Parliament: Committee of the Whole House - Homosexual Law Reform Bill (16 April 1986)

This page features computer generated text of the source audio - it is not a transcript. The Artificial Intelligence Text is provided to help users when searching for keywords or phrases. The text has not been manually checked for accuracy against the original audio and will contain many errors. If you would like to help create a transcript, please volunteer to listen to the audio and correct the AI Text - get in contact for more details.

[00:00:00] This audio comes from the collections of the lesbian and gay archives of New Zealand. For more information visit leggins.org.nz. it. [00:00:09] It shall be announced before the amendment has moved. Now. Right is that, Mr. Chairman, because of message received or information received by the committee earlier today from the Human Rights Commission, [00:00:24] and [00:00:26] that does tie on page two [00:00:30] as follows a part two of the bill is passed by Parliament Sheeran and that means initially in the committee to a democratic majority, yes, yes, it is. It is a standing order and 392 and it involves, it involves the Governor General. Now, Mr. Chairman, if you would be good enough to have a look at the standing orders, I believe you are Human Rights Commission made a face a tattoo of the bill is passed by Parliament pursuant to a democratic majority people actively challenge the new law then they could indeed be an increased workload with increased cost basis. Quite simply, Mr. Jim, understanding all the 392 it is not competent for a private member to move or have passed a measure, which would increase the public appropriation or [00:01:20] the cost on the public [00:01:22] and my authority for bad speakers ruling 1381 which doesn't only just say that, it says if there's any doubt you can keep going. And I repeated a private member's bill clauses which may involve an extra charge on the people in the way of rights payable into the public account requires the recommendation of the crowd. Now that's where speakers standing order 392 comes in. And if you haven't got it, it is out of order. [00:01:51] It is therefore out of order. [00:01:53] Speakers ruling 1381 1959 volume 321 page 18 Speaker status. Now, Mr. Chairman, you can't accept [00:02:03] that closure. Because [00:02:06] that bill, the whole by committee is out of order. [00:02:11] Simple as that. [00:02:13] I think I, you want to bring [00:02:16] on this better. And I think the member has previously raised the wrong folder. [00:02:23] I wouldn't [00:02:24] if, if the member wishes made a rule, I'm happy to do so. [00:02:29] But the member has raised the point previously, and it would be out of order for me, I think, to run away which was any in any form inconsistent with the ruling which has been given by speaker war in this manner. So we are waiting, sweating and rolling falling on the floor. Mr. Lee. [00:02:49] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I [00:02:53] want to welcome the Prime Minister back after total absence in this debate, sir, no challenge him tonight. [00:03:02] To tell us health, where he stands on the fill, [00:03:06] if he [00:03:08] gave why he wants me to answer answer a simple question that he wants to genuinely heal here, right? [00:03:13] You can take your full, [00:03:16] complete I am fully still [00:03:17] I have stayed tight for a year but [00:03:23] you know what the rules are? Really just so basic. It is Tommy did stand up and speak out and tell 837,000 people who rejected this bill why he can support why he can support this obnoxious, reprehensible bill what I give us a week in advance as prime minister for this country. [00:03:44] I'm addressing Part Two and saying that that part of the bill that part of the bill sim is not only totally reprehensible, it will serve do great damage to this country and that Section of the building cannot be justified it cannot be tolerated. It cannot be passed tonight. [00:04:07] So the [00:04:09] members of house should know that the [00:04:12] second part of this bill pulls down in particular has been drafted by boys from the International homosexual community. And that's why this particular section is confusing, complex, and since designed to be that way, and that's why the implications of this section is not understood. And it's clear it's not fully understood, but the results would be double as high as this country considered and their outward. [00:04:41] Let me just explain further, that in the [00:04:45] terminology of sexual orientation, we have a replacement phrase, one that has followed the word a fictional preference. A fictional preference was first used in this particular human rights section around the world. But in fact, the notes implies a choice in behavior. So that's why it's been changed to sexual orientation because that implies that which might have been from birth, all that which a person has been born with. And so you have this phrase LG sexual orientation. But sir, it is completely confusing, but it's very clear in the sense of the damage it would do. If that section goes through in the present construction, in its present construction, [00:05:34] it would allow such things to happen. paedophilia because of sexual