Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Regarding an interjection which suggests I should not make this a partisan issue, the decision by backbenchers in the Labor Party to work with the government to bring their own bills to a vote in both houses is as cynical and party-political as it can possibly get. There was an opportunity here to work with the bills that were in both houses of parliament already—to continue to support the campaign for marriage equality and not work to undermine it. The decision by those backbenchers of both houses of this parliament was a decision to facilitate the stalling of the debate nationally, because what it meant was bringing it to a vote to stall the momentum of the campaign. People might not like to have that pointed out to them but that is the reality of what has gone on in this particular debate. That is what is so appalling about it. As many members of the Senate understand, there are families, and young gay and lesbian people, around Australia today who had hoped this parliament's members would speak with the courage of their convictions. In relation to this issue, one half of the parliament is not allowed to speak with the courage of their convictions for a political outcome to satisfy the Leader of the Opposition. The other half is not speaking on their convictions, even with a conscience vote, because they do not want to embarrass the Prime Minister, in a strategy that was worked out by one member of the executive of the federal ALP with the Australian Christian Lobby to use the Prime Minister's view to forestall people actually voting as their conscience would have dictated in other circumstances. What an appalling outcome.

But as my colleagues have indicated, we in the Greens will not allow this to be anything other than a hiccup in the debate for marriage equality in Australia. We will continue to work with the campaigners around the country on this because the majority of the Australian people are with us. The majority of the Australian people would be absolutely disgusted by remarks being made not only by Senator Bernardi but also by Senator Boswell. I found it particularly offensive that he should stand up and say that it is bad enough that we have normalised being gay over the last couple of decades, let alone suggest that we might go to marriage equality. Well, I have got news for Senator Boswell, and that is that gay and lesbian people are perfectly normal thank you, Senator Boswell. Your offensive remarks are in the same category as those of some of the rest of your colleagues in relation to this.

For families, for people in Australia who want to end discrimination of all kinds, who have managed to get this parliament to recognise an end to discrimination on the basis of race, we are doing everything we can to end discrimination on the basis of gender, and now we are trying to end discrimination on the basis of sexuality.

We are seeing a whole lot of political games being played here in order to change the normal sitting practices in both houses of parliament. There can be no explanation for that change other than to try to secure an outcome in a vote in both houses in the same week for a political purpose. There is no other explanation. If Senator Pratt has another explanation as to why Mr Albanese stood up and said that the reason that all the procedures in the House of Representatives had to be changed was to facilitate the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition making statements, which they failed to do, then perhaps she could explain to the Senate why all those changes in the House of Representatives took place. Further, she might explain why it is necessary to change the hours of meeting and routine of business in the Senate to bring this matter to a vote when there is no urgency for it to be brought for a vote. There is none. We know full well what the outcome is going to be. What is happening here is the backbench of the Labor Party are facilitating the Labor Party bringing it to a vote when there is no urgency for it to do so and when we all know it is going to be defeated. If that is not an attempt to burst the bubble of the momentum that has been building around this issue then I do not know what is. It might feel bad to actually recognise that that is the way the pawns in this game are being played, but that is precisely what has gone on and that is why the Greens are not going to facilitate that occurring.

We understand that the coalition has agreed with the government to change the hours of meeting and the routine of business to facilitate this because it suits Mr Abbott that it be so. It suits the coalition that they do not have a conscience vote. As my colleague Senator di Natale said, the party of the individual is very happy not to have a conscience vote on this issue so they can hide behind Tony Abbott, the Leader of the Opposition, on this matter. But, of course, the campaign will go on, and in their electorates they will be asked very much so for their views on this matter. Then, when it does come back into the Senate again—as it will continue to come back, right through to the next election—they too will be put in exactly the same position that Mr Rudd has been put into today, and Mr Turnbull as well: standing up and voting against what they truly believe in in order to facilitate political outcomes. That is why the Australian people get so cynical about the political process.

For the member for Wentworth, it is particularly cynical when he makes a speech on honesty in politics, saying we need a much more honest process whereby people can say what they really think. Well, he can say what he really thinks, but he is not voting according to what he really thinks because, as he says, the leadership team in the coalition requires him to toe the party line. If he did not, he would be required to leave the leadership team in the coalition and he clearly puts being in that leadership team ahead of actually voting according to his conscience on this particular issue. So be it. That is exactly where the situation has ended up.

