Derryn Hinch (Victoria, Derryn Hinch's Justice Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Attorney-General, Senator Brandis, representing the Prime Minister. Former Liberal Prime Ministers John Howard and even Tony Abbott have said in the past that change to the Marriage Act should be made by the elected representatives of the country. Even Prime Minister Menzies once promised that discrimination would not be written into Australian marriage law. Senator Brandis, why won't your government let us do our job?

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

Thank you, Senator Hinch. Obviously what you are referring to is the government's intention to give all Australians a say on the question of the definition of marriage. Now, Senator Hinch, might I remind you that late last year the Australian Labor Party and the Greens and some of the crossbench, including, I'm sorry to say, you, voted to stop the Australian people having their say on this issue. Had you not done that, Senator Hinch, on 11 February, six months ago this Friday, there would have been a plebiscite. From all of the opinion polls and empirical evidence, we have every reason to believe that that plebiscite would have returned a resounding yes vote.

I believe in marriage equality and I know you do too. I regret and I lament the fact that the Senate rejected the government's legislation late last year, which would resulted, six months ago, in this issue being resolved. Six months ago, this would have been behind us. Now, Senator Hinch, what the government is going to do is present the plebiscite bill to the Senate again. We hope that you, Senator Hinch, and others on the crossbench will reconsider their positions, because I do not believe that on all social questions, particularly vexed social questions like the meaning of marriage, politicians know best; I don't. I believe that marriage is something about which we who have the privilege to sit in this chamber have no greater wisdom and no greater insight than every man and woman in Australia, which is why we want to give them a say.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hinch, a supplementary question?

Derryn Hinch (Victoria, Derryn Hinch's Justice Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Speaking of wisdom, how can you justify spending $122 million on another opinion poll when you have heaps of national opinion polls showing overwhelming support, as you say, for same-sex marriage?

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

Senator Hinch, you and I have discussed this matter. You're a reasonable person, and I believe you approach this issue in good faith and with goodwill. Please appreciate that the government considers this to be a unique issue. A marriage is the most intimate relationship into which any two adults will enter, and no politician can claim to know the secrets of the human heart. No politician can claim to know the nature, the features and the meaning of the most intimate relationship any of us will enter into, which is why, recognising the uniqueness of this issue, we think that it is one of those very rare kinds of issues about which the parliament has no greater wisdom, insight or right, frankly, to decide than the people voting as one.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hinch, a final supplementary question?

Derryn Hinch (Victoria, Derryn Hinch's Justice Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, unlike in the other place, we get these time-wasting supplementary questions, especially the dorothy dixers, so, on principle, I'll forfeit that time.