orientation. [00:05:42] You haven't read the [00:05:45] sexual [00:05:45] room right, a point of order. The Honorable [00:05:48] Mr. Willington it is quite improper for the member in charge of the bill. Whether he or she be a private member, or a minister [00:05:58] to use the microphone In front of him to interject [00:06:03] constantly. Mr. It is it is Kevin indeed understanding orders. Now the the member in charge of the bill, the name of Wellington Central, called out I think thrice which has another ring thrice Rammus thrive, and then say tell the truth. Now, Mr. Chairman, I suggest that she remember for weddings and central and charge of the homosexual reform bill should be restrained from the privileged position she occupies. I think that generally the partners will know that interjection should be rare and reasonable. I think that I'm probably more with anybody else's in the house but members to my right in charge of bills, use the proximity of the microphone to the middle might be reassured to know that I have a button here which meets that microphone, and I use it quite frequently have done this at UCLA. Thank you. When I repeated sexual orientation not only covers here to sexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, but it didn't fact covers in its totality, any other preference leaning or persuasion. And that, indeed could cover paedophilia. It could and does allow the Christian of sodomy bracket insist to happen on the basis that that would in fact, be local. Another context this bill. point of [00:07:34] order, Mr. Chairman, a point of order, Mr. Lee, I call [00:07:37] you to rule what I believe is disorderly language language in this tremor which will lead to disorderly behavior by the member for him. [00:07:47] I think I think it would be helpful as objection has been taken for, for whatever reason the member feels that he's being interviewed I [00:07:54] think will be helpful there for the [00:07:59] chairman list. concern. [00:08:02] I think the baby should be given the opportunity. [00:08:08] Mr. Lee, Chairman the concern is adequately expressed by the nine amendments, which are being for the health which we should surely voted upon, that has been somewhat safe to exclude the principal areas of concern the answers is education, the church life, youth activities, etc. Now, sir, I indicate however the the point I'm making in this particular speech as the complexity because in those amendments, the word sexual orientation does allow sir for discrimination against not only homosexuality, bisexuality, but also heterosexuality. So, Sir, I am tabling amendments, which I would offer to those movers are the members currently before the house Which I would ask them to address my amendments, and they effectively change the word sexual orientation in those respective nine amendments to allow, which I believe is the intention of the movers [00:09:17] that they [00:09:19] that the discrimination be set against homosexuals, or bisexuals and it is not the intention of the movement the movers I believe those are members to and face loudest relation to sexuality. So a man while cheering [00:09:38] speech with just heard, and the claims that have just been made by the men before how deep are a complete perversion and I think a disgusting conversion not only on the intent [00:09:50] of the [00:09:54] stated in the bill and the main before herick he knows that and night after night in this house. For the last year he has come in every Wednesday night he enters his friends. And they have yours that sort of emotional diatribe, that sort of emotional, frightened members into voting against the bill. Tonight, they have raised the issue on Wednesday. So and I haven't bothered to look at the truth to look at the what the bill really does. That I think is plain disgusting. They're the ones who revolt and rolling the word sodomy. And I know onto course on Phillips night after night squat terminology that these members who are opposing the bill are so fond of saying, and I think Mr. Chairman, that says more about [00:10:51] about what this bill actually will do, and I were [00:10:58] just discussing the Phil and [00:11:03] disgusting puppet version of the right out of this happened into the ghetto where it belongs and tried. [00:11:10] before them. [00:11:13] The Honorable Mr. Winning just came in about a week ago. [00:11:15] The member in charge of the bill he was Justin Sit down. [00:11:21] That of course was the member for Wellington central say that voluntary organizations were exempt from the provisions of part two of the major before I continue with the the member in charge of the bill, I mean, the general confirm or otherwise, what she said a week ago. [00:11:41] Yes, precisely with it. valancy cisely. [00:11:46] Yeah, if I might take and She then went on to talk about some version and and looking at the truth and so on. But I might, Mr. Chairman, pick up what she has just say. She talked about the voluntary workers and voluntary organizations. Is that correct? Does the member agree or disagree? I mean, mostly house and it is well, she might. she of course said a week ago 168 hours 24 multiplied by seven to be precise that voluntary organizations were exempt from path to the path to provisions of this bill. Now she shakes