|
Plans in the ACT to re-introduce legislation that would allow for legal ceremonies for same-sex couples have been abandoned.
In July, Greens MLA Deb Foskey stated her intention to introduce a bill reinstating the ACT government’s original plan of allowing same-sex couples to have their relationships formalised with a ceremony.
Due to a lack of support from the ACT government, Foskey decided not to introduce the legislation in the Assembly this week.
The ACT’s original Civil Partnerships Law Bill was quashed by the Rudd government earlier this year, over concerns that the inclusion of a legal ceremony would emulate a wedding. The federal government threatened to veto the legislation unless the ACT government amended the Bill.
Facing this threat, the ACT government complied, amending the Bill so that no formal ceremony would be allowed.
Foskey told SX the Greens will go ahead with the Bill in December.
“At this stage the ACT government have categorically said they won’t support this Bill, so we have decided to wait for our next chance, which will be in December,” she said, adding that by then, following the ACT elections, she hoped to have the support of at least one more Greens parliamentary representative.
Tim Colquhoun, a spokesperson for the ACT’s Attorney-General, Simon Corbell, told SX Foskey was “playing politics with something as serious as people’s relationships”.
Foskey said in response: “I thought that was a bit rich. What we are doing is putting the ACT government in a difficult dilemma, but we need to stand up to the federal government. The ACT government was voted in by the people on this issue. What does it say when you have the ACT government being ruled by a federal government rather than [by] what the people want?”
Colquhoun also alleged that the ACT government feared Foskey’s move would endanger the new laws regarding same-sex relationships,
“The ACT will not support the Bill, which could jeopardize the new laws which were introduced three months ago, and [which] more than twenty couples have taken advantage of,” he explained.
However, Foskey stated that she would not have proceeded with introducing the Bill if she thought it would endanger, rather than advance, the cause of LGBT equality. She added that she had reassurances from the Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, that “he would not change the existing laws”.
In related news, George Brandis, the federal Opposition Attorney-General, has claimed that proposed legislative amendments to change ‘marital couple’ to ‘coupled relationship’ will undermine marriage.
“By abolishing the statutory definition of marriage and reducing marriage and de facto relationships to the same category, the Bill fails to acknowledge and respect the unique cultural significance of marriage,” Brandis told The Australian.
At a recent appearance before the Senate Inquiry into same-sex couples and law reform, the Australian Coalition for Equality (ACE) addressed the issue of a ‘couple relationship’ in their Senate submission.
Corey Irlam, spokesperson for ACE said: “ACE supports [the] individual’s choice to enter into different forms of relationships recognition. Registered relationships, defacto, marriage and interdependent relationships share unique aspects, which is why people may choose one over the other.
“If the Senate is to provide equal treatment to these differing categories, then they should recognise them under an umbrella term, such as couple relationship. In this way marriage will be distinctly recognised, as will the other distinct relationships."
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed