Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 3 Hansard (11 March) . . Page.. 852 ..

deeming a person within a same-sex relationship to be either a man or a woman. The New South Wales approach I think is the age-old deeming approach. If you find something a little difficult to deal with, then just deem someone or something to be something they obviously are not.

The new definition of domestic partner helps to ensure that spouse and marriage retain their proper meanings, by replacing interpretive provisions such as spouse includes a de facto spouse. Spouse is included under the more general term domestic partner. The inclusion of spouse under the more general term domestic partner in the bill does not affect the meaning of spouse at all. Spouse continues to have its ordinary legal meaning of a husband or wife.

Similarly, marriage continues to have its ordinary legal meaning as the union of a man and a woman, to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life. The new definitions do not affect the current operation of any legislation that is not amended by either bill. Nor do the definitions preclude the use of specific terms such as spouse in any future legislation the Assembly may choose to pass.

In order to make it clear that we want to retain the current well understood meaning of spouse, I am moving an amendment today that will insert a note to the definition of domestic partner, stating that spouse means a husband or wife. I am also moving an amendment to insert an explanatory example in the definition of domestic partner.

I am aware there has been some discussion about the approach taken in this definition, in describing the kinds of partnerships to be covered. It is not the intention of the government, in this first stage of reforms, to make major changes to the way legislation treats relationships. The policy we are seeking to express is that couples who have made a genuine commitment to share a life together should be treated the same, no matter what the sex of the partners may be.

Most legislation already recognises heterosexual partnerships where a couple live together but are not married. This bill simply extends that recognition to all partnerships, regardless of the sex of the partners. The definition of domestic partnership is simple and inclusive. It means the relationship between two people, whether of the same or different sexes, living together as a couple on a genuine domestic basis.

Some people have preferred the approach taken in other jurisdictions of including a list of indicators of whether or not a couple are in a partnership. I believe the form of definition in this bill provides a better, more flexible approach to defining something that may have many forms of expression.

I quote from the second reading speech made by the Victorian Attorney-General, Rob Hulls, in November 2000, in the debate on that state's Statute Law Amendments (Relationships) Act, as it seems to me to express the position of this government precisely. Rob said:

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .