Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Bob Brown has just exposed, for all of us to see, what this is all about. The Labor Party caucus has been deceived. The Labor Party caucus agreed to support this legislation on the basis that it would not lead to legalisation of same-sex marriage in the nation's capital. The Labor Party caucus adopted support for this bill—and without controversy, it was reported—because members were assured it was not about same-sex marriage.

In his contribution just now Senator Brown indicated that the Greens would not support the very sensible amendments that are being put forward by Senator Brandis, amendments which would ensure that the assurances given to Labor Party members and senators would be enshrined in this legislation. Here it is; we can see very well what this is about. The Labor Party has been deceived. Of course we are not surprised that the Greens will not support these amend­ments. But if the Labor Party is true to the assurances that were given to members and senators in the ALP caucus then the Labor Party should support the amendments that will be moved by Senator Brandis on behalf of the coalition.

At the end of the day, we always knew that this bill was not about improving self-governance arrangements for the ACT or the Northern Territory. This bill is about promoting the cause of same-sex marriage, because Senator Brown knows that the best chance of getting this passed in any jurisdiction is by facilitating it, enabling it to happen, in a territory parliament. We heard: 'No, no, no—this is about improving the democratic rights of territorians. It has nothing to do with same-sex marriage. You want a guarantee that this is not about same-sex marriage? We are going to give it to you.' Katy Gallagher, the ACT Chief Minister, was not prepared to give that guarantee. She declined to comment when she was asked whether the territory would use this bill to pursue same-sex marriage. But Senator Brown has let the cat out of the bag. Senator Brown, in his contribution to the motion foreshadowed by Senator Brandis, has made it very clear what this bill is all about. All this amendment does is enshrine in legislation the guarantees that were given to the Labor Party caucus so that the Labor Party caucus became comfortable to support a Greens initiated bill.

I say again: this is all about the Green tail wagging the Labor Party dog. This all about a Prime Minister who is too weak to stand up to Senator Brown. This is about a Labor Party caucus that is too weak to stand up to the Greens agenda, which many of them do not support. This is all about hanging on to government by the fingernails at any cost. This is a government that is prepared to compromise anything they stand for if it helps them to stay in government.

If the Labor Party wants to keep any semblance of political integrity in this debate, it will support this amendment because all this amendment does is enshrine in this bill the promise that was made to the Labor Party caucus about what this legislation would do and what it would not do. Labor Party members and senators were told that what it would not do is lead to same-sex marriage in the nation's capital. Senator Brown has just said that he does not want this bill to be amended such that same-sex marriage in the nation's capital would be prevented from going ahead.

It was the coalition that included the definition of marriage in the Marriage Act 1961 in 2004, the definition being that marriage is the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others voluntarily entered into for life. That is the definition which the Prime Minister tells us publicly she supports, but then she is too weak in the context of this legislation to stand up for the principle she supposedly supports. If the Labor Party is serious about complying with the promise that was made to its members and senators in order to get this bill through its caucus, then the Labor Party will support this very sensible and very important amendment.