Search Browse On This Day Timeline Research Remembered About Contact
☶ Go up a page

Parliament: Committee of the Whole House - Homosexual Law Reform Bill (20 November 1985) - part 2

This page features computer generated text of the source audio. It is not a transcript, it has not been checked by humans and will contain many errors. However it is useful for searching on keywords and themes by using Ctrl-F, and you can also play the audio by clicking on a desired timestamp.

[00:00:00] This audio comes from the collections of the lesbian and gay archives of New Zealand. For more information, visit [00:00:10] Mr. Roger Maxwell, let's figure [00:00:13] this out after this divided, well, this bill is granted a great deal of divide and even division in their community, but also, I believe, played an integral role, and that there's a much better understanding about the problems associated with the sexual orientation. And as a result of hearing much of the evidence, I've accepted the some of the arguments put up by experts on this matter. But it's still those individuals and our submissions that have been based on that evidence supporting the bill still have not changed my point of view that this bill should not proceed any further and should not certainly not become law. The were a great deal of submissions. I have 1000 a lot of letters, the majority against the bill, and, unfortunately, many of those submissions that we're putting together. Bill quickly though, is the clause five on the bill and and those clauses which make some reference to the age, were not able to be heard. And we have the closure on the committee. And for that reason, Mr. Speaker, I think I think the name of Well, I think it's it's it's possibly that I haven't ruled on it before, but I think it's important for the member to remember that, reasonably speaking that we're talking about the clauses of the bill here and not about the select committee consideration, which is [00:01:34] Roger Maxwell. [00:01:37] I understood that point of order and before Nike was discussing on a [00:01:43] order by not raise the point of all [00:01:45] you haven't heard of water, you haven't heard it yet. So how can you [00:01:50] give a seat [00:01:56] or he will be subject to discipline by the cheerleaders. Why. [00:02:01] Now if the member has a point of order, not a challenge to the ruling chairs, given that he must come to it to Mr. Peters, the chairman the point of order is simply this that my colleague from Atlantic he isn't discussing in a short title debate. Now I am I'm seeking the point of clarity is he entitled to rely on the speaker's rulings and the standing orders and respect to the end but of a debate in the short time the beta wasn't? And that case, could you please clarify for him the subject matter that he may discourse on? [00:02:31] are very happy to do that? [00:02:36] Mr. Freelander, you would have noticed [00:02:38] when the member from Melbourne tech spoke on the short title, she in fact referred to the weight of evidence that was held by the select committee and a view of the fact that she was able to cover that area without interruption for vo could well have been argued at time she was out of order, I believe the member of the Terran it isn't entitled to briefly respond to that and to counter any arguments. Right. otherwise it wouldn't be an unfair situation development. We need more help. And I take the point of the member for going to implement that to the extent that we have had some discussion, then of course, it's it's within the capacity of the member for Tara nakey. To Rebecca, I'd put out that the member preceding in fact spoken rebuttal of three points and there was only one of them. What I'm simply attempting to draw the members attention to is that we are in fact bound by relevance, it is necessary for him to come reasonably quickly to the consideration that is appropriate on the short side of a something perhaps that addresses the particular question raised by the member for Tarana. He's entitled, certainly to rebut. But what he can't do is talk about the select committee stages and basis speech upon that he is obliged In fact, in the in the speech that he is giving under the short title to address the causes of the bill as the major consideration that he addresses in his speech. Mr. Maxwell [00:04:00] Chairman. Mr. Maxwell, [00:04:02] can you clarify your ruling that I was not relevant? Because I think the main I have to come quickly to the floor, I sought to speak to the point of order because I wanted to point out that I may night in our mission and that I didn't refer to clause five initially, but in fact, I had just when you arrive to the point [00:04:22] where you're thinking about the failure for that clarification. [00:04:26] The fact is, Mr. Mr. Chairman, I find that the given the experience that we've had in as a result of the submissions, and the the fact that we're in these clauses, that the Commission of Inquiry, which is by way of amendment for the house, is not really an adequate solution to the problem. The In fact, I'm well aware that there has been a great deal of evidence both forward particularly relating to the way in the bill, the reference and as I suggested, Mr. Jim, and there's a number of references died in Clause five and an The floors, that those submissions were, in fact, supported by many