her head. Now she likes a voluntary organizations in around [00:12:31] she scratches the head [00:12:33] was an extraordinary site. And she has not shaken I hate in the space of less than 60 seconds. He has shaking her head and she has scrapes that and now she's trying to dig through the microphone. Even [00:12:50] the pauses are relatively narrow and I asked you [00:12:54] to ask the member to come back to debating them [00:12:57] and not the position of the chicken [00:13:00] In the cheer [00:13:01] here on got no i think that the member on his feet was in the process of seeking answers. I think that's [00:13:11] well, well indeed [00:13:12] I am going to be doing at this stage of the build I think that I must repeat what I've said previously in the debates it's advisable when tempers are high for members not to beat to peers. The Honorable [00:13:30] don't kick me [00:13:33] out of another matter I should mean to your attention brought been brought to your attention earlier, but I have listened to the broadcast of this debate on the number of times outside of the house, and the member in charge of the bill is frequently interjecting yourself. You know, I make the point that if you be asked questions by a member of the health and she has the opportunity to get through her faith and take the call [00:14:01] When I didn't reply to Come on, tell us why I'm in a no win situation. And I [00:14:10] was speaking to lead [00:14:12] up to a point I accept what the member Willington center was just said. She is quite right. I have complained not often, but as I thought appropriate, of interjections into the microphone. Now leave it there because you have room. Now I come to the point A week ago, she playing from the safe, she's going. I think perhaps I mean, she's seeking advice. [00:14:42] She's on an eighth. [00:14:47] She claimed that voluntary organizations were exempt from part two of this bill. Now I'm prepared to give way if she would get up and use the mic and say one of two things, neither all ah voluntary organizations exempt from the provision of an IC provision singular of Part two comma or not. Now with now with the main the full Wellington central indicate whether they are or not. [00:15:25] What do you want to speak? Yes. [00:15:28] This Chairman since the name of a pepakura is finding this concept a little difficult to grasp, even though the bills before before the house for a year, I should explain to him very patiently again what the bill says. It says in terms of work that an employee applies to people and paid employment, and that means people in a voluntary capacity such as scoutmasters, which was the issue that are rose last week, not in fact covered by the bill, they are exempt. Yes. Well, thank you, [00:15:57] the honest when I turn my understanding a week [00:16:03] I'm sorry, the member in charge of the bill this Christian and inside doing give her a little bit of background, she is talking about voluntary organizations and she assigned to the volunteers are exempt. That's fine, except for a New Zealand many very fine volunteer in inverted commas organizations have paid administrators [00:16:29] at the very top. Now, let [00:16:30] me let me give an example. Maybe give me another example. Let me give an example. The New Zealand Red Cross Society has paid a secretary general and he is subject to the member for Wellington Central's challenge. If this measure is math, that means that he shall remain subject to police investigation as to whether he is a fit and appropriate person. That is correct. And all volunteers are exempt. [00:17:05] What about the pattern the Secretary General of the New Zealand Red Cross Society. other persons in the pipe employed? Mr. Chairman, I take exception to what the member willing from Central is doing. She has said that volunteers are exempt is not as simple as that. There are people in New Zealand volunteer organizations in inverted commas volunteer who are in fact, I've mentioned one, the New Zealand Red Cross Society and I shall tell Michael, tell me I'm in charge of this bill, it would be impossible. It would be impossible for such a person to secure employment, so as to organize assist, encourage the volunteers it would be impossible unless those persons in paid employment in a voluntary organization where cleared by the police. Now I know Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, [00:18:06] brand while I'm not [00:18:08] quite sure with a name before pepakura dreams up these amazing ideas, but there is nothing in this bill said that anyone should be subject to police investigation because they want to get a job. I'm not I can't actually follow his line of reasoning if it can be graced with the name of reasoning, which I don't think it can. The fact is that the administrator, the paid person, running the Red Cross, would in fact be the Red Cross would be subject to this bill in terms of its paid employees. And so it should be and I for one can't imagine how that would concern the Red Cross in any way because I know that despite the fact that the meaningful pakery used to work for them, they're actually on the whole a fairly decent and broad minded outfit, and I hardly entirely personally support them. I always give their appeal and I support them in every