Gay marriage bill future uncertain
Victorian Liberal MPs should be allowed to vote with their conscience on a marriage equality bill in front of Victoria’s parliament, Australian Marriage Equality national convenor Alex Greenwich said.
Greens MLC Sue Pennicuik (pictured) introduced her Marriage Equality Bill into Parliament’s Upper House on June 6.
Greenwich called on Premier Ted Baillieu to allow a conscience vote, just as NSW Liberal premier Barry O’Farrell did recently for a same-sex marriage motion.
“If same-sex couples can marry in Victoria, it will show the rest of the nation it has nothing to fear from this important and overdue reform,” Greenwich said.
Pennicuik said we needed to achieve this important law reform to send a message that all love is equal before the law.
Equal Love Victorian spokesman Anthony Wallace said he supported the bill and it was important to see support for marriage equality at a state level.
The Victorian Labor Party endorsed same-sex marriage at last year’s state conference but Shadow Attorney-General Martin Pakula told the Star Observer the Opposition will wait to see the bill
before it makes a decision.
“Many Labor MPs, including the leader of the Opposition and myself, are on the record in support of marriage equality,” he said.
“But we are genuinely concerned about whether any single state marriage bill could ever overcome the massive legal, practical and constitutional problems that will undoubtedly be placed in its path.”
The Star Observer understands all Labor Party members were effectively granted a conscience vote on the issue at the party’s National Conference last year.
A spokeswoman for Victorian Nationals leader Peter Ryan said marriage laws were for the Commonwealth Parliament to decide.
“As this bill seeks to enter into an area which is the responsibility of the Commonwealth Parliament, it is unlikely it would receive support,” she said.
Gay marriage bills have already been introduced into the South Australian and Tasmanian Parliaments although both are still waiting to be fully debated.
The Victorian Premier’s office was contacted but did not reply at the time of publication.
