Labor’s deputy leader Tanya Plibersek delivered a speech in parliament yesterday restating Labor’s call for the government to address the marriage equality issue.
Ms Plibersek said many Australian’s were asking themselves why marriage equality had not been introduced considering over 20 countries, many who are culturally similar to Australia, had brought in legislation to allow same-sex couples to wed.
“The new Prime Minister dashed the hopes of his constituents and the many Australians who are supporters of marriage equality by kicking this issue off in to the never-never.” Ms Plibersek said.
Ms Plibersek said the proposal to hold a plebiscite that was developed by former Prime Minister Tony Abbott was a $160 million dollar waster of money, and questioned it’s value considering three coalition senators have vowed to vote against the issue regardless of its outcome.
Government members shouted across the chamber to Ms Plibersek asking if Labor members would be bound by the outcome of the plebiscite. The member for Sydney responded, “Its not our policy. We think its stupid.” Ms Plibersek responded, saying that a Labor government would introduce legislation for marriage equality within 100 days of taking office.
Ms Plibersek shared the personal story of one of her constituents, Dr John Challis who is in his late 80’s. The former Catholic priest, who was head of the ABC’s science unit has been with his partner for over 50 years. Ms Plibersek shared a comment made by Mr Challis; “I won’t live forever”. Ms Plibersek said Australians like Dr Challis should not have to wait any longer.
Ms Plibersek said gay and lesbian people were the only group in Australian history who have had to face a national plebiscite to remove discrimination against them.
“We have not had plebiscites on removing discrimination against any other group in society.” Ms Pliberske said.
“We know as an advanced society, every step we take towards the removal of discrimination emboldens us as a nation. It makes us stand prouder. We don’t need a plebiscite to tell us that it’s the right thing to do.”
The speech I gave on marriage equality in the Parliament today. “This is above love, and family, and the respect people have for one another. “Every step we take towards the removal of discrimination emboldens us as a nation. It makes us stand prouder. We don’t need a plebiscite to tell us that it’s the right thing to do.”
Posted by Tanya Plibersek on Sunday, February 7, 2016
Prime Minister defends plebiscite proposal
The Prime Minister has defended the government’s commitment to the proposed plebiscite despite Senators McKenzie, Abetz and Bernardi vowing to ignore the results.
Last week in Question Time, Labor’s Terri Butler asked Mr Turnbull if he would consider allowing a free vote and address the issue within the parliament.
Mr Turnbull said the government still supported the idea even though it was not an approach that he personally endorsed when it was first raised. Mr Turbull said the plebiscite was an example of the government being innovative, but conceded the process was costly.
“The coalition has resolved on an approach to dealing with the same-sex marriage issue which involves the Australian people being asked for their opinion. I can understand the honourable member complaining about the expense. She is entitled to that view but she cannot question the democracy.
“What we have here is a direct vote. Every single Australian will have a say. It is a new approach. It has not been a practice in the Australian political system other than in constitutional referendums. It is a new approach, and I grant the honourable member that.” Mr Turbull said.
“It is certainly not the approach that I favoured at the outset. I am a traditionalist. This was a case of democratic innovation. The innovator was out innovating, so there you go. Every Australian will have a say. The honourable member will have one vote. I will have one vote. And each of our respective constituents will have one vote, and we will be able to have our say. I will vote for the plebiscite. I will vote ‘yes’. Some of us will vote ‘no’.”
The plebiscite is proposed to occur at an yet to be determined date after the next federal election.
OIP Staff
Well said Tanya