Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you. It's very kind of you, Madam Acting Deputy President! I would not normally speak in this state of undress, but I do today. My position on this whole issue has been pretty clear from day one. I don't think this is a high-order issue. I know some of my gay friends would argue with me on this, and some have indeed done so. But I don't think this is the sort of issue that deserves the wall-to-wall treatment it's had in the media in recent times. I've always worked on the basis that there is no discrimination in Australia on anything—on race, religion, colour, creed, sex or gender. Over the years, some of which I've been in this parliament, laws have been passed to make it illegal to discriminate on any basis. Certainly for same-sex people, those laws, as I understand it, were passed some years ago. There is no discrimination in Australia, in my view, of any sort. I think we are a wonderful country that respects everyone's views.

I have recently been to a meeting of the Inter-Parliamentary Union in St Petersburg, where, during the course of debate, a delegate—a female parliamentarian from, I think, Italy—accused the Russians of having detention camps for gay people. I certainly don't say whether that is true or not true, but it was interesting to see in this forum of parliamentarians from right around the world the debate and the emotions that were raised on this particular issue. The Russians were accused of this and, as is the way in these multinational forums, they sought a right of reply, which they eventually got. Their response was not to comment on that subject, but to ask the Italian lady who had accused them why she was picking on Russia when, as the Russians said, 'There are many parliamentarians in this chamber from countries whose parliaments have the death penalty for those who are gay.' So, when people say there is discrimination in Australia, I just ask them to look around and see what happens in other countries in a so-called civilised world.

But I've always worked on the basis that there is no discrimination. As a previous speaker said today, I've said to some of my gay friends: 'If you want to get married—if you want to say you're getting married—send me an invite. I'll come along, I'll bring a present, I'll drink your grog and we'll have a great party. We'll all celebrate and you can sign whatever you like, and away we'll go.' I just understand that there are many people in Australia who have a deep religious conviction on what marriage is. I class myself as a Christian. Regrettably, I'm not as regular an attender as perhaps I should be, but I do know many Christian people who are deeply offended by what they see as an abuse of the Christian rite of marriage. Recently, I've been to a couple of weddings in churches and, when you hear the ceremony, when you hear the words, when you hear the traditions and when you hear the passages that are read from the Bible and elsewhere—which were the same when my wife and I were married, I have to say—you start to think that this does seem to be a very Christian tradition, a Christian part of the Bible and what Christianity says. I'm one of those who can take everyone's view, one way or the other, but I do know that there are very many deeply religious people who are offended by this proposal, and, of course, their vote in the recent plebiscite was fairly significant.

But my position hasn't changed. I've always made it clear that I, through my upbringing, my understanding and my association with people who are deeply religious, would be voting no in the plebiscite, and I did. But I also made it clear that, in the end result, I would follow whatever my fellow Australians decided to do on this particular subject. My main concern was that we as a political party, the Liberal and National parties, had in two elections, following each other, promised to the people of Australia that we would give them a say on whether same-sex marriage should be allowed. I'm proud to say that I belong to a political party that does actually honour the commitments that it makes at election time. I know there are other political parties in this room that made the same sorts of commitments in the past, but, like other promises they've made, they choose, once they're in power, just to ignore those promises. Of course, that's one of the reasons why politicians and politics are held in such low regard around Australia at the present time. But I was proud that my party stuck by its guns and honoured the commitment it had made in the last two elections that, if there were to be any change to the Marriage Act and to the issue of same-sex marriage, then the people of Australia would be consulted by way of plebiscite. Unfortunately, others in this chamber didn't agree with us. We had to end up with a Bureau of Statistics survey, which, although it wasn't ideal, did, I think, get the same result, and that showed that the majority of Australians in all states actually support the concept of same-sex marriage. So I, as I committed before, will be voting to support a change to allow for that.

I confess that I have not gone into the proposed amendments in any great depth. My general feel is that the protections should be greater rather than lesser, but I say that without having directed my mind to any possible amendments to the bill that we're debating. If there are amendments brought forward I will assess them as we go along. I do think that in a society such as Australia people should have the right to act in accordance with their own beliefs, providing they're not hurting others. There have been in the bit of this debate that I have heard a lot of very fine arguments and very fine propositions put forward which I think require and warrant very serious consideration, consideration I intend to give to the wording of the bill as we come to vote on it.

For the moment, I indicate that I will be voting in accordance with what the Australian people asked us to do, as I have for many years past. We were very keen to honour our promises to have a plebiscite of all Australians. Having done that, we are of course duty-bound to follow the dictate of the majority of Australians and support a change to allow for same-sex marriage. I will be looking carefully to make sure that there are adequate protections for those who, perhaps inadvertently, might otherwise be discriminated against when certain bills become law through this parliament. But I indicate that for the time being I will be supporting the change, as I indicated before that I would, in accordance with the wishes of the majority of the Australian public.