Senate debates

Thursday, 4 February 2016

Bills

Recognition of Foreign Marriages Bill 2014; Second Reading

9:35 am

Photo of Robert SimmsRobert Simms (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

The bill I rise to speak on today, the Recognition of Foreign Marriages Bill, will end a cruel and draconian feature of Australian law by providing recognition across Australia for same-sex marriages performed overseas. We currently have a situation where overseas same-sex marriages are recognised in New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and Tasmania, but not in other states. They are not recognised in my home state of South Australia. It lags well behind, as does the state of Western Australia and the territories. We have to remedy this complex web of relationship laws so that married couples receive the acknowledgement that they deserve. Recognition should not stop at state borders. We need to have a uniform approach to these issues and these questions of human rights.

The consequences of this parliament failing to show leadership on this issue are heartbreaking and they became all too clear with the distressing case of Marco Bulmer-Rizzi in Adelaide. It was appalling that Mr Bulmer-Rizzi was not recognised as next of kin following the death of his husband in South Australia last month. He and his husband, David, were on their honeymoon and visiting friends in Adelaide. I am deeply concerned that a grieving husband was treated in this way and had to go through the pain of reading 'never married' on his husband's death certificate. How traumatising that decisions concerning his husband's death had to be directed to his father-in-law. In the Australian government's eyes he was not recognised, despite having legitimately married his husband overseas.

His father-in-law described the degrading and humiliating situation to BuzzFeed, saying, 'It demeaned my son's memory and denied their relationship. It has cast them as second-class citizens. No-one should ever have to go through what we have gone through. We're at the bottom and somebody has dug us a deeper pit'—all of this, despite marrying overseas in a legal wedding and despite the father-in-law of the widow declaring that Marco was the person who should have been able to make these kinds of decisions.

Marco Bulmer-Rizzi told 7.30 that the issuing of this death certificate was the most humiliating moment of his life. Imagine the trauma of losing your husband, your partner in life, and then having that trauma compounded by being treated in such a cruel and degrading way. Had Marco Bulmer-Rizzi's husband died just 400 kilometres east, in New South Wales, a state that does recognise overseas same-sex marriage, then he would not have been put through this experience. So the cruel reality of these laws has been exposed by this tragic incident, and the inconsistency between our states on this matter has been exposed. It is clear that there is a need for national action.

I have to say I am deeply embarrassed and ashamed that, as a senator for South Australia, my home state has been lagging so far behind on this issue. As the first state in this country to decriminalise homosexuality 40 years ago last year, South Australia has been a leader in the space of rights for gay and lesbian people, but it is a sad indictment of my home state that we are one of the last states to end this form of discrimination.

There was a huge reaction to this story in South Australia in early January. I do want to acknowledge that the Premier of South Australia, Mr Weatherill, has apologised and announced that he intends to take legislative action on this matter in the state parliament, and obviously we in the Greens welcome that development. However, this case highlights why we need national laws in this area. The fact that we had to wait for an appalling human tragedy for the state government to take action—a government that has been in power for more than 14 years—highlights why we need uniform laws at a national level. Human rights should never stop at state borders. Human rights do not stop at state borders, and we need to have some uniform legislation in place to deal with this issue. By supporting this bill, we can ensure that same-sex marriages performed overseas are recognised right across our country. There is no ambiguity. Whether you are in Western Australia, whether you are in South Australia, whether you are in the Northern Territory, you should have the same rights as other people visiting our nation, and our bill will achieve that.

Currently there are 14 countries around the world, along with a series of state jurisdictions in a further six countries, who recognise marriage equality—and the numbers are building. How must citizens of these countries feel when they visit Australia and know that they could be exposed to the appalling treatment that faced Mr Marco Bulmer-Rizzi and his family? What does that say about our country and the way that we promote ourselves on the international stage, when people coming to our country could be exposed to that kind of trauma?

I want to point out that this bill will also impact on Australians who have same-sex marriages performed overseas. It is an absurd reality that the Australian government not only deny the rights of same-sex couples to marry on Australian soil but also deny their rights to marry overseas. It is not enough for the Australian government to deny the rights of Australians on Australian soil; they want to deny their rights when they are overseas too. What an appalling indictment of our country. We need to do all that we can to ensure that no-one experiences the humiliation that Mr Bulmer-Rizzi has experienced, and this law would be a powerful step in that direction. It would be a powerful step in favour of equality.

We must also remember that this kind of humiliation and degradation is experienced by Australian couples on Australian soil, who also want their love and relationships acknowledged by their home country. While this bill would address marriages performed overseas, we need to change the law to recognise same-sex marriage here in Australia. The Greens have been a leading force in that debate. We continue to fight for the rights of all Australians to marry the person we love.

