Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The moment cannot be allowed to pass without making the point that when Senator Brown spoke on my amendments he revealed his agenda—the agenda which the government has been warned all along lay behind this bill and which the Labor Party decided to go along with. My amendments gave the Labor Party the opportunity at the last minute to back off and to protect the definition of marriage in the 1961 Marriage Act. By the Labor Party voting with Senator Brown and the Greens to oppose the coalition's amendments, they removed the capacity to protect the definition of marriage in the 1961 Marriage Act applying to the ACT. They have in effect, whether they realise it or not, given their sanction to gay marriage in the ACT.

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The critique from Senator Brandis is wrong. What we have seen this morning is a stunt from Senator Mathias Cormann and Senator Brandis. If the situation was so serious and of such concern, why did they come into the chamber at the 12th hour, almost literally the 12th hour, and circulate an amendment that no-one had seen? I did not even have a chance to have a copy of it in front of me. I did not even have the amendment in front of me in order to examine what its intent was. We had to rely on Senator Brandis's explanation, such as it was. It was nothing more than a stunt. This legislation is about removing executive power. It is not about gay marriage. It is not about euthanasia.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is not what Senator Brown thinks. That is not what Senator Brown thinks, and it is his bill.

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is not about those issues and you well know it. To conclude, having seen the amendment I can say to the chamber we have been advised by the Attorney-General—so we have received advice—that the opposition amendment is unnecessary. It is not necessary. The amendment is unnecessary to maintain the status quo in section 122 of the Constitution.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not according to Professor George Williams, a member of the Labor Party.

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You can quote some professor. I am quoting the Attorney-General. That is his advice. Your amendment was unnecessary.

Senator Brandis interjecting—

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Brandis, if you are not taking a point of order, Senator Sherry has the call.

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again we have an illustration of what is just a hysterical stunt. The government stands by the advice we have received from the Attorney-General. The amendment was unnecessary.

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

The Labor Party members of this chamber voted against an amendment which would have protected the definition of marriage in the context of this bill, the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Amendment (Disallowance and Amendment Power of the Commonwealth) Bill 2010. The Labor Party voted against it. We are led to believe the only reason that the Labor Party ended up deciding to support this bill is assurances they were given that this would not lead to the legalisation of same-sex marriage in the nation's capital. So here we have it. Senator Bob Brown was so keen to shut up the Labor Party on this that he moved that the motion be put before the minister at the table was able to say anything about it. Not only is this the Green tail wagging the Labor dog; they do not even want this dog to bark. When there was a chance that Minister Sherry was about to jump up to express a view on behalf of the Labor Party on this bill, Senator Brown jumped to his feet and said, 'I move the motion be put.' He did not want Minister Sherry to be in a position where he had to formally say on the record, 'What we said to our Labor members and senators in caucus this week was a lie'. This is very simple. I saw our President, Senator Hogg, walk in, being very, very uncomfortable about what he has been forced to do in this chamber. Our President is a very honourable man, and I can tell you now that President Hogg was very, very uncomfortable about being forced by this Green alliance with Labor members and senators to vote against the definition of marriage through this legislation—as was Senator Furner and as was Senator Stephens. Incidentally, Senator Farrell sat here with a big smile. He does not seem to mind that this could well lead to the legalisation of same-sex marriage in the ACT.

I am mindful of the time, so I will not keep going on this except to say that this is a hypocritical Labor Party. They deceived their caucus. If they were truly committed that this legislation should not lead to the legalisation of same-sex marriage in the territory, they would have supported the very sensible amendment that was moved by Senator Brandis on behalf of the coalition. Question put:

That this bill be now read a third time.

The Senate divided. [11:53]

(The PRESIDENT: Senator the Hon. JJ Hogg)

Question agreed to.

Bill read a third time.

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I table the supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendments to be moved to the bill. The memorandum was circulated in the chamber on 17 August 2011.