Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Many of my constituents were overjoyed at the overwhelming vote in support of marriage equality in Ireland at the weekend. This means that at least 20 nations support marriage equality, including the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand. It is now time for Australia to join the nations which have recognised that people should be allowed to marry the person that they love.

Institutions, just like society's values, evolve over time. Only 22 years ago homosexuality was illegal in Ireland; now, marriage equality is a reality. When I introduced a private member's bill in my first term in parliament, to give same-sex couples equal rights on superannuation, it was seen as a radical proposition. The Howard government even prevented it going to a vote but, by the time the Rudd government removed discrimination on the basis of sexual preference in more than 80 pieces of legislation, it carried the parliament with broad support and without controversy. Giving one group of people the rights that they have been denied does not in any way diminish the rights that currently exist for the rest of us. I fail to see how the institution of marriage is weakened if more people have the right to participate. I strongly believe that there should be a vote in the parliament this year and that it should be a conscience vote. That would enable parliamentarians to have a mature debate in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Whilst I have strong views in support of marriage equality, I respect those who hold a different view. You cannot promote diversity and tolerance whilst not showing tolerance for those who disagree with you. I have argued consistently that the coalition needs to allow a conscience vote on this issue and it is inconsistent to argue something different within the Labor Party. In 2002, as a member of the ALP national executive, I dealt with a unanimous report that resolved the issue surrounding the use of conscience votes in a process that included Labor's pre-eminent authority on our internal history and precedent, John Faulkner. There have been conscience votes on a range of issues over the years, including the family law bill, euthanasia, and the marriage bill. The ALP national executive decided unanimously:

The most appropriate model is the case-by-case, political model, but with consideration and tolerance of other factors relating to religion, the party platform and precedent.

As the document says, 'These types of questions are not easily resolved in the party room, so conscience votes provide a way in which divisions over contentious social or moral issues can carry over into the parliament without adverse repercussions for those who differ from the majority view.' There is also a pragmatic reason to argue for a conscience vote across the parliament and it is this: it is my judgement that there are now majorities in favour of marriage equality in both the House of Representatives and in the Senate. There is therefore no argument to delay this reform. Let's get this done. (Time expired)