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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 01 Hansard (Tuesday, 10 February 2004) . . Page.. 106 ..

The heart of the issue is whether gay people should be subject to an automatic veto based on prejudice and stereotypes, or whether their suitability to be parents should be judged on a case by case basis by child welfare experts”, said Good Process spokeswoman Liz Keogh…Currently children being raised in gay families do not have the same protections…

And she goes on. Does the government think children are going to have the same protections in what it is proposing? I do not think so. It is not giving them a chance to have a say. The Australian Christian Lobby is an apolitical group, despite Mr Stanhope wanting to refer to it as some rabid, extremist Christian group. Many people who are not particularly Christians would support the Australian Christian Lobby. They do not necessarily go to a church. Some of them are Buddhists. People from all over, from different communities, support what the Australian Christian Lobby stands for. Hundreds and hundreds of people have turned out and hundreds of people have written to the Chief Minister. He ignores them at his peril. In its media release, the Australian Christian Lobby says:

…to sacrifice children’s interests to narrow political agendas and its own civil libertarian philosophy…will be a dark day for representative government in the Territory.

The Chief Minister can keep sliding but is he bringing the community with him? The media release goes on:

Mr Stanhope lamely says that he has conducted “lengthy discussion”, but what he doesn’t say is that he has refused to listen to that discussion.

That is very symptomatic of this government—“Yes, we will consult, but we really will not listen, we will tell you what’s good for you.” The media release continues:

90% of submissions to the public consultation process said they did not agree with the proposal to allow homosexuals to adopt children, and yet he is planning to push it through on the weight of his numbers regardless of community opposition,” said Mr Wallace.

We are about numbers in this place and Mr Stanhope knows that. He knows that six against 11 isn’t going to get anything up. He is sitting there knowing that on the basis of 11 people this city is going to be faced with one of the most major decisions that we are about to enter into. I do not think that he has contemplated this enough.

Mr Stanhope: It’s called democracy.

MRS BURKE: No, it isn’t called democracy—far from it, Mr Stanhope, far from it. I would also like to quote from somebody who represents the multicultural community. This lady emailed me to say:

…one of the children have said…“they would not (the child) like to judge, but for themselves, they would not like to be in a family with the prevalence (only) of the same sex.”

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