way i can and Mr. Chairman, they will be subject in terms of the employees. But as I have stated to the house on many, many occasions, where the member for petrichor obviously has been not listening there any volunteers in any group whatsoever, and I must admit the Red Cross is the first one that's been raised. Here. Normally, the scouts would in fact not be covered by this. And that because that has nothing to do with their livelihood. [00:19:26] The novel was willing to say, Mr. Chairman, Mr. great difficulty Parliament gets it sylvans. [00:19:33] Let me take the Red Cross Society and I chose it advisedly for two reasons. In the early 1970s, I was a paid employee of the New Zealand Red Cross Society in charge of organizing the voluntary activities of thousands of New Zealanders. [00:19:51] Now it's the member in charge of the bill gossiping with the clack of the house [00:19:56] hiding behind the microphone or is in fact [00:19:58] a tape recorder. [00:20:01] Mr. Chairman, I asked you to indicate which [00:20:03] one of the to the [00:20:07] member in charge of the bill was simply having a few words of a technical nature with the class. [00:20:12] Okay. Well, like [00:20:14] I say what you say and, Mr. Chairman, as [00:20:20] is the name of Hamilton when I political level for paper, I saw political last chance a select committee on this major city like a Chrome, making sure the mayor of Wellington central staff to get away. But he hasn't talked to the Prime Minister. He hasn't spoken on in the committee stages. He hasn't spoken to the deputy prime minister who hasn't spoken on the commission stages on the money implications of the spills and it's another matter. You say, Mr. Chairman, I come back to where we were a minute ago. The member for Wellington central can have it both ways in this manner, the page feminine head, if you like of the New Zealand Red Cross Society, who is by designating the Secretary General is subject is subject to the old law. But the President, the elected head of the society, he was a volunteer is not. Now what sort of division and confusion what sort of division and confusion the president of the New Zealand Red Cross Society in my time was in the first instance. I notable public accountants in the end and the second instance, I notable surgeon, [00:21:39] indeed is at this moment chairman of the Wellington College Board of Governors. [00:21:45] Now, how [00:21:46] how do we get on if the president the elected he is subject to a different law, compared with or in relation to the penalty? See doesn't make sense and I feel That is what the member for Wellington central said 168 hours ago, flippin to me but of course, voluntary organizations are exempt life, even in voluntary organizations, where people try to do what is right, she shakes her head. She shakes her head. Of course she is wrong and she is starting to realize life isn't that simple? Life isn't that simple. And I suggest, Mr. Chairman, before I get onto other matters, the main of the member for Wellington Central. So just how the committee with voluntary organizations only as it spices at this moment, gets out of the difficulty of having one law for the president of a voluntary organization and another law for the paid official or permanent hit of the same Mr. Jim Zappa Where's the chairman? I move that the question be now put Christian is that the equation been output size and favors those tables? Mr. Chairman, I'm interested in what you're saying. Are you suggesting now that you're going to put the question is that is that what you're saying? I mean, you haven't answered this man here and I've taken the call. Are you going to put the question because some, and I want to ask some questions about the number of questions, you're going to be putting how you're going to put them? I think that's a very important question that the member has raised. I'll be very happy to do that. at the stage where we're moving through the members, because otherwise I'm sure that members are going to be a bit bit lost who haven't taken taken place attention what's happened. The question that is the question being put those in favor will say I'm Those were the economy. printables say now, what are the eyes have? I fed the point of water. [00:23:57] Ds point of order, Mr. Chairman, [00:24:00] Because then that's when I thought about our members and the hours that we saved it [00:24:06] was one clearing out [00:24:07] tersely, please. [00:24:10] Mr. Chairman, when we discussed at the beginning of the commitment stages, the procedural knowledge the lady members, when, when the committee considered the procedures, the chairs indicated by inference that any member who wished to speak would have four times 552 to five minutes, four times. Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I have not had that. I might have had 1012. Now the journals of the house will testify to that and I think and there are other members I mean, the member for why Carrie Moran and others are anxious to put new material now I submit to you [00:24:54] that the material I put a minute ago on voluntary organizations are they guys so they look Mallory? [00:25:02] Well, I think he will direct the point of order. challenging. I think [00:25:09] the I think you have been, I think you've been very fair. But Mr. Chairman, I also submit that we have fresh material is injected into the debate, as I am David today, you're the judge of it. As I am David, Jason, you shouldn't be a further I can I [00:25:26] want to hear the name [00:25:28] break charge of the bill to the point so I write it I think they don't mean [00:25:32] that I have the members point of view. Clearly in my mind. The the problem that we now have is that the emotion has been sold. The motion has been put in the motion has been passed. Well, I know that well, no, no, the main the main that may not may not matter, in fact, Mike the reputation but I would like to point out to the member for pepakura. That the point of order, he raises is worthy is worthy of a reply. I think I mean, he has he has pointed out to the chair at the time that the question was asked way back at the beginning of the of the debate did say that members were entitled to 445 minute calls. That was of course not taken into account the possibility of a closure, which which we now have a point of order, Mr. Chairman, first Well, I think that members members should be aware that we have now had the closure motion put before us and the closure motion has been passed on hi Natalie. I don't know. I haven't bought a border border. All of the members are in some that are pulled against absolutely and a lot of doubt a lot of depth. Because we're gonna have a bite on this. We're not just going to let it go through Well, that's that's fair. That's fair. If members are not not quite clear, I'll put the question a great again a question Is that the question be now put those in favor say aye. Guys what the country to say no. The eyes have Heaven division code four ring the bells eyes will go to the right nose will go to the left. Tell us for the eyes, Mr. walleston and himself and Mr. Jim Sutton tell us for the nose [00:27:18] delay and [00:27:21] and the subscriber [00:27:23] question is the question be now put the Isaiah 42 the nose 34 the question will be put and lock the doors. At this point it might be helpful if members if they haven't received a copy that's been circulated, avail themselves of a list which has been prepared by the clerk's office and is available at the table which is our come to the members point of order which sets out the the memory of the various amendments that have been proposed and the order in which it is proposed to take them [00:28:08] I'll take the name as part of water in a moment. [00:28:13] Graham Graham, do you want to put yours or not? Are you gonna see [00:28:31] tribal. [00:28:41] I explain further to members now that they have the copy of the sheet that's been supplied by the clerk's office that there are emissions from the sheet, which takes the form of a two page civil amendments, which was circulated earlier this evening by Mr. Lee. Mr. Lee has proposed amendments and amendments to amendments Which he gave notice of earlier in the evening and indicated that he would be moving with the permission or with the agreement of the movers of the amendments to which they apply. [00:29:12] Now we have a point of order from Mr. Willington Chairman. [00:29:16] I said the reading of the channels list about the pleasure, [00:29:22] my tie and quiet because when it hasn't had the opportunity of examining, in which manner the member for Wellington central baited on the pleasure mentioned. I don't think [00:29:38] that that's really a matter of water. [00:29:43] Yes, yes, I'd like black members to come to water now. We have quite a complex series of amendments to deal with. Can Can the members now apply themselves to the amendments before the committee and the first of these is found on separated Order paper 72 it's doctor bills, Bill satins amendment and it is an amendment to clause nine which redefines the term sexual orientation. A name is very divided on there for the water, Dr. Bill Sutton [00:30:17] just came on I do not wish to proceed without a mean. [00:30:25] Can we can we therefore have order? Can we therefore have to leave as the committee for Mr. Bill satin to withdraw the amendment [00:30:33] which isn't as that [00:30:36] does not? [00:30:42] Well, [00:30:46] at this stage I believe the amendment has been moved, and it's up to the main but whether he seeks to move on [00:30:58] live to Canada all that Or can I just Can I just ask members of the House to hear points? [00:31:05] What's the name of a better career resume sequence ever going to order here? Mr. Peters [00:31:10] movies amendment [00:31:12] and we will be happy to do it for him. [00:31:15] And I believe so. That's a [00:31:20] you're getting nervous I'm so we [00:31:24] I moved the amendment saying the name of Dr. Seven. [00:31:32] Speaking to the point of order by [00:31:37] foreshadowed the possible amendment some weeks ago, the men before Tara did not forget other amendment. They have to name the folks by chooses not [00:31:46] having heard the debate to move with amendment, [00:31:48] then no member of the House can force them to do so. [00:31:54] Speaking of the Parramatta Mr. Peters ocean has been the amendment has been foreshadowed. Thereafter any person can move it. And the Blackstone alleged party should know that I liked [00:32:08] I like famous order. I'd like me