Barr ‘saddened’ over civil unions stance of marriage advocates
ACT Deputy Chief Minister Andrew Barr is said to be “personally saddened” by suggestions from marriage equality groups and other LGBTI activists that the Government’s proposed amendments to its civil unions laws are a step back for same-sex couples.
During this month’s sitting of Parliament, the Government will debate a bill it introduced late last year that would allow same-sex couples to enter into a civil union at a legally binding ceremony conducted by a celebrant.
Though same-sex couples in the ACT have been able to register civil partnerships since 2008, the changes would reflect the original civil unions laws first introduced by former Chief Minister Jon Stanhope before they were overturned in 2006 by the federal government under then-Prime Minister John Howard.
Ivette Gonzalez, spokesperson for Equal Love Canberra, said the campaign for marriage equality would continue with “full force” with a rally on August 11 as the Government's bill would not bring about equal civil unions let alone equal marriage.
“It is discriminatory because it only applies to non-heterosexual couples, taking the discriminatory federal Marriage Act as a reference point,” she said.
"Civil unions are a consolation prize for lesbians, gays, bisexuals, trans-sexual and intersex people. That’s better than nothing but highlights the importance of continuing the campaign to change the Marriage Act and win marriage equality for all at the federal level.”
Australian Marriage Equality national convener Alex Greenwich echoed those concerns, saying the Government should listen to the LGBTI community.
“Obviously the ACT Labor Government have been really pioneering when it comes to recognition of same-sex couples, however the debate has now moved on and it’s one about marriage and it’s one about equality,” he said.
“A really good strategy for ACT Labor would be to focus on the great work that they have done towards affecting the debate federally.”
The ACT Liberal Party has said it will oppose the civil unions amendments while the Greens have indicated they will consult with LGBTI community groups before deciding on their position.
The openly gay Barr, who along with WA Senator Louise Pratt is also co-convener of the ALP’s internal LGBTI caucus Rainbow Labor, told SX that no one was arguing civil unions were better or a replacement for marriage.
“I am personally saddened by Equal Love’s attacks on the ALP.
“They are unnecessary and divisive. You don’t win support for a cause by attacking your supporters,” Barr said.
“Equal Love have previously rallied for civil union ceremonies and clearly understand that marriage laws are the preserve of the federal parliament.”
Barr said it was thanks in part to Rainbow Labor’s campaigning that the Labor Party had adopted a position of supporting marriage equality as part of party platform during last December’s National Conference.
“All ACT Labor MPs, Senators and MLAs support marriage equality and the ACT Branch of the Labor Party has a long standing record in this area,” Barr added.
- Tags: ACT, Alex Greenwich, Andrew Barr, Australian Marriage Equality, Blaze, Canberra, Civil Unions, Discrimination, Equal Love Canberra, Greens, Ivette Gonzalez, Law, Liberal Party, Marriage Equality, MCV, Politics, Queensland Pride, Rainbow Labor, Same-Sex Marriage, SX
Comments (4)
I strongly disagree with the criticism of the Civil Union legislation, legislative progress is an incremental process.
As someone who was involved with the previous attempts to agitate for civil unions in the ACT, I believe that they can make an important impact both in terms of recognition for relationships, particularly for those who don't want to be in a state sanctioned 'marriage', as well as an impact towards the broader societal recognition and respect for same-sex relationships.
I don't want to get married and neither does a huge proportion of the LGBT community, but I do recognise and appreciate the benefits of civil recognition of a relationship, both in terms of improved legislative recognition of rights and through advancing the broader societal recognition of equality for same sex individuals and couples.
My preference for legislative reform would be if the Marriage Act was renamed the Civil Union Act, as I believe has been the case in some constituencies internationally, and anyone wanting to call their civil union a marriage could do so without it having a legal definition. Unfortunately this won't happen. The Marriage Act is here to stay in some form.
Given the divisive federal situation regarding same-sex marriage and the particular appalling legislative situation in the ACT that allows ACT laws enacted by a democratically elected government with a mandate to recognise same-sex relationships to be thrown out by the federal executive/governor-general, civil unions are the best way forward for the ACT. And if some people from outside the ACT in states with greater legislative powers than the ACT wants to critcize the situation, how about you agitate for equal and democratic proportional representation in the House of Representatives to allow the ACT to legislate for same-sex marriage!
It seems that the main problem with Andrew Barr MLA is his politically lead habit of compromise. Same-sex marriage will never be legalized in Australia if civil union small talk is not dropped from the wider agenda. It is not progressive to be obsessing over the fine print of the runner-up prize. People want leaders who will talk the talk on social policy and have the courage of their convictions without wavering through political deal-making. After all, you don't win the gold medal by shooting for silver. Shame bogus Barr!
Here, Here.
I think Civil Unions are a certificate of segregation from the 1084 laws that reference the Marriage Act. Anyone can print them off their epson printer. As we saw in Queensland, they are open to attack and change, and even death. Politicians seeking Civil Unions for GLBTI people are certainly not divorcing and getting the segregation certificate.