David Leyonhjelm (NSW, Liberal Democratic Party) Share this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion to vary the resolution of 15 March 2016 relating to the hours of meeting and routine of business.

Leave not granted.

Pursuant to contingent notice, I move:

That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent me moving a motion relating to the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to vary the resolution of 15 March 2016 relating to hours of meeting and routine of business.

The motion for variation that I seek to move will ensure a vote in the Senate on same-sex marriage this week. The Greens may seek to put their Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2013 to a vote in private senators' time, but, if they do not, or cannot, then my motion comes into play. My motion will require that the bill be finally considered before we adjourn this sitting. My amendment does not limit the government's ability to require the final consideration of the bills on its list; it just requires that the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill be finally considered before we adjourn. The Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2013 is a Greens bill. I support this bill, even though it differs from the Liberal Democrats bill on this issue—the Freedom to Marry Bill 2014—because I support allowing same-sex marriage regardless of which party's bill finally comes into play and finally becomes reality.

The Greens are a swing vote on this issue. The Greens have said that parliament should deal with same-sex marriage and that there is no case for delay. They have repeated this position recently at Mardi Gras and in the wake of the Safe Schools debate, which has foreshadowed the kind of debate that we would see in the lead-up to a plebiscite. I do not look forward to an expensive and divisive plebiscite where people would be asked to vote on other people's rights. The potential for coalition parliamentarians to vote as a block against allowing same-sex marriage is not a reason to put off a parliamentary vote; it is a reason to proceed. Each voter should know before an election whether their coalition parliamentarian is committed to allowing same-sex marriage. It would be perverse and undemocratic for the Greens to avoid parliamentary consideration of their own bill just to provide coalition parliamentarians with cover on this issue.

I call on all senators to support this amendment, including senators who do not support change to the Marriage Act. Supporting this amendment simply means that you do not fear voting on the issue of same-sex marriage and you accept it as part of your job.