Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

It is important to recognise that the political and public discourse being created as a result of the Bill, in and of itself, is the key threat. It is very unsettling and disheartening at times to hear Ms Nabagesera speak of the Ugandan committee's wish that the Bill would just pass on the grounds that the activists would know how to deal with it and have strategies. At the same time, we hear very clearly that their view is that if the Bill is passed, many people will be killed. While physical attacks are happening and members of the community are beaten badly, people are told repeatedly to wait until the Bill is passed, at which time the problem will really be solved. People are waiting for the Bill. It is not just that the Bill carries the death sentence. It is that it is seen by very many as a licence to openly kill, with impunity, members of the LGBT community.

On Senator Norris's suggestion that there might be engagement with officials from the Roman Catholic Church, the majority church in Uganda, I had it pointed out to me recently that the Catholic Church has come out against the Bill in Uganda. I will give the statement to Senator Norris if he wants to see it. The statement from the Catholic bishops' conference of Uganda starts with the line, "We, the Catholic Bishops of Uganda, appreciate and applaud the Government's effort to protect the traditional family and its values." It states homosexuals are in need of repentance, conversion and rehabilitation. It expresses concern that the Bill does not allow for that to happen. Specifically, according the church, the criminalisation of people who have knowledge of homosexuals creates a difficulty for priests, teachers, etc., who might assist them in repentance and conversion on that basis. Thankfully, the statement points out that the death penalty is a significant issue, and it has particular difficulty with it. However, the statement ends thus: "Additionally, in our view the proposed Bill is not necessary considering that acts of sodomy are already condemned under section 145 of the penal code." It asserts the legislation is unnecessary because there is already a sentence of life imprisonment in place under Ugandan law. In the interest of trying to influence key influencers, that statement is possibly a route of potential influence. I hope church leaders, particularly leaders of the Roman Catholic Church, will be able to influence the kinds of statements being made in Uganda. The Ugandan bishops' statement is not a rejection of the legislation but a statement of support for its intent and design and a reaffirmation of criminalisation. The route I suggest could be useful.