people who signed the petition of 800,000 persons who was presented to this house, which was questioned by many supporters of the bill. But indeed I understand that I Independent newspaper, as a dress that matter followed up a sample from that those petitions and found that over 90% of them genuine. And for that reason, I believe that the submissions that have been put forward soundly based and particularly those that relate to the clauses, clause five in particular, where there's a great deal of reference to the the the finger with the chairman the movement and report, which has been referred to and indeed when people supporting the various and submissions were made the various causes of the bill, particularly clause three, and once again, the important clause five, the woofing report, which was often used by supporters as a major bank Some acceptance of the bill really put up the argument that the state lawmakers should not be involved in legislative procedures to, to measure or to put parameters around society's morals. But I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that evidence would show and in the, in the circumstances where we have a major health problem, I which has been referred to before that the quote that from the opening report, which has been being used often is not, is taken out of context. And if that committee was sitting in New Zealand today, they would have not have found in the way that I did, Mr. Chairman, the important it's also important in the context of clause five, because the what clause five does in the wire is written, [00:06:53] creates [00:06:54] a building build in the fence. And indeed, if we accept the evidence which was given Through the committee and which I accepted those evidence dating from the Kinsey's work and evidence build on that work shows that there is a great deal of different degrees of sexual orientation. And really what this klore five does, allows the those who would not normally or would not have a strong enough homosexual orientation to carry out homosexual practices [00:07:29] would [00:07:30] be encouraged to do so under the provisions of this bill. And I believe that that is an unfortunate aspect of the bill it in effect legalizes idle intercourse. And what we ought to be doing is discouraging those that may have that sexual orientation orientation and not encouraging them. And that I believe is the major fault with the bill. The The other important area of which I believe is of concern to many people in the country is the bad news. Particularly clause nine which ranges is unlawful to discriminate discriminate against the person on the grounds of a person's sexual orientation? [00:08:09] Once again, [00:08:10] I am speaking to that cause I accept the evidence given on Kinsey's work. But the bike I believe, is one should be one of understanding and not [00:08:20] rejection. [00:08:23] Mr. [00:08:23] Trevor young. [00:08:24] Mr. Chairman, I want to speak briefly to the amendment vary by the member for Nigeria, and after listening certainly contributions the night of the member for now, but I am I feel compelled to rise to support the amendment. I want to say, sir, to the house, that the objection taken by the member to mount of Mount Elbert to the wording in the in the bill here are the amendment proposed that we are that there is a constitutional conflict in referring to the Governor General he is there is not great all the size of the floor. Base drafted by legal representatives and the who are responsible for inviting us in this house. And you will know, sir that no world permission can be granted unless there is a word or an authorized license from the Governor General, of course, him at all, Isaac on the advice on the advice of a minister of the crown, because that there is that that was a very preachy diagonalized. That was what to the house in to oppose the referendum of the least the amendment of the name of the night yet, but in any case, sir, I want to put attorney I want to put a seriously to the house, that this is I an issue, which just the words, defect consideration by people who would be appointed to a commission of inquiry or a royal commission, because of their ability to research and to report on the matter. I remember saying many referenda that have resulted to wall Commission's that the government has set up in the past. I am I you will notice here that the title is it agency arose out of it a commission followed by a referendum. We know sir, that there have been the reversion to liquor hours as I similar result and a while Sir, I am one who have not always been satisfied with some of the findings of welcome meetings in the past because at first letter to your jaw, I have adopted life. Nonetheless, sir, I have been prepared to accept, prepared to accept what has been carried out as I did prior to inquiry. And then as a surgeon, that is my Bible paper and I would appeal to all members like House including the member for mount Elbert, that she would likewise do that, because I believe that that is a compromise with citizens of this country, Sir, have learned. And my experience in next year I'll see the member for mount Elbert shakes her head. And I think Sarah, I was campaigning on the on the referendum following the World Report, the commission's report and 1946. I'm elected [00:11:27] liquor interest, [00:11:29] probably