ACT marriage debate begins

ACT marriage debate begins

The ACT Labor Government is hedging its bets as it looks for a way out of a dilemma created by its conflict with the Rudd Government over same-sex unions.
If passed, the Civil Partnerships Amendment Bill would force the Rudd Government to either admit civil unions don’t breach Federal marriage laws, or spark a bitter Labor vs Labor territory war by having the proposed law overturned.
Greens MLA Shane Rattenbury introduced the wedge last week, 12 months after the original civil partnership laws were passed.
He argued there was no risk of the original relationship recognition scheme being overturned since the six-month window for Commonwealth intervention had passed.
“Couples entering into civil partnerships are making one of life’s biggest commitments. The Greens believe that entry into a civil partnership deserves more than a simple registry process involving making an application on the papers,” he told the Legislative Assembly.
“The current operation of legislation means that a ceremony does not have legal effect. Rather, it is the decision of the registrar-general back in the office that marks the commencement of the partnership. Civil partnerships deserve more and this bill delivers that in the form of legally recognised ceremonies.”
The problem for the ACT Labor Government is that the bill is also ACT Labor policy, albeit ideological policy it has decided to strategically not advance to avoid further conflicts with the Rudd Government. At risk are millions of dollars in infrastructure funding to a safe Labor territory.
ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell and Education, Industrial Relations and Sport Minister Andrew Barr have been cautious not to indicate which way the ACT Government will vote when debate resumes later this month.
Barr said even though he is gay and planning his own civil partnership later this year, if the cabinet agreed to vote the bill down, he would not cross the floor.
The Federal Attorney-General’s office declined to publicly justify its objection to civil unions when invited to do so by Sydney Star Observer or indicate how the Rudd Government would respond if a state passed such a scheme, instead of a territory. The Federal Government would require the backing of either the Parliament or the High Court if it wanted a state scheme overturned.
Last week the Tasmanian Labor Government told gay activists it was not interested in passing same-sex marriage laws.

You May Also Like

3 responses to “ACT marriage debate begins”

  1. I agree with David W. Kevin Rudd is an utter disgrace to humanity sponsoring the Australia Christian Lobby. Some members of the Lobby say we are a cancer and should be eradicated.

    I think the Chinese saying about Kevin Rudd is “To borrow a Knife”. Use others to get your enemy. That way you can be seen as not responsible for what happens. This includes gay youth in the country killing themselves at six times the rate of heterosexual youth. His only eduction to be PM was as an interpreter and liar. It shows so well now.

    No super protection for private super, no children protection for gay parents, no anti discrimination protection, and the list goes on, let alone gay marriage.

    Kevin Rudd Rudd is a corrupt country Queensland politician. Nothing more and nothing less. Go see http://www.acl.org.au/national/browse.stw?article_id=28624 to see what a bloody monster he really is.

    Kevin Rudd is truly a twisted Fuck.

  2. Mmmm, just refer to the previous story on government-sponsored homo-negativity. Get a backbone Kev & stop holding back progress by banning ceremonies.
    Besides, the 2004 Marriage Ban does not ban state civil union ceremonies… the only thing that is stopping them, is Kevin07 stupidly made a 2007 election promise to hateful homo-negative evangelical christian gay hate groups to ban the any ceremonies that “mimick marriage”. And apparently it’s a promise that can’t be broken- a core election promise… and a promise that will also be committed to in advance for the next election as well, and the one after that, until Kev grows a backbone when it comes to this issue of pure & simple homo-negativity.

  3. Technically, it is not ACT Labor policy. There is nothing in either the ACT Labor platform or election policy papers that commits ACT Labor to ceremonies.