House debates

Thursday, 30 March 2006

Adjournment

Civil Unions

11:26 am

Photo of Annette EllisAnnette Ellis (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I also want to speak on the issue of the ACT civil union legislation. It is my pleasure to completely endorse the words of the member for Fraser, who just spoke on this matter. The ACT government is a democratically elected government. In its work, it has made a decision—a decision I happen to agree with wholeheartedly—to introduce the ACT civil union bill allowing civil unions to occur between people of the same sex within the ACT. We now know that Mr Ruddock has made a public declaration that he is completely against this and will use his powers to override the ACT government’s decision and if necessary legislate to change it so that any law passed by the ACT will be overridden by Mr Ruddock’s proposed legislation in this place.

I am outraged for two reasons. First, I am outraged because it is a democratically elected government in this Territory and should be allowed to govern in its own right for the people. The people in the ACT make the decision as to whether governments stand or fall within their own territory. Secondly, on the issue itself—the issue of the ACT civil union bill—I happen to also support that, and I endorse entirely the remarks made just a moment ago by the member for Fraser.

The member for Fraser has brought up a very interesting question, and I think it is the most vital question in this debate: what role will Senator Humphries play in this debate within the parliament? Senator Humphries is the government senator in the ACT. We all understand very clearly the balance of power in the Senate. It is incumbent upon Senator Humphries to make his decision known now. We in Canberra need to know right now what his view is in relation to this issue and what his decision will be—how he will vote in the Senate—should Mr Ruddock go ahead with this mad idea of bringing in legislation to override a law-making process within the ACT.

This is not the first time that I have had to stand up in this parliament and comment on the fact that the ACT government is sometimes affected by rules and laws made by this place. The government cannot do it here if it is a state, but it can if it is a territory. I repeat my remarks. The ACT people have had self-government since 1989. There is a current government in place—a majority government, for the first time in the ACT—duly elected by the people of this territory. The ACT government acts accordingly. It has made a decision to bring in this legislation—the civil union bill. It is something that I believe will be very popular within this community but something that the ACT government itself should stand or fall on. I happen to agree with it, and I am very pleased to think that the Chief Minister has had the foresight to bring this piece of legislation before the ACT Assembly.

As I said, Senator Humphries is the man who really should be coming out today and stating very clearly what his position is in relation to this particular debate. I vehemently disagree with Mr Ruddock’s action. I do not understand the logic of it other than that he does not like what they are doing so he is going to stamp on it. But that is not a very good reason for doing something. At the end of the day the ACT people should have their views known and have the ability to carry out their decision-making process unfettered. I disagree very strongly. I find it arrogant beyond belief that Mr Ruddock is going to choose to go down this path. He stands absolutely condemned for that, in my view. Senator Humphries, come out and tell us what you are planning to do. Do not dilly-dally around for the next few weeks. I think the community needs to know right now what your intention is. As far as I am concerned, I will be doing all I can to support democracy within the ACT and to ensure that they are allowed to govern in their own right and represent their own community into the future.

Comments

No comments