We know from the polls throughout this country—there have been a series of polls coming out on this issue over many years—that marriage equality is supported by a majority of Australians, and support is growing day by day. Despite this huge groundswell of support, the government continues to try to defer the issue by going to a costly and divisive and pointless plebiscite, which would cost taxpayers over $160 million a year. I saw in the news today that the Attorney-General is looking into developing legislation on this matter, despite the huge public outcry on this plebiscite. What a blatant waste of taxpayers' money. What a flagrant disregard for taxpayers' money, particularly when people in the Liberal and National parties have come out and said that they will not support a decision of a plebiscite that they do not agree with. We are being sold this plebiscite lemon and told that it is the only way we are going to get this reform over the line, but the very people it has been set up to appease say they will not abide by the decision anyway; they will not even follow the outcome. They will turn their noses up at the Australian people and flout a decision of a plebiscite. So, really, the whole thing is a pointless and expensive sham.

Just a few days ago, a poll came out that looked at the majority of voters in three rural National Party held seats. It is clear that they reject the idea of a plebiscite. Almost two-thirds of those voters express that it is a poor or very poor use of taxpayers' money—and, obviously, we agree. These results clearly show that Australians want the parliament to act on marriage equality, and they want the government to ditch what would be an incredibly expensive and pointless plebiscite.

We are at a unique point in this debate on marriage equality. It is the first time we have been at this point in this debate, where we have the numbers in the federal parliament—people who support marriage equality—but we also have the leaders of three major political parties in this parliament supporting marriage equality. We know that Mr Turnbull supports marriage equality, we know that Mr Shorten supports marriage equality, and of course we know that the Greens leader, Senator Richard Di Natale, supports marriage equality and that the Greens have been leading this debate; yet somehow we as a parliament have not been able to get this done. The numbers are there; what we need is political leadership from the Prime Minister. He needs to step in and stand up to the conservative right wing of his party.

We have heard members of the Liberal and National parties saying they will ignore the outcome of any plebiscite. They have said that they will turn their noses up at that. I want to say to members of all sides of this chamber that, on this bill on recognising the rights of same-sex couples married overseas, they should vote according to their conscience. They should vote for what they know to be right. If it is okay for conservative members of this parliament to say that they are going to vote according to their conscience to reject marriage equality, then it should be okay for those members of this parliament who support the reform of marriage equality to vote according to their conscience, and Mr Turnbull should provide that right to members of this parliament.

This legislation would amend the definition of marriage in the Marriage Act to recognise same-sex marriages performed in a foreign country. It is a step in the right direction on this long road for equality. It would provide certainty to gay and lesbian people who want to come and visit our country. People in same-sex relationships who are married deserve that certainty when they travel. They want to know that when they go to a country they are not going to have their human rights trampled over, they are not going to be humiliated and have their love degraded in the way that Mr Marco Bulmer-Rizzi was treated in Adelaide earlier this year. People want to know that when they travel overseas their rights are protected, and this bill will provide that certainty to people who are seeking to come to Australia.

This legislation would also recognise same-sex marriages of Australian couples that have been carried out overseas. It is an appalling reality of this debate—and it shows the lengths that the Australian government will go to in order to deny the rights of same-sex couples—that the Australian government not only denies people the right to marry here in Australia but also denies them the right to marry overseas. They say, 'When you come back to Australia your marriage is null and void.' What an appalling attack on the rights of gay and lesbian people in our country. It is time for some leadership on this issue.

When the Labor Party were in government and Senator Hanson-Young put this issue on the agenda at that time, there was not support for this reform. But I do hope that members of this parliament will think carefully about this as an important step in the campaign for marriage equality and that they will vote according to their conscience. It is critically important that they do that.

Why is it okay for members of the Liberal and National parties to say, 'Irrespective of the outcome of any decision, we will turn our noses up and we will flout the views of the Australian people', but those who actually support getting something done on marriage equality are not given the right to vote according to their conscience. There is a really serious anomaly here and it needs to be addressed.

I also want to make the point that it is time for Mr Turnbull to show some leadership on this issue when it comes to the rights of gay and lesbian people. I spoke in the chamber the other night about Mr Turnbull's failure to stand up to Tony Abbott when he went overseas and spoke to a right-wing lunatic fringe group. Mr Turnbull sat back and said, 'You're free to go and meet with whomever you want, that's fine', and failed to show any leadership. He failed to bring Mr Abbott to attention for his inappropriate comments and inappropriate actions. This strategy of appeasing Mr Abbott is not going to work; it is not going to gel with the Australian people. Australians are looking for a change in direction from this government—not the same old stale policies. Mr Turnbull is great with the sizzle but where is the sausage? Where is the meat on the bones in terms of offering a different direction for our country? There is an opportunity, with this bill before the parliament, for the government to do things differently and for the parliament to provide recognition of same-sex marriages performed overseas. It is important issue.

We saw earlier this year, with the appalling treatment of Mr Bulmer-Rizzi in Adelaide, the terrible human consequences, the human implications, of what can happen when there is not something like this in place. I urge this parliament to support this bill.

Comments

No comments