Sharon Grierson (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the private member’s motion put forward by the member for Melbourne and to support the amendment by the member for Throsby that ‘this House calls on all parliamentarians, consistent with their duties as representatives, to gauge their constituents’ views on ways to achieve equal treatment for same-sex couples including marriage’. I personally welcome the specific inclusion of marriage in the amendment. That is where the debate is in our communities.

I want to speak on this motion for several reasons: first, to demonstrate that this is a mainstream issue which affects many people who live in my electorate and in every electorate across Australia. This is not an issue confined to same-sex couples or to any particular lifestyle or to any particular place of residence. This is an issue that goes to the core of the human experience: the need to be loved and to love and the need some people feel to have that bond formally recognised in a union called marriage. Although it is my personal view that marriage as a legal construct has some serious limitations, I understand that to many people it is an important milestone in their quest to form a partnership in life based on lasting love and commitment.

Second, it requires no elaboration other than to say that, amongst my wider family, friends, colleagues and community and within organisations that I deal with every day as an MP, there are many people in same-sex relationships who would like the right to marry. They would want me to put forward their view and oppose discrimination against them on the basis of their sexual preference and the nature of their relationships. I am pleased to do that tonight.

Third, as a heterosexual mother of two heterosexual daughters, I do not come to this debate because of any intimate experience. But I am a mother and I empathise with the mother who emailed me to say that she has two young adult children, one who is married to the person they love and the other who cannot marry the person they love because they are of the same sex. There was a certain poignancy and regret expressed that I would think all mothers and fathers can understand. We hope our children find a special partner in their lives to love and support them as we as parents loved and supported them before they gained their independence. To loving parents, the gender nature of that relationship is secondary, as it should be. And as parents we hope that our children will be able to celebrate that special relationship with their family and friends. For many, the most important part of that celebration is marriage.

Although the Constitution extends to us here the power to legislate on marriage and divorce, the first Marriage Bill introduced into the Commonwealth parliament in 1960 and reintroduced in 1961 did not define who could marry but made bigamy an offence. An attempt at the time to amend the legislation to define marriage as ‘a voluntary union of one man and one woman for life to the exclusion of all others’ was defeated 40 votes to eight—a more enlightened time, perhaps.

But in 2004 the Howard government introduced two bills which defined marriage as between a man and a woman and clarified that same-sex marriages entered into under the law of another country would not be recognised under Australian law. The then opposition, of which I was a member, supported those changes without division. As is the procedure within the Australian Labor Party, I spoke against that position in caucus but was bound by the caucus decision, based on ALP policy. Within the ALP we continue to apply that collective approach, but similarly I will continue to speak out to eliminate discrimination in all its forms.

Tonight’s motion is not to change the Marriage Act and it is not a debate to support or oppose same-sex marriage, but it supports honest dialogue in our communities and in our electorates about same-sex marriage, just like the debate that already is occurring. The recent Australian Story program Mum’s the Word provoked much debate; the churches are having this same debate; and our community are considering this issue as they confront the reality for their family members, friends and work mates. That is a good thing. To the many, many people—hundreds—from my electorate who have emailed me on this issue: thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. That is a good thing too.

I also speak tonight as a member of the Australian Labor Party, a party that historically has brought about equality of opportunity in this country. Labor governments championed opportunity for all and led the way in bringing about fairness and dignity in the workplace. Labor governments delivered strong economic and social reforms to deliver better standards of living in this nation. And it was a Labor government in 2008 that removed discrimination against same-sex couples in 100 Commonwealth laws. That was a phenomenal achievement, one which was overdue and had wide community support. But for same-sex couples the Marriage Act remains the last hurdle in granting them equal rights. So I encourage continued debate within the ALP and within our communities and I personally hope that honest dialogue free from prejudice and intolerance will lead to same-sex marriage being recognised in this country and legislated in this parliament. (Time expired)

See this speech in context