I rise to speak to the Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws – Superannuation) Bill 2008.

The Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws – Superannuation) Bill 2008, seeks to amend the eliminate discrimination against same-sex couples and the children of same-sex relationships in Commonwealth legislation that provide for reversionary superannuation benefits upon the death of a scheme member, and in related taxation treatment of superannuation benefits.

The Greens support the removal of discrimination in all areas of federal law, and we do not want to see the Same-Sex Relationship (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws-Superannuation) Bill 2008 delayed any further. The public have expressed their desire to have same-sex discrimination removed from law, and we need to see this discrimination removed expediently.

The Greens have a strong track record of defending the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people.

We believe all members of our community are entitled to equal treatment before the law and by the community.

There has been discussion and public debate about the removal of same-sex discrimination for decades.

The first stage of the Rudd Government’s election promise to remove discrimination against same-sex couples in more than 100 pieces of Commonwealth legislation following a 2007 Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission report highlighted that at least 20,000 same-sex couples experience systemic discrimination daily.

The Australian Greens believe that freedom of sexual orientation and gender identity are fundamental human rights.  The need for acceptance and celebration of diversity, including sexual orientation and gender diversity, is essential for genuine social justice and equality.

The Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws – Superannuation) Bill 2008 amends the Commonwealth civilian and military (defined benefit) superannuation schemes, the parliamentary, judicial and statutory legal officer pension schemes, and the pension scheme for the Governor-General.

As I have already outlined, while the Greens welcome the introduction of this long overdue piece of legislation, the issue of providing equality to same-sex couples in superannuation entitlements has been a subject hotly debated in this place for more than a decade, yet only now are we seeing any real movement on this issue.

The Greens do not think people should be discriminated against on the basis of their sexuality, and have some serious concerns which we believe need to be addressed before universal equality is achieved for same-sex couples.

In particular, we, along with other key witnesses, are concerned that while the Government’s proposed piece of legislation will provide for superannuation entitlements for same-sex couples who have Commonwealth super schemes, for those who have commercial super schemes, the discrimination could continue.

Where a superannuation fund provides for recognition of an opposite-sex relationship as a “defacto relationship” we believe this should be non-discriminatory.

While this Bill specifically legislates for judges, veterans and Commonwealth public servants, it allows private superannuation firms to, if they choose to, remove the discrimination, and yet does not actually mandate them to do so.

While the Greens were indeed pleased to see the Government commit to its election promise of removing same-sex discrimination in all areas of law, we are disappointed to see that this legislation does not specifically mandate private superannuation firms to stop discriminating against same-sex couples, considering that around 90% of Australian's have their super tied up in private funds.

The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) (SIS Act) regulates private superannuation schemes. Where private superannuation trust deeds refer directly to the definitions contained in the SIS Act, they will have the immediate effect of including same-sex couples. Yet, as I have outlined, this legislation, in its current form, does not require all trust deeds to incorporate these definitions.

The Greens believe that in order for full equality to be realised for same-sex couples, with respect to this legislation, the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act should mandate that where an individual superannuation fund recognises opposite-sex defacto couples, they must also recognise same-sex defacto couples, and we would encourage the Government to stand by its commitment in removing discrimination against all same-sex couples, not just those who hold their superannuation in public funds.

The Greens also welcome the new definition of a ‘couple relationship’ contained within this Bill.

We particularly support the explicit reference to same-sex couples in the definition of partner and the addition of registration of a relationship as evidence of the existence of a couple relationship.
As I outlined in the additional comments to the Chair's report into this Bill, The Greens particular support point number 17 in  HREOC’s submission that states  “The combined effect of replacing the term ‘marital relationship’ with ‘couple relationship’ and replacing the phrase ‘husband and wife’ with ‘partner’ ensures the equal treatment of same-sex and opposite-sex relationships.”

So, I would like to outline that the Greens do not support the Committee’s recommendation that the definition of ‘couple relationship’ in the Bill be amended to read ‘marital or de facto relationship’.  We believe that if the Government were to proceed with this recommendation, its aim of achieving equality for same-sex couples would not be achieved

Further to this, the Australian Greens also support the recommendation put forward by the Australian Coalition for Equality that the recognition of registered relationships needs to be completely separate from the distinct recognition of defacto relationships.

It is for this reason, that the Greens believe that an “umbrella term” of a
“couple relationship” be adopted, to ensure the courts do not treat married, registered or defacto couples differently, in that each will have unique criteria but be provided with equal “couple relationships” entitlements.

Another issue that was raised during the Committee Inquiry in this Bill, was to ensure that children born into same-sex families have the same rights and entitlements to superannuation benefits as children born into opposite-sex families.  A basic human right that is currently denied.

The Bill expands the changes the definition of 'child of a relationship' by adding the concept of a child who is the 'product of the relationship', which caused significant confusion during the Inquiry.  Many witnesses claimed it was ‘ugly’ language without any legal precedent.

During the Inquiry in Sydney, Professor Jenni Millbank suggested to the Committee that the ‘product of a relationship’ concept was attempting “to do too many things while pretending it is not doing very much and that the ensuing confusion and uncertainty will deprive the people of their rights rather than grant them rights.”

It is for this reason, that the Greens, along with other key witnesses have concerns about the terminology ‘product of a relationship’ used to define a child.

While we support the need for a more concise and legally tested definition of a child, the Greens do not support the Committee’s recommendation that a review be conducted to determine the necessity for the definition to be included within this Bill.

We therefore believe that the terms used to define parents and their children be simplified wherever possible in this and similar legislation to ‘parent’ and ‘child’, and applied consistently to ensure children across Australia are equitably included and the distinction between parents, co-parents and step-parents not be inappropriately or unnecessarily blurred.

The Greens support the removal of discrimination in all areas of federal law, and we do not want to see the Same-Sex Relationship (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws-Superannuation) Bill 2008 delayed any further. The public have expressed their desire to have same-sex discrimination removed from law, and we need to see this discrimination removed expediently.