|
Federal reforms have been welcomed but some say it doesn’t go far enough. Is gay marriage next on the agenda? Adam Bub reports.
The Rudd government’s proposed reforms to remove financial discrimination against same-sex couples will have far-reaching effects on the everyday lives of many gay and lesbian couples.
A gay man who was previously unable to transfer his superannuation payment to his partner will now be able to do so.
Two lesbian mothers will not have to pay double the amount to reach the Medicare safety net for their children or themselves, because they will be now considered a couple.
Last week, Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland announced that more than 100 laws that discriminate against same-sex couples will be reformed as part of the May budget, which includes the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission’s 58 recommendations.
Yet while the laws mark some of the most progressive gay rights reforms in Australian history, gay activist groups believe that the Rudd government has washed its hands clean of the marriage debate, stopping short of full equality.
“The amendment of the Marriage Act remains that last legal obstacle,” Peter Furness, national convenor of lobby group Australian Marriage Equality (AME), tells SX. “The new legislation cleared up the removal of financial discrimination, but as long as there is any law that discriminates against us, we remain second-class citizens in our own country.”
Rodney Croome, gay rights activist and spokesperson for the Australian Coalition for Equality (ACE), also condemns the government’s same-sex marriage ban. “It’s archaic. It has no place in our modern tolerant nation,” Croome tells SX.
Earlier this week, the Commonwealth government vetoed the ACT’s Civil Partnerships Bill because it ‘mimics marriage’. While the Bill will be amended to allow relationship registries, like those in Victoria and Tasmania, ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell says that the territory would still fund ceremonies for gay couples, even though they will carry no legal recognition.
“We are angry, disappointed and frustrated with the approach of our federal colleagues,” Corbell told reporters.
The sticking point for many seems to be any ceremony that legally implies marriage. Even Jim Wallace, the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) chairman, is open to the new laws, but on the proviso that they don’t ‘undermine’ heterosexual marriage. ACL Chief-of-Staff Lyle Shelton told ABC Regional that it was only an ‘activist minority’ that was pushing for gay marriage.
Greens Senator Kerry Nettle plans to challenge Labor’s legislation with a Senate inquiry. “There you find out how that discrimination in relation to marriage impacts upon so many people’s lives, particularly in relation to their children,” Nettle tells SX. “It’s not just a symbolic issue.”
Nettle insists that while the legislation is welcome, the government discriminates against same-sex couples by denying marriage and parenting rights, also neglecting transgendered rights regarding marriage and passport documentation. Earlier this year, Nettle reintroduced the Greens’ proposed amendments to include same-sex marriage in the Marriage Act 1961, already rejected under the Howard government in 2004.
While marriage hovers on the agenda, Rudd’s new legislation still needs to be passed in the Senate. Support from both of the major parties has been solid, but there is still room for doubt.
“I don’t even want to contemplate that,” says Nettle. Federal Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson has indicated his support of the laws, but told the media last week that his party was “steadfastly opposed to gay marriage, gay adoption and gay IVF”.
The Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby (GLRL) believes that the reforms are a “huge step forward” for gay men, lesbians and their children.
“While our community has expressed the desire for some sort of formal relationship recognition, whether that be marriage or civil unions, this should be a time for our community to celebrate,” says Peter Johnson, GLRL Co-Convenor
The legislation might reduce some people’s social security or tax benefits, as they will be now considered as couples rather than independents. “But the overall effect of the changes is much more beneficial than any of the losses that will occur,” Johnson says.
Whatever the result, lobby groups will vehemently continue to fight for gay rights, including the GLRL’s state campaign for parenting rights, and AME’s growing initiative to get national corporations on board to recognise employees’ same-sex marriage rights.
Johnson adds that the lobby plans to educate the community in the practical aspects of the new laws. “There’s no point in having new rights if people aren’t aware of them,” he says.
Indeed, Australia’s new reforms may follow the lead of Canada, which banned same-sex marriage in 1999 but provided same-sex couples equal access to social and tax benefits in 2000. In 2005, the tide had turned, and same-sex marriage became legalised. In Australia, the fight is far from over, but the beginning of the battle has certainly been won.
 |
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