I think it is a shocking thing for Australians to not actually know why the Prime Minister in particular opposes marriage equality. We know from Mr Abbott where he is getting his advice on this and where he has always got his advice on this. He has a particular point of view that he has always maintained. However, it interests me that the Prime Minister has never really articulated to the Australian people what is the basis for her opposition to marriage equality, when she has always said that we should end discrimination. Yet she is moving here to facilitate ongoing discrimination against gay and lesbian people in Australia. It is a fact that that is the case and that she has not stood up to say so. That is why I make it very clear that I believe it has got a lot more to do with the backroom numbers in the Labor Party, with the Labor Party executive and with the role of Joe de Bruyn, the union he represents and the numbers that they can deliver in the leadership of the Labor Party, that the position is being taken to oppose marriage equality, not only from the Prime Minister but from Mr Rudd as well. For all the talk about getting beyond the back rooms, getting beyond the factions and getting beyond the backroom deals, what we have seen here is a backroom deal which is actually going against the future of the nation, going against what we all know is right—an end to discrimination in Australia. I cannot for the life of me understand, as Prime Minister of this country, why you would not want to lead the nation into an era that ends discrimination rather than do the numbers and work out that in fact you will abandon a leadership position on an issue of discrimination, about the sort of country we want to live in, in favour of maintaining the power bases across the various factions in the Labor Party and what they can deliver. However, having said that, so be it. That is exactly what we are dealing with and that is why we are not going to facilitate a change in the hours of meeting and routine of business.

There is no urgency to bring this to a vote. Not only is there no urgency; it is incredibly offensive and generating a good deal of hurt across the gay and lesbian community in Australia that this is being forced to a vote in this way. I have spoken to parents of gay and lesbian people and of course with young gay and lesbian people and this is just another affront to them. This is another assault to their wellbeing, to their dignity and to their self-esteem. Once again, the Australian parliament has failed them. The Australian parliament has been able to work up the courage to get over and get beyond discrimination on the basis of race and get beyond discrimination on the basis of gender but the Australian parliament cannot get beyond discrimination on the basis of sexuality.

It seems that even conservative parliaments like that led by Mr Key in New Zealand can do it. Conservative parliaments led by Mr Cameron in the United Kingdom can do it. Even President Obama, in the face of the religious Right campaign in the US, has been prepared to come out and say his position has evolved. Even the Attorney-General, Nicola Roxon, who stood up before the 2004 election and got a standing ovation for opposing marriage equality and became the pin-up at that time of those opposing marriage equality has now changed her view, and is prepared to say, 'This discrimination in Australia must end.'

We had hoped we would see the same from the Prime Minister and we have not. I think we had an expectation, I think the Australian community had an expectation, Mr Albanese had an expectation and everyone who agreed to the changed procedures in the House of Representatives had an expectation that we would have had on the record in parliament from the Prime Minister the statement that the changed hours of business and procedures was meant to facilitate, and it did not happen.

Exactly the same can be said of the Leader of the Opposition. I do not think there is another issue, a matter of conscience, that has ever come before this parliament where you have had neither the Prime Minister nor the Leader of the Opposition having the courage to put on the record in the parliament their view. I think that is an appalling state of affairs that shows that there has been a lack of leadership on both sides when it comes to standing and fronting the parliament and the Australian people on the positions that are held.

I think the Leader of the Opposition needed to tell the parliament why he refused his members a conscience vote on the matter. The Prime Minister owes the Australian people and the parliament an explanation as to why she wants to maintain discrimination in Australia and why she wants to put gay and lesbian people through more years of agony and discrimination, and fails to explain where the justification for that comes from. The Greens are not going to facilitate it.

We will continue to campaign to end discrimination in Australia on the basis of sexuality. We will campaign to say that people who love each other should be able to marry in this country and that we celebrate the love that they share and want to see the community recognition of that love that marriage equality would bring about. We will continue to argue that. This will not be put off the parliamentary agenda as far as the Greens are concerned. We will work with the community groups and the majority of the Australian people and we will encourage the Australian people to continue to invite the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition to have the courage to stand up in the parliament and put on the record in detail the views that they hold.