Ivana Bacik (Independent)

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 15, subsection (1), line 27, after "into" to insert the following:

"(including a relationship entered into prior to the commencement of this section)".

Section 5 relates to recognition of registered foreign relationships. The amendments are all aimed at strengthening this provision. The first amendment is a simple statement that the provisions will cover relationships entered into prior to the commencement of the section. I believe this may already be the case. Given that the Minister is nodding, I presume the amendment is unnecessary. It was proposed for the simple purpose of clarifying that persons who had entered same-sex marriages or partnerships abroad prior to the commencement of the Act would still be entitled to recognition. I am glad this is clear from the wording.

The Labour Party supports amendment No. 8 in the name of Senator Norris which addresses an important point on which I have received submissions. Where a gay couple get married abroad in a jurisdiction in which same-sex marriage is recognised, as it is increasingly in various European jurisdictions, including most recently Portugal, as well as Canada, South Africa and elsewhere, under section 5 a marriage contracted abroad will only be recognised here as a civil partnership. Senator Norris has correctly tabled a simple and straightforward amendment providing that the Minister can declare a class of legal relationship to be entered into by two parties of the same-sex as entitled to be recognised as a civil partnership or marriage. Under section 5, as it stands, the Minister would only be entitled to recognise a Canadian same-sex marriage as a civil partnership here, which clearly does not give the marriage equivalent status to that accorded in Canadian law. From the point of view of the couple concerned, this could be viewed as a downgrading of their status since they have entered a marriage. We propose to give recognition to foreign marriages as marriages rather than just as civil partnerships. It is complicated because there are many different types of civil partnership across different EU countries, some open to same-sex and opposite-sex couples and some only to same-sex couples. It is difficult to say they are all equal. The amendment recognises that same-sex couples may marry abroad.

Amendment No. 9 is to address submissions we received about individual cases of hardship where persons have died before the Act commences. While we very much hope that will not happen, there may be cases where people would wish to enter a civil partnership arrangement but there is likely to be some delay before the Act is commenced. If one partner in a relationship dies before the Act is commenced, we are seeking to ensure that if they entered a foreign civil partnership or marriage abroad, that could be recognised retrospectively here as a valid civil partnership. Perhaps the Minister can clarify when it is likely to be commenced and whether he is willing to accept amendments Nos. 8 and 9. I will not press amendment No. 7 in the light of what he has said.