before some members in this house were born. And I remember that one, sir, [00:11:33] very vividly. [00:11:35] And there's the reason for that, sir. The government giving a commission on that occasion was that the issues involved transcended all political party differences. It went right across the community. And I believe, sir, that because we have a free vote in this house tonight is evidence that there is no one political philosophy on this and I believe Sir, if we have a referendum to tomorrow, that this bill would not be a great do it any thought whatsoever? The bill would be thrown out. But, sir, before we have a referendum, I believe it would be advisable to have that world condition, I think said that they get the wolf and the commission that set in Britain some years ago, would probably need updating. Certainly, Sarah, I think the situation is applicable to New Zealand could be very different than what we've seen in Britain, back there somewhere about 20 years ago. And I am appealing to members of the House of this is a logical way out of the of the issue. Rosling is one [00:12:46] which would be accepted [00:12:49] by all citizens in this country. Irrespective of a president convictions on the map. There is no more appropriate why And that has been suggested by the member for Nigeria. And I exhaust the house, sir, to follow this in a sort of pattern that we have adopted in the past on other important social measures, such as in gambling, and in matters of the liquor try. I'm sorry, the, the Honorable member My my, because we're operating on a new speaker standing orders in this respect. Perhaps I should clarify the position the member has taken three calls. He's entitled if he wishes to repeat two speakers goings on the subject is entitled, who to sit down on page 18. In the Committee of the Whole House to three speeches of five and indelible imprint McCargo has had three speeches of five minutes. I don't need the assistance of any member I want to clarify for the member of a cargo to have these features which Eve which he made were consecutive periods of five months. [00:14:07] I was going to speak the amendment and [00:14:09] I will remember the member may not have been listening when I when I made the point earlier that we are speaking to in this particular debate to both the both the short title and the amendment the two when i when i intervened on the on a particular point of relevance earlier on, I made it made it clear to members that that is the scope of the debate. It's the clauses and the amendment and in fact, we've had numerous members speaking to both in their speeches [00:14:42] speak a delay, [00:14:44] want to continue to speak in the short title and refer this time to pause five which is commonly referred to the age benchmark closer and I want to particularly speak in the context of the Age 16 nature that has been heavily promoted by the homosexual community and who have been most vociferous in their attempts and intentions to maintain a hold of age. And so I want just to say that if this house indeed ever passed this bill with age 16, and tech, it would indeed be a very diverse nation. So, we all have received enormous amount of correspondence on this matter. But the most recent correspondence that I have received here comes again from the gay Task Force and addresses this question of 16. This age 16. And sir, their comments. Firstly, are that sexual preferences determine alien childhood and then you can say the 16th is unlikely to have any impact on the development of an individual's sexual orientation. So That's spurious in the extreme, spurious and extreme, the Kinsey studies, which I certainly don't accept, in title shot, at least 50% of the homosexual men attributed their orientation to having basically learned homosexual behavior. Therefore, circumstances may lead to homosexual disposition. But it takes a homosexual learning experience or exposure to convert that type of predisposition so into a homosexual orientation as the phrases today. Now, that's what we've got to understand. And it's quite erroneous for the gay task force to offer that comment. Secondly, they say that in a New Zealand survey, significantly New Zealand survey 70% of gay men felt a physical attraction to someone of the same sex before the age of 14 And the conclusion therefore, is the age of consent of 18 or more words, therefore seem to be unreasonable and workable, I just, I cannot even see exactly the logic of that particular phrase, sir. But let me respond to that. That English psychologist Elizabeth mobily my research in the case that she has published out to support the theory, and certainly, I believe is a very common sense theory theory that a physical attraction to a person of the same sex is a natural progression in sexual maturity towards here to sexuality. So, I believe that's accepted by people everywhere. What we have from the homosexual group is entirely like their whole act and behavior unnatural and totally unreasonable. [00:17:55] I'm the third point sir. [00:17:59] The call In some way that the vast majority of homosexual dead also attracted to other adults. Justice here to sexuals the picture of gays is predatory child molesting monsters, the myth whipped up by extremist anti gay lobbies. So I want to respond first of all to his Christian album was made by these people