at the outset that it is Labor’s longstanding policy to remove discrimination against the GLBTI community. We did take action when we were in government and we have taken action at a state level. We have made commitments in our platform, and when in government we will deliver change. Labor recognises that we have strong legislation protecting people from discrimination on the basis of race, sex, disability and age, but that under federal law it is still lawful to discriminate on the grounds of sexuality or gender identity. We are committed to removing discrimination in Commonwealth legislation—a process all Labor states have undertaken except, as I recall, South Australia, which is currently undertaking that and which will complete it soon.

This is much needed at the Commonwealth level because some of these items do impact, as I think Senator Bartlett indicated, in areas of social security, tax law, veterans, Medicare and the like. We do acknowledge the strong interest that has been shown by the Democrats, especially former senator Brian Greig, who drafted the bill. So we can happily support the intent and the direction of the bill, even if parts of it we might approach in a different manner, if I can put it that way, in terms of both drafting and a couple of other issues contained within the bill. But it is not really the time to go to that level of detail.

What we can say is that, because Labor has had a longstanding commitment to remove discrimination against same-sex couples, we do feel strongly about this issue—one that this government has totally neglected. It has been in our platform for a long time. We took it to the last election and we will take it to the next election. We are committed to delivering equality between de facto heterosexuals and same-sex couples and are currently conducting consultations on relationship recognition for same-sex couples.

The Democrat bill is basically a good one. We support the intention of removing discrimination to the GLBTI community. Labor would not approach these issues in the same way, but this bill would be a positive change nonetheless. It is one I know that the government would not pick up. I doubt very much that they will express that here today.

It is a matter that Labor has also progressed. The shadow Attorney-General has an exposure draft of her own sexuality discrimination bill open for public comment and feedback. The exposure draft is a private member’s bill that has not been introduced into the House of Representatives because Labor wants to ensure that many people in the community have a look at the bill and provide feedback to Labor’s shadow Attorney-General on the many issues that are contained within it. It is a detailed exposure draft. The hard work has been done by Labor. It goes through a range of issues covering many different matters, including an audit of all Commonwealth laws and ministerial advisory councils, and, of course, the central plank of the draft bill: the prohibition of sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination. It deals with discrimination in areas including education, goods and services, accommodation and land, how those matters might be looked at and issues that go to harassment and victimisation. It is a very complex exposure draft bill. I congratulate the Labor shadow Attorney-General for the hard work that she has put in in developing that. It does demonstrate Labor’s commitment to this important issue. It provides a clear and comprehensive path to removing long overdue discrimination at the Commonwealth level and aims to combat harassment and incitement to violence on sexuality or gender identity.

This exposure draft bill has some similar provisions to the Democrats bill and some different approaches as well, but the general direction is the same. We have learned from the success in some state jurisdictions. Labor supports the intent and aim of the Democrats bill, though, as I said, in government we would probably not take the same path or take every definition or exemption and perhaps depart not only on form but sometimes on technicality as well. But, as I said, it is not the time to go to some of that detail.

It is worth noting that the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission is currently undertaking a national inquiry into discrimination against people in same-sex relationships regarding financial and work related benefits and entitlements. I would encourage people to have a look at that at the HREOC website at www.hreoc.gov.au. It is about providing a thorough list of Commonwealth legislation which discriminates against same-sex couples, so it gives you some measure of the work that this government has not addressed. Already over 80 pieces of legislation needing change have been identified, so there is a great need for government backbenchers to turn their minds to ensuring that the government might one day find its way clear to look at it, but I doubt that very much, quite frankly.

Labor plans to win the next election and will deliver on its promise to change the law in this area for good. Whilst there are some similarities between Labor and the Democrats on GLBTI issues, there are significant differences between Labor and the coalition—most importantly, by Labor refusing to stoop to the government level to use language and rhetoric to alienate and abuse people living in our community who are not heterosexual.

In voting a few months ago for the ACT’s right to make its own laws in this area, free from the intervention of the Commonwealth, we made this point clear. But our track record in this area is also strong. We commenced these changes under a Keating Labor government, particularly in Defence. Some might recall that the ALP lifted the ban on gay and lesbian people working in the military in 1992. Labor in government in the states has also delivered far-reaching reforms. New South Wales was one of the first to put gay and lesbian couples on an equal footing with heterosexual de factos. Since then, Western Australia, Tasmania, Queensland, Victoria and the ACT have moved forward with significant changes.

Labor has always been committed to removing discrimination against gay and lesbian people. From opposition we have continued to campaign for change. Mr Anthony Albanese and Ms Tanya Plibersek pursued superannuation changes for years before the government finally took some action. We will continue to do that, but the real measure will be when we are next in government, because we know that this government will not be moving on this. We can fix up the legislation that remains unaddressed—those 80 pieces and counting. Our community needs to be respectful, tolerant and engaged. Caring and loving adult relationships should be recognised and supported. Labor will do its bit to ensure that they are.

I understand that there was some arrangement with the times. I have been allowed 10 minutes. The clock has not been adjusted for that, but I will I adjust my speech accordingly to ensure that those who follow me can also have an opportunity to speak. But it is worth reiterating that the shadow Attorney-General, Nicola Roxon, has put out a draft, and for more information you can contact her website and, as well, you can comment on that. It is at www.nicolaroxonmp.com. We note that we are a consultative party, unlike the Howard government.