was indulgence while I console was standing orders, order, can we just have a moment or two to consult on this matter? [00:32:29] I think that the position that we're in [00:32:33] is covered in [00:32:36] standing orders 190 [00:32:41] standing order hundred 90 sub paragraph two, which is the situation that applies when I emotion that the question has now been put has been carried. Now the second sentence in that standing order sub pair to it says any proposed amendment that has been properly notified on the subcommittee order paper or has been handed into the table prior to the time of the closure motion is accepted and which relates to the matter under consideration shall be put forth with so that the member is not in a position to withdraw his amendment. The amendment has to be put. [00:33:28] Can we have Silence please which speaker It is good that the opposition agree that these methods now go for the vote without coming debate or further points of order. [00:33:44] Right That's what I got you properly rise and the Standing Orders run nine eight to [00:33:51] the point that you have just put but 1903 guys on to site and affirmative bait have not been Spend 20 members shall be necessary to carry any motion under the standing order. Now, I'm not going to go into that any further. But the same [00:34:07] for Chairman. [00:34:09] I believe that the fact that the member for Hawke's Bay chooses not to proceed should be voted upon by the committee in accordance with standing order 19832. And that we should proceed in that direction for threat. No. [00:34:28] That's fine. [00:34:29] Thank you. Now, the question then, is that Mr. Bill Sutton's amendment to clause nine, which I've summarized for members, as redefining the term sexual orientation, the question is that that amendment be agreed to those in favor will say Aye. Those who have the counter opinion will say no, the amendment is locked. [00:34:53] Now remember, the main man is lost. [00:34:57] We now come to Bora Bora Bora [00:35:05] maybe it's come to water. We now have a series of amendments proposed by Mr. Lee order. Neighbors wish to know where we are. It would be helpful for them if they came to order. Mr. These amendments have been circulated on a two page, slip of amendments. And the first of these is an amendment to the amendment, which is proposed by Dr. Bill set. Dr. [00:35:40] We've lost that but yeah, we've got an amendment to this one. [00:35:43] Yeah. Can I explain to members what is about to what is about to happen? Dr. Bill septons amendments provided clause nine a for discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation. in respect of domestic employment and religious orders, there is the there is the amendment and the amendment to the amendment which is proposed in Mr. Lee's supplementary order paper is the substitution of the term sexual with the term heterosexual male [00:36:23] has emotion [00:36:23] been actually put has a sudden men are actually being [00:36:28] put this one's been putting last. [00:36:30] It will be important last April so my memory courses are relevant. [00:36:48] Sky actually hit to me, one of which has been lost and the other one that Mr. Lee wishes to hang on to a name. He surrendered that battle without a fight. I can understand [00:36:59] that We're about to die or can I clarify the metaphor the member quarter for the member for hierarchy, the second amendment proposed by Mr. Sutton, to which Mr. Lee has an amendment has yet to be put. [00:37:12] That is the situation and we are now about to move to put Mr. Bill Sutton's. Second. I mean, Mr. Mr. Chairman, I'm sure that I can clear up matters for the house. If I if I simply explain that the amendment which has been lost was an amendment to clause non. There are two further amendments standing in my name, which would would constitute clauses nine I in non be there is a closes, there is a maintenance, Mr. Lee has sought to a mean. [00:37:47] Mr. Lee. Mr. latest proposal then, is the substitution and Mr. Sutton's Amendments of the word heterosexual for the word sexual. The question then is that the amendment to the amendment be agreed to We are now voting on Mr. Lee's amendment to the amendment. The question is that the amendment to the amendment be agreed to those and fables. That is the country opinion will say no. The nose, the eyes haven't the vision for for ring the bill. The eyes of 39 the nose of 40. The amendment to the amendment has not agreed to unlock the door. [00:38:27] The door [00:38:28] members are now and now obliged to vote on the amendment. I remind members that this is on separate reorder five or 72. If you just let me finish there, and it belongs to Dr. Bill setting and allows discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in respect of domestic employment and religious orders. Mr. Banks, I noticed that the last bill was a one minute bill. Only forthcoming bills Going to be one minute bills until we just settle down and ask you to be heard in silence. Mr. Banks. Settle down. Mr. Chairman. So I know at the end that all all the forthcoming bills will be one minute bills. The question is that the amendment be agreed to. Those in favor will say Aye. Those with the country opinion will say no, the nose have eyes have it. division called