Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

No. I reserve that for a few others. I say to the members of the government in the Senate who support these types of amendments: do not worry; Labor will be giving you the opportunity to vote and to allow your practical record on the matter of the removal of discrimination against same-sex couples to be put on the public record through this simple example.

Finally, I would like to deal with government criticism that was raised in the Main Committee on another bill, the Federal Magistrates Amendment (Disability and Death Benefits) Bill 2007. As I understand the comments made by the Attorney-General at that time, the government wants to address all of this discrimination at once, in one package, and it was not appropriate to tackle these issues of discrimination in the manner we are doing it today. In response to this criticism, I point out that the government has had 11 years to remove discriminatory provisions in federal legislation. During that time, state Labor governments have moved forward on the issue—abolishing discriminatory provisions in areas such as superannuation and recognising same-sex de facto relationships, to give two examples.

And let us not forget the case-by-case pledge. Where did that get to? The Attorney-General and the Prime Minister could be described as flip-flopping around on their previous long and deeply held commitment to reform on a case-by-case basis. One minute, when it is convenient, it is case by case; the next it is ‘wait for the package’. It is really concerning that the Liberals cannot be trusted on this issue. Even if you thought you could rely on a Liberal promise in this area, do not forget that there is always the National Party.

Federally, Labor have pledged that, if elected, we will remove discrimination against same-sex couples across all federal legislation, with the exception of the Marriage Act. By way of contrast, this government have been in power for 11 years, the HREOC inquiry has been going on for the last 18 months and the report has been publicly available since June. There surely cannot be too many sitting weeks left—if you believe the Treasurer, at least his first iteration, this is probably the last—before parliament is dissolved and the general election is called. So far, all we have heard from the government is that they will look at legislation ‘on a case-by-case basis’. We have not seen a formal response to the HREOC report. We have no indication of whether the government is planning to act on it and, on the off-chance that they will, when they are going to do so.

The case that Labor are making here is quite simple. We are in favour of these bills. They have our support. It is a minor technical amendment that fixes some inconsistencies in the scheme and brings it into line with the maximum surcharge. Labor are not objecting to the bills per se in the amendments that have been put forward. There is an issue here that does give an opportunity to this government to make some practical changes to benefit an individual’s life. I commend these bills to the Senate.