Mark Coulton (Parkes, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I have been watching this debate throughout the day. It has been quite instructive and I am somewhat relieved as to the way it has gone. I, too, have issue with the sanctimonious nature of this motion moved by the member for Melbourne which conveys the idea that democracy is as simple as clicking a mouse rather than engagement. I have met with many people in my electorate on this issue and I have not refused anyone access to me.

I say at the outset that I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. At this point in time that is clearly the majority view of Australian society. As time travels on that may change, but at this particular time that is the position. What I have been concerned about during this debate are some of the more right-wing aspects of society and some of the comments that are being made about gay people, which I find regrettable. I have met with quite a few gay couples in my electorate and, while I appreciate their circumstances and fully support civil equality in matters of law, I cannot support their position for same-sex marriages at this time. I am regretful that I cannot help all my people or agree with all of my people all the time, but at this stage I am not in support of same-sex marriage.

Before this motion was moved by the member for Melbourne I was getting no correspondence or email traffic on this matter. Clearly, the overwhelming vibe coming out of my electorate is that the Australian parliament should be concentrating on matters that are far more relevant to the people of my electorate. They are concerned about issues regarding the cost of living, obviously the upcoming carbon tax, education, roads, health and all those other things. They believe that the reason they sent me to Canberra was to represent them on things that are of the utmost importance to them. They resent having the Australian parliament hijacked by one member. We must not forget that there are 150 members sitting in the House of Representatives. I find it deeply confronting that one member, one 150th of the representation of this place, seems to generate the publicity and promote the agenda. I have spoken about this before. I have spoken about the fact that the member for Melbourne and the Greens urban elite are quite happy for people to go snow-skiing and build chalets in the mountains but are opposed to cattle grazing. While they are happy to have exclusive restaurants, they are opposed to people who raise cattle.

In conclusion, I will restate that I do believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. I do respect the gay couples and the gay people in my electorate and acknowledge that they have a different view. But at this stage I stand by what I have said.

See this speech in context