Same-sex Marriage In Australia Article Index for
Same-sex Marriage
Website Links For
Marriage
 

Information About

Same-sex Marriage In Australia




''' the Marriage Act 1961 did not define marriage, but the Common Law definition of marriage as "a union between a man and a woman" was applied by Australian courts and was taken to be "settled law."


RESPONSE TO CHALLENGING COMMON LAW

The possibility of a challenge to the common law definition of marriage arose when same-sex marriage became legal in Ontario , Canada , in 2003 . Since Ontario law does not restrict the right to marry to residents or Canadian citizens, the possibility arose that Australian citizens would contract same-sex marriages in Ontario and then return to seek recognition of those marriages in Australian courts.


Marriage Legislation Amendment Bill

On and the ''Family Law Act''. Although this was not intended to alter the current status of same-sex relationships, it would preclude any possibility that the courts could overturn the common law definition and recognise the validity of a same-sex marriage legally contracted in another country.


Responses by major parties to the bill

The Labor shadow Attorney-General, Nicola Roxon , said on the same day the amendment was proposed that the Labor Opposition would not oppose the section of the legislation amending the Marriage Act . Support for same-sex marriage has never been Labor policy, although the party has a policy of removing all discrimination against gay men and lesbians and against same-sex couples. Labor feared that the government was introducing the legislation with the intention of using it as a Wedge Issue at the Federal Election expected before end of 2004 .

Labor argued that the amendment did not affect the legal situation of same-sex relationships, merely putting into statute law what was already common law. Ruddock and other Liberal s argued that bill was necessary to "protect the institution of marriage" against what they said was the "threat" of same-sex marriage, by ensuring that the common law definition was put beyond legal challenge {Link without Title} .

The Australian Democrats and the Australian Greens opposed the legislation in the Senate , however Labor's support ensured that it was passed through both houses of Parliament . In June 2004, the bill passed the House Of Representatives . On August 13 , 2004 , the Senate passed the amendment by 38 votes to 6.


Specifications of the bill

The amendment specifies the following:
''Marriage means the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.''

''Certain unions are not marriages. A union solemnised in a foreign country between: (a) a man and another man; or (b) a woman and another woman; must not be recognised as a marriage in Australia.'' {Link without Title}



Responses to the bill

Criticisms of the bill during the Senate discussions included an amendment proposed by the Greens to change the name of the bill to the "Marriage Discrimination Act" (which failed), an emotional Democrat Senator Andrew Bartlett , stating that the legislation "devalues [his marriage", and with Greens Senator Bob Brown referring to the Prime Minister John Howard and the legislation as "hateful" [http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200408/s1176303.htm . Brown was asked to retract his statements, but refused.

Until recently most Gay Rights activists in Australia did not regard the legal recognition of same-sex marriage as a high priority as compared with other issues, such as abolishing discriminatory laws relating to Superannuation , Adoption , Next-of-kin rights, and other matters. Under the influence of events in the United States and Canada , however, the issue has become more prominent, although some gay rights activists still take the traditional view that marriage is a Heterosexual institution which gay men and lesbians should not participate in.

Labor's decision not to oppose the amendment of the Marriage Act thus drew sharp criticism from the gay and lesbian rights movement. In response, Roxon argued that the bill did not change the legal position of same-sex relationships, and was merely a "Howard election stunt." She said that Labor remained committed to a comprehensive policy of gay and lesbian rights.


PUBLIC OPINION


  • A Newspoll poll, commissioned by the Humanist Society of NSW , taken February 2006 said 52 percent of respondents agreed that the government should introduce a law to recognise same-sex relationships (whether through marriage or civil unions was not specified), while 37 percent disagreed. {Link without Title} {Link without Title}



OTHER SAME-SEX UNIONS


At a state level, there is recognition of same-sex '' De Facto '' relationships.
States with Domestic Partner laws for same-sex couples:

  • Australian Capital Territory - Distribution of property and finances in the event of a separation, inheritance in the event of death. Currently the ACT have enacted laws relating to same-sex adoption. The ACT has announced plans for civil unions to be introduced from early 2006. In March 2006, legislation will come into effect. Attorney-General Philip Ruddock has said that the enactment of the bill for civil unions "will not satisfy the Commonwealth"[http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200603/s1604208.htm] and may intervene unless the bill was changed.


  • New South Wales - The Workers Compensation Act now include same-sex couples. The Victims Compensation Act and the Criminal Procedure Act have also been reformed to include same-sex couples. Previously, under the Workers Compensation Act, entitlements were only extended to a heterosexual worker's dependent spouse and children. The Act now includes dependent same-sex partners, parents and siblings. In 2004, the City of Sydney Council, led by Lord Mayor Clover Moore, introduced a re-working of the former South Sydney Council's Partnership Registration scheme, renaming it the City Of Sydney Relationships Declaration Program . While not conferring the additional legal rights of marriage, it may confer some limited legal recognition as this document may be produced as evidence of the relationship.


  • Northern Territory - Members of the Legislative Assembly in the Northern Territory can take their same-sex partners with them on overseas trips at taxpayer expense, the territorial Remuneration Tribunal ruled on 12-9-03. The tribunal redefined a de-facto spouse as a "person who is not married to the Member, but is in a marriage-like relationship with the Member."


  • Queensland - Allows couples in same-sex relationships who are victims of relationship violence to take out domestic voilence orders against a violent partner, and other protective measures, including counseling services.


  • South Australia - Extends superannuation entitlements under four state superannuation acts to allow same-sex couples the same rights as heterosexual couples. South Australia has legislation before its Parliament to enact same-sex ''de facto'' relationships.

  • ''


  • Tasmania - Since January 1 , 2004 , The Relationships Act allows same-sex couples to register their union with the state's Registry of Births, Death and Marriages. Gives homosexuals rights in making decisions about their partner's health, provides for guardianship when a partner is incapacitated, and gives homosexuals equal access to their partner's public sector pensions. Allows homosexuals to adopt the biological child of their partner.


  • Victoria - Gives same-sex couples some rights equal to those enjoyed by de facto couples, including hospital access, medical decision making, superannuation inheritance rights, property tax, landlord/tenancy rights, mental health treatment and victims of crime procedures.


  • Western Australia - Allows same-sex couples equal access to adoption procedures and in vitro fertilization treatment. It also gives same-sex couples the same rights as opposite sex couples in areas such as transfer of property, medical treatment, and inheritance upon the death of a partner.



Civil unions

After the that would recognize civil unions. He said he has support for the bill from other Liberal MP s, including some of Howard's Cabinet members. {Link without Title}

In March 2006, independent Victorian MP Andrew Olexander proposed a private member's bill to allow civil partnerships in the state, but the state government has not allowed it to be drafted by the parliamentary counsel. {Link without Title}


SEE ALSO



EXTERNAL LINKS

;News articles

;Senate Hansard speeches (''Marriage Amendment Bill 2004'')

;Divisions

;Other