boring the bills. One minute bill, eyes will go to the right nose will go to the left. been to the Isaiah 52 the nose 26 the amendment has agreed to unlock the door Hello. [00:39:50] We proceed now. [00:39:54] We proceed. We proceed now to the next of the series of amendments to amendments proposed by Mr. Lee. Mr. Lee has a proposal which affects the honorable future Academy Sullivan's amendment. Harriman month in nine I nine BB, but new clauses is to allow discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in respect of positions of authority of a young young persons and in respect of the lating of residential property. Mr lays amendments to those amendments proposed once again the substitution of the term sexual with the term heterosexual. The question now is members members economy but they all want some clarification. Well, what what is the point that perhaps, perhaps it would be helpful for Mr. Lee if if if Mr. himself spoke just briefly to [00:40:56] me was chairman the Human Rights Commission Section 15. There's provision for in fact preference on the basis of sex in certain areas. Now, the confusion if there is any, because [00:41:11] in the context and I think [00:41:13] the wording of this way or this amendment, the change is in line with the the Human Rights Commission next section 50. In the other amendments, it is changed realm, but it is the same purpose for all amendments throughout just said that members know what the pieces of paper as they haven't found all of them. There are two pieces of paper one contains the amendments. The other, the other is a two page piece of paper. That sounds strange, but it contains Mr. Lee's amendments to the amendments regarding on the the the second of these. The question then is that the main the aura equation is that Mr. Lee's amendments to the amendment officer Academy Sullivan be agreed to those in favor will say Aye. Those are the continual say no nose have a [00:42:10] division call for ring the bells. [00:42:16] division has been called for the eyes will go to the right the noise will go to the left. See, the question is that Mr. Lee's amendment to the honorable Tim Academy celebrants amendment be agreed to. The eyes are 34 the nose of 45 the amendment is not a great to unlock the doors. [00:42:40] Let's delay for the water. [00:42:43] Fancy to leave the house to withdraw the subsequent amendments as they affect the further amendments before the house and the interest of [00:42:55] time with me [00:43:03] Well, it will require members leave if the committee or if the committee is in unanimous agreement, then Mr. Lee's request to withdraw his amendments can be agreed to. Is there any the same from this to these proposed course of action? There is now we move on to deal with the honorable ciera catanese Sullivan's a main months on submit your paper six members have asked for a quick summary of these by propose new clauses nine a and by Nivea. And they allow discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and respect of positions of authority of a young persons and respect of the lasing of residential property. The question is that the amendments be agreed to in favor say aye. The contract is signed now. The eyes have it knows have division call for the ringing the bells is the ride notes live one minute bill The question is that the amendment we agreed to the eyes 44 the nose 35 the amendment is a great to unlock the door. Hello. We now come to a consideration of Mr. Flynn's amendment to Mr. Bray Brooks amendment. Mr. Bray Brooks amendment is found on separate separately the order paper one. It is a new clause 10. it proposes for the police Armed Forces traffic officers and prison officers to discriminate on grounds of sexual orientation and respect of employment in these services. We are dealing first of all with Mr. Flynn's Amendment, which provides for discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation only in respect of employment in the armed forces and the police Not in respect of traffic officers and police and prison officers as well. We're putting this Dr. Prince amendments to Mr. Brooks amendment first. We just got a vote of us to bribe on a clarification with my amendment includes also traffic officers and officers employed in penal institutions, prison officers. If I wish to vote for that, are you going to put them separately as you know, one after the other? Or if Mr. Flynn's amendment is one does mine then get to go again? because it puts the traffic officers and the prison offices in with it. [00:45:43] Not quite clear what the members question is but they order order. Can we have order please? Amanda nightmares is seeking clarification of the status of as a member in the event that it is last If members want to vote, that sexual orientation will be grounds for discrimination against the armed forces, police traffic officers, prison officers, how do we get on because if I want to support Mr. iPhones, which is almost a copy of mine, but I also want the prison officers including it as well [00:46:20] need to get mine? [00:46:21] I think that I should, I should make it clear that the proper course of action for the member in the case that he wanted to retain discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in all four