Bruce Billson voted very strongly against same-sex marriage equality

The majority voted against a motion to read the Marriage Amendment Bill 2012 for a second time. This means that the majority of members reject the main idea of the bill, which was to recognise same-sex marriages.

This means that the bill will not considered any further.

Debate in Parliament

The bill was introduced by Labor Party MP Stephen Jones as a private member’s bill.

Jones MP said that he was guided by the fact that “a majority of Australians are in favour of the changes contained within this bill” as well as “the human right not to be discriminated against on the grounds of sexuality”.(Read Jones MP's contribution here. ) He explained that in 2011 the Australian Labour Party changed its policy to allow its members to make a conscience vote on any legislation that legalised same-sex marriage, which is what occurred in this case.(Read Jones MP's explanation here. )

As the Labor Party called for a conscience vote on this issue, Labor members were split for and against the bill with the majority voting in favour.

Although the Liberal Party did not explicitly allow its members a conscience vote, the Liberal Party’s Luke Simpkins MP said that a conscience vote was “always” an option for Liberal members.(Read Simpkins MP's contribution here. ) However, the Liberal Party still uniformly voted against the bill.

Several members who opposed the bill argued that the current marriage law is not discriminatory. For example, the Liberal Party’s Stuart Robert MP referred to family law expert Professor Patrick Parkinson’s submission to the Senate inquiry into marriage equality that “functional equality has already been achieved” in Australian law for registered same-sex unions.(Read Robert MP's contribution here. )

Background to the Bill

The Marriage Amendment Bill 2012 was introduced into the House of Representatives on the same day as the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2012, which was co-sponsored by the Greens Party MP Adam Bandt and Independent MP Andrew Wilkie. There was also a similar bill being considered in the Senate, called the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2010, which had been introduced by Greens Party Senator Sarah Hanson-Young. Despite containing different language and writing styles, all three bills aimed to allow people to marry regardless of sex.(Read more about these three bills in the bills digest.)

References

This division is a vote about a motion rather than a bill. According to the House of Representatives Practice [923kb], a motion is “any proposal made for the purpose of eliciting a decision of the House”.

The members were voting on whether:

the motion ( Mr Bandt’s ), as amended, be agreed to.

The motion had been introduced by Greens Party MP Adam Bandt and amended by an amendment introduced by Labor Party MP Stephen Jones.

Someone who voted Aye supported the motion. Since the majority voted Aye, the motion was successful. This means that the House agreed with the motion and so it became an order of the House. An order can be described as a command of the House, though it has no legal effect outside of the House (see the House of Representatives Practice [923kb]).

Debate in Parliament

The original wording of the substantive motion introduced by Bandt MP was:

That this House:

(1) notes that there is:

(a) a growing list of countries that allow same-sex couples to marry including the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Spain, Canada and South Africa; and

(b) widespread support for equal marriage in the Australian community; and

(2) calls on all parliamentarians to gauge their constituents’ views on the issue of marriage equality.

Before introducing the motion, Bandt MP sought leave to amend it but leave was not granted. The wording Bandt MP wanted to use was the same as the wording proposed by Labor Party MP Stephen Jones in his amendment, which was:

That all the words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: “this House calls on all parliamentarians, consistent with their duties as representatives, to gauge their constituents’ views on ways to achieve equal treatment for same sex couples including marriage”.

This is why Bandt MP joined Jones MP and the rest of the Labor Party in voting ‘Aye’ to the amendment (see the division here).

Background to the Motion

The substantive motion introduced by Bandt MP was part of the Greens Party’s campaign to change the law to recognise same-sex marriage. At the time it was introduced, the Senate was considering the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2010, which had been introduced by Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young.