Relationships Register Bill 2010

The Relationships Register Bill 2010 is welcome, and whilst the New South Wales Government has been slow off the mark introducing this legislation, its significance is not reduced as a result. New South Wales needs a relationship register. The bill is modelled on existing legislation in Tasmania, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory. It could be said that tonight the New South Wales Parliament is catching up with public opinion. At the start of the twenty-first century we have witnessed an enormous increase in support for formal recognition of a range of relationships, and indeed acceptance that people's love and intimacy can be expressed in a variety of ways. Tolerance and respect have become the hallmark of how so many people live their lives and interact with each other. So the Greens support the bill.

There is both a social and political context to the bill. The social context is that there is now a wide acceptance of people having significant relationships outside marriage. Our work tonight is to finalise legislation that gives legal recognition to those relationships. The Parliamentary Secretary noted in his agreement in principle speech in the lower House that marriage cannot be legislated at State level. Marriage provides the political context for this issue, and there is wide political acceptance of marriage and quality. The result of a galaxy poll conducted last year was that 60 per cent of Australians support marriage equality. 

Understandably Labor is coming under increasing criticism for its failure to legislate for marriage equality. In some ways I was pleased that the debate of this bill was postponed last night until tonight; overnight I was given a leaflet that is being distributed about the city by Australian Marriage Equality, and I would suggest that members consult that organisation's website if they want to know more about this issue. The leaflet is titled "Labor does not support equality. Do You?" It sets out a number of concerns expressed by people working on this issue, and I congratulate this organisation for the voice it is bringing to an issue that is troubling more and more people.

Sooner or later Australia will have marriage equality legislation reform, and when that day comes many of us will join together in celebration. It is important to keep in mind that it is only a matter of time—hopefully it will be sooner rather than later. Many people see this bill as a cover for Labor. Months out from Federal and State elections Labor is working hard to manage what some people regard as controversial issues in its various constituencies, and the way that Labor has handled this bill has strengthened that view. The key intent here is to manage what some senior Labor people see as a difficult issue for them: marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples. That perception could have easily have been laid to rest if this bill had been used by New South Wales Labor as a means to call on its Federal counterparts to do the job properly and to change the Federal law to grant marriage equality. That could have been so easily done.

The agreement in principle speech in the other place should have put the case for marriage equality. All that was needed was a couple of sentences recognising that the relationships register is no substitute for marriage equality and that New South Wales Labor backs marriage equality. That is what we needed to hear, but that has not come through in this debate. A gentle call from the Minister to his Federal colleagues to change the marriage legislation would have given much encouragement to those backing a change in the law, such as Australian Marriage Equality and the thousands of people who gather at the many protests and rallies that are being held about this issue.

Such a statement from senior Labor figures would show that New South Wales is truly behind the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community. Many Labor members—and many of them are members of this House—hold a similar position to that of the Australian Marriage Equality and the Greens on this issue, but unfortunately officially Labor as a party and a government has adopted a go-slow approach to reform. That is the only way one can describe it. Many people think that key Labor leaders are not supportive of marriage equality. Labor members should be aware of the political perceptions around this issue, which the Government is feeding by the direction it has taken with this legislation.

The Minister, in his second reading speech, gave an example of a number of countries that have relationship registers. Unfortunately, the Minister did not mention the number of countries that have marriage equality within their statute books. It is nine countries, as well as a number of States of the United States of America. I was interested to know how long the countries have had this legislation in place. The Netherlands was the first country to introduce the legislation in 2001, then Belgium in 2003. Legislation was passed in Spain in June 2005 and marriage equality became legal on 3 July 2005, amid great celebrations. In 2005 Canada introduced marriage equality under the Civil Marriage Act. A matter of fascination for many people, on 1 December 2005 the constitutional court of South Africa ruled unanimously that it was unconstitutional to prevent same-sex couples marrying when marriage was permitted for people of the opposite sex. That was most significant. Norway legislated marriage equality in 2008 and Sweden in 2009.

Then it was introduced in Mexico. I am unsure whether that applies to the whole country or only Mexico City. However, it is still significant that the jurisdiction has moved forward in such a progressive way. Argentina joined its Mexican brothers and sisters and then it was introduced in five States in the United States, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont, with that shift in legislation starting in 2003. The shift is occurring around the world with more countries considering marriage equality. Australia has to catch up. The Minister made a mistake in his second reading speech in the lower House. He drew a distinction between relationship registers and civil union schemes. On my understanding, that is a false construct. Relationship registers, civil partnership schemes and civil union schemes, whilst they are different terms, are in fact the same concept. 

At the many rallies I have attended in support of marriage equality, I have been struck by the passion of the people. The rallies are dominated by young people in their twenties. They are not only gay and lesbian couples. When they first become politicised about this issue, they are shocked that the law is unequal. They think because it is the twenty-first century it has all been worked out, we all have equality. When they find out that is not the case, that their brothers and sisters in different relationships are unable to get married, they become irate. This movement has become a driving force. It is a big deal to them that people are denied a legal right to marry. It should not be a big deal. People should be allowed to marry, irrespective of who they fall in love with. The Greens welcome this legislation. There is a perception that this law is more than it appears on paper and that the Government has another agenda. Even if that is the case, and I believe it is, the Greens still welcome this legislation. We look forward to celebrating marriage equality legislation in this country and call on more Labor and Coalition members of Parliament to back the campaign.