services that exam forces, police, prisons and traffic officers, and I in that case, he should make those amendments. And I will take the leave of the house to put my amendment first because it covers all four and if that is defeated, then go to Mr. O Flynn's amendment and I for me move that way and take the pleasure the house [00:46:57] if it is a wish, [00:46:58] if it is wish to continue this That should be the case. We will proceed in that way. We will now proceed then with Mr. Bray Brooks. I mean, the question is that the amendments we agreed to daizen five will sign the contract and he will sign now. The [00:47:20] evasion code for rebels woman a bill eyes will go to the right. Yeah. [00:47:45] They question is that was the Bible from Emma be agreed to the eyes of 42 the nose or 37 the amendment is agreed to unlock the doors are not those that that leaves the situation Mr. Ifans I mean when does not proceed it [00:48:11] isn't consistent. [00:48:14] The question now is with respect to Mr. Bright Brooks the main one, this is one which appears on submit your papers close 11 and it makes it clear that educational institutions can make and enforce rules about sexual conduct. There is the amendment which members are now invited to deal with. The question is that the amendment be a great day. Guys in fable say [00:48:41] I [00:48:43] buys the court opinion will say no. The noes have [00:48:48] Coco ring the bells. [00:48:51] The question is that Mr. Bray Brooks, new clause 11 be agreed to the eyes of 45 the nose or 35 Members therefore agreed to unlock the doors. We now move to Mr. The Honorable Miss Dr. Flynn's proposal for a new clause because the live in a in substance the clause allows discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation by vocational training bodies and respect to the training of servicemen or people seeking to enlist. [00:49:28] question that is that the amendment [00:49:31] question is then demanded be a great to diversify. country now. The eyes have knows him division call for ringing the bell is running a bill is the right nose today. [00:49:43] Tell us for the eyes Mr. Lee and [00:49:47] tell us for the night is Mr. Maillard and Mr. Wallace to [00:49:50] excuse people training for for the armed forces. I'd like you to check those lists, because the prime minister was here and I don't know whether he's been here. divided and maybe through some. Boy. [00:50:13] Thank you. We're just taking the listener [00:50:55] making to the point [00:50:56] of Bora [00:50:58] Bora Bora. court [00:51:00] order [00:51:02] should be hitting the sun's [00:51:06] proximity of the member. And of course, the question, [00:51:11] and I certainly did not hear him [00:51:12] quite on the voice of ours is considerably closer than the member of red roof. [00:51:20] Mr. Speaker, I was sitting and watch the Prime Minister very carefully. [00:51:27] When when the vote on the voice of recall the Prime Minister cold Yes. Hey Vin. Um, [00:51:38] I don't think there's any order. [00:51:42] I don't think there's anything here that I can that I can move on. The divisions been called the the list of here if anyone who wants to examine the list to determine who's voted and [00:51:55] who has [00:51:57] the question then is that Mr. I Flynn's amendment a new club live in a be agreed to the eyes of 40 for the nose or 30 for the amendment is agreed to unlock the doors or not. We can't Mr. I friends for the new amendment. This is a new clause 12 It allows discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation by education institutions conducted by the armed forces in respect of servicemen or people seeking to enlist. The question is that the Amana be a great tool that isn't is a high rise in the country opinion will say no, the eyes have a nice have a division called one takes the question now is that Mr. Flynn's a man been incorporating a new clause 12 A be agreed to the eyes of 44 the nose and 35 the amendment has agreed to unlock the doors Hello. We now come to the We now come to the main question. Which is that part two as amended? [00:53:03] stand pat. [00:53:04] The question is that the motion be agreed to. Those in favor will say Aye guys with the coffee opinion Sinai. They [00:53:16] have division call for rebels eyes will go to the right nose. [00:53:27] Tell us for the eyes and [00:53:31] tell us for the nose [00:53:41] and pass [00:53:43] the eyes 3630 [00:53:45] seconds [00:53:55] the eyes 31 the nose 49 Part One, part two and [00:54:06] I will report privates and ask believe it again. [00:54:24] homosexual law reform bill and Rick report crisis [00:54:27] is also directly division leads to siliceous. [00:54:32] The [00:54:34] chairman has committees has reported that security on the homosexual Law Reform Bill has direct report progress and has also directed him to move to seek leads that again. The time has come when I'm asleep the chair and I will return the chair half stands again until 2pm tomorrow afternoon

This page features computer generated text of the source audio - it is not a transcript. The Artificial Intelligence Text is provided to help users when searching for keywords or phrases. The text has not been manually checked for accuracy against the original audio and will contain many errors.