Senate debates
Monday, 27 November 2017
Bills
Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017; Second Reading
4:52 pm
Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source
I rise to make some brief remarks in relation to the Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017. It seems to me, after serving some two decades in this chamber, that for a considerable part of those two decades I've been waiting to speak on a bill like this—that is to say, a bill that by all estimations is likely to pass and that will enshrine in Australian law the ability to achieve marriage equality. The journey to today has been, from time to time, convoluted and fraught to say the least. However, as an Australian whose rights, privileges and freedoms, at least in contemporary society, are rarely brought into question, if I feel like it's taken a long time, then the Australian communities for whom this means so much must have felt it as an eternity.
I want to acknowledge the length of that battle or campaign. I want to acknowledge those who kept this outcome or this prospective outcome in sight through the occasionally contorted travails of governments of both colours, it's fair to say. Today, I particularly want to acknowledge and recognise my Senate colleague and friend Senator Dean Smith—whose timing is impeccable—who brings this bill to the chamber with its co-sponsors. Nobody should doubt the strength and resilience it takes to do what Senator Dean Smith has done. In a party by its nature a combination of conservatives and liberals, the tenacity required to see this process through to this point is considerable and, in my view, commendable. I want to acknowledge a number of other colleagues as well, notably Warren Entsch, the member for Leichhardt, who over some years now has played a leading role on my side of politics on this issue. I've lost count of the discussions, the debates and the drafts of bills toured through Entschy's office over many, many years. But we, Australia, are now on a path to legislate for same-sex marriage, as many other jurisdictions have done. In recent years, I've watched numerous friends and acquaintances travel overseas to be married in other jurisdictions in the absence of the opportunity to marry here and in the absence of the opportunity to affirm their love and commitment along with the rest of the Australian community. Similarly, I know many Australians who have been waiting for the opportunity to marry here. If this bill passes then that will change in Australia. That is a very important step in recognising rights and freedoms for our whole community.
This bill, which has been in the public domain for some time, builds in a number of protections and mechanisms to protect religious institutions in particular. I support the inclusion of those provisions. On the matter of further amendments, I would note that I, along with all of our colleagues in this chamber, I am sure, will consider those on their merits; however, I do not want to see the resolution of this bill delayed. I note that the Prime Minister has, in the last week, announced the establishment of a review, under the Hon. Philip Ruddock, to examine whether Australian law adequately protects the right to religious freedom. I welcome this process. I very much encourage engagement in that process. I note and respect the view that my New South Wales colleague Senator Concetta Fierravanti-Wells expressed in the speech immediately preceding this. I do think that the examination with which Mr Ruddock has been charged is an important one in terms of examining religious freedom protection in Australia. As I said, I strongly encourage participation in that process, particularly in relation to concerns that have arisen out of the discussions and the debates leading to the presentation of this piece of legislation. However, I also note that, in my own view, it is not tenable under the guise of this debate to wind back our existing, longstanding legislative provisions and protections against discrimination, discriminatory behaviour and actions.
I want to speak briefly about the national postal survey. Others have noted—and it is most certainly fair to say—that it was an action disagreed with by many. But, importantly, given the nature of our election commitment before 2016, the undertaking of the national postal survey kept faith with the coalition's publicly enunciated and advocated position of engaging with the fullest breadth of the Australian people on this very important matter of marriage equality. We took that policy to an election and we implemented it, and we implemented it through the national postal survey of the ABS.
I also acknowledge—and I heard Senator Carr making these points himself in the chamber in the previous sitting week—the proponents of a parliamentary process for this change. It's a fair argument that that is what we are paid to do but, in light of the outcome of the survey, the level of participation and the strength of the response, I do feel very sure that as the parliament goes down this path we do so with the people's voice of affirmation for marriage equality ringing loudly in our ears.
I've been part of a failed referendum bid as a republican in the previous republican referendum. I know the bitter disappointment of not being able to bring the Australian people with you. But in this case, with such high participation levels, a strong 'yes' vote of over 60 per cent, we can progress this bill confident in the support of the Australian community. Those that responded to the postal survey in the negative, their responses should be acknowledged, should be respected. Our hope is that, as the parliament works through this, concerns which may have led them to respond in the negative can be addressed. But for some, of course, that will never be the case. That is, in my experience, the nature of the democratic process: it is the opportunity to exercise one's view, to exercise the right to express one's view, as we have done and as almost 80 per cent of Australians have done, but it is not always the case that the outcome is the one for which we voted, or, in this case, were surveyed.
So today, for some of my very dear friends—those friends whose commitment ceremony I went to so many years ago, decades ago, in Glebe, Bruce and Greg; for my friends who went to Denmark to marry, Shane and Yasper; for the thousands and thousands of Australians who, with the passage of this legislation, can now take that very special step—is very important. It is very special. It is momentous even. I am very proud to be in this parliament, albeit somewhat later than so many of us would have wished, as this bill is debated, and I look forward, at the appropriate opportunity, to have my chance to vote in this chamber and to vote 'yes'.
No comments