in terms of adult. But I use this term and deed it seems to be a very adequate escape term. But sir adult in this country has many connotations. In fact, in terms of drinking laws, an adult is not considered to be an adult as such until he's age 20. And, indeed, I just had the writer that the constant abuse of abuse of this law has not been seen as sufficient to change that. [00:18:49] Now, sir, [00:18:51] the second part of that contention, that therefore as that also picture of gaze of predatory charmless, the monsters is an extremist Sir, I want to quote here, the testimony of a man who is an ex gay activist, no Muslim. And he has said in the last seven days, that that is not true, because as an individual who has been an activist who has been a leader in the homosexual community, he sir has said that indeed there is a bias to younger people. And Sir, there is testimonies, not only by that man, but in fact, sir, that could be offered to the house. Time again, that indeed ages below the 16th as sought by homosexual community, people. [00:19:45] Mr. Peter, [00:19:48] the members of America, [00:19:50] the Honorable 5010 Academy, Solomon, [00:19:55] Kim, and I want to speak to the amendment on this occasion. And make the observation that of course, it is based on a premise [00:20:08] fill out the path [00:20:11] and it has its validity in that assumption. accepting that assumption, then I speak to the amendment suggested that there be a royal commission. And I want to suggest that it would be salutary for one of the terms of reference of that Royal Commission to study the HOMO sexual, socio political ideology and movement internationally to see if there is anything that New Zealand can learn, and I have no doubt that they would be from such a study and from such research Mr. Chairman, I want to paraphrase some Tatiana's famous quotation, those who cannot remember are condemned to repeat is not precise. I do not have it exactly here, but that is a reasonable paraphrase of it. For just as we now following something like five years behind the movement progress in America, I believe we have lessons to learn, and must endeavor to learn for the the benefit of future generations and particularly for the children of this generation. On the ninth of October, I referred to this importance, and I claim it would be one of the most important aspects of that royal commission of inquiry to consider progress and experience In other nation, which have had a similar early history to that which we are in right now in this country. [00:22:12] I made the observation and I repeated that New Zealand is following the American sequence [00:22:19] of events in even though we are fully aware of the tragic consequences of those events, we are still slavishly following you know, the amazing thing is that less than a fortnight ago in New York, in a drive to slow the spread of the fatal disease aids, the New York City lawyers sought in one court approval to close a well known gay bar. But even as authorities. The closed sign on the door of the mineshaft tevan local homosexual said it was an empty gesture. JOHN Vincent a 38 year old guy caterer said of the mayor Edward Cox actions, it is a bad joke because dozens of private sex clubs will open within a month and the police will never find them. The move against homosexual gay bars and bath houses where customers engage in sex is a rearguard action by the city authorities to contain the spread of AIDS by limiting sexual promiscuity among gay men less than a fortnight ago that was done in America and we are following a very similar sociological phase is America. Why therefore? Are we not learning from it? And if I would make an analogy on Santayana. We're New Zealand ignores the American experience. With respect to the homosexual movement, development and the gay liberation movement in particular in New Zealand, we are condemned to end up with a similar epidemic. Now, having said that, I want to risk in fact to the meteoric rise of the movement in America and look at the initial impetus, an important part of an initial impetus because it has frightening possibilities for this country. And I reserved to the publication of Donald with the core is the homosexual in America, which included a call for activities that would eventually result in the development of the homosexual movement. So we know there is there are frightening conquista Tmm there are consequences. Sullivan, thank you about the same time through the effort. A homosexual Marxist named Henry May, the magazine society was founded, hey, propose the code of organization that was similar to what he had found in the American Communist Party. And among European Freemasons, the more radical elements within the movement began to come to the fore. And that was the first phase from which progress develop the gay liberation movement, and we have seen the same progressive movement here. I call on the lessons of history for us to try at this stage to consider the young of this generation and consider, therefore, very seriously, whether or not this bill should be passed. Mr. Chairman, I know come to close taping of this bill specifically and the amendment that was passed. In the select committee, the only amendment This bill redefines adult to 16 in approving consensual, homosexual activity. This bill legitimate, legitimate, what has been known as sodomy, and may still be known as sodomy, although the act euphemistically changes the term to anal intercourse if that is a euphemism, but in the alteration in the amendment made in the select committee to clause seven, it makes it a permissible and acceptable defense, where a boy of 12 has been sodomized by an older boy to claim that the 12 year old was thought to be 16. Now, I want to take up the point where I ended when I last spoke. That in countries overseas where the young have been sought and enticed a particularly hard represent a group has been the indigenous minorities and I come back to New Zealand and that comes right back to Polynesians in this country. [00:27:11] The most highly desirable group. For those who have these messages and effluent travel agents built on to build their businesses on the homosexual membership, I referred to one agency alone in America with 20,000 members who will come to New Zealand. If this bill is introduced, [00:27:33] who am I particularly, [00:27:35] particularly look for among the younger people. I claim, Mr. Chairman, it will be the Polynesian [00:27:41] boys. [00:27:42] I claim that and that is why I take a very strong stand in opposing every part of the bill, for I stand as an advocate and a defense on behalf of those young Polynesian boys. It is none We're research if members of this house will consider what is happening in America who have provided the young prostitute for the gay movement which ethnic groups there are two that have now become very popular. The young black group and the young brown groups Hispanic or Mexican. And I am referring to research I also carried out on my own behalf and look, how can I not but work to see this bill. [00:28:38] File when I consider who would be most at risk. [00:28:45] And then what follows with AIDS as we have it, we know it, why are we not talking about it? It is a scourge in America that solid in the face of the movement I would like the Royal Commission to look at it has reached a high point Why do we ignore those figures? For it is coming it is beginning here for we are five years behind, but what will it become and who will be the most condemned group that which is already at the base level of the socio economic scale in this country and I come back to the Maori people in the pollination. So, again, that is why, even today, responsible Maori elders have said to me, especially of an older generation, do not let that will go by, do not let that will pass for it is our young. We see [00:29:36] will be the subject [00:29:38] of those who will be attracted to this country. One sort of me become safe is legitimate by law. And I passed there Mr. JOHN even communicated by the last group is likely today in this building. [00:29:57] Chairman Mr. Peters English short title, so, hi Eric. is a privilege to speak, following the member for Southern Mary. And I support the views. Yes, especially the last night, particularly the view that the young Mary will be the person most abused as the consequence of the pass of this bill. And I say to anybody who has contempt for that philosophy or that idea that there is an inverted racism that the members of the Mary's talking about, and she and I will have no part of the different parties tonight, so not a matter of discussion about shallow thinking, but about the future of a significant part of our race. And for that reason, sir, I support her views and I will oppose this bill and respect to the short title. I believe that at least, the amendment move by the member for navia should see the support of the house tonight. We have told her that the report is the report which should gain the support of the members of this house. having read the welcome, welcome report 1957 it says this. We do not think that it is proper for [00:31:07] the law to concern itself without [00:31:09] what a man doesn't private unless it can be shown to be so contrary to the public good. That the law to intervene in its function as the guardian of the public good. Now sir, that was 1987 there was no aids them but of the welcome them report committee had the benefit of what we have in front of us today. I do not believe they would have said that. I don't believe they would have said that. If I knew that as a October the first at 5am this country in New Zealand we have had 12 confirmed cases of a proper New Zealand which seven have died and you know, and I know that is a five must die if they've got its proper several have been an open brothers ordeal have returned from LSE W. parts of the country now. So that is the fact of the matter, Which nobody can deny. And I say that this is the wrong bill at the wrong time. We are spending as taxpayers millions of dollars, millions of dollars in the health of this country, but specifically over $3 million to erase the problem of a NASA surely we are the taxpayers. Surely we are the people of this country whose funders can bring an answer before we so carelessly move in the face of such public expenditure. It's not good enough to ask them to pay the price in a general taxation, the pay the price of this phenomenon or this good, which besides particularly the Western world, well, that first Sir, we have regarding this house, two measures which may assist that public expenditure Right now tonight, we have asked the taxpayer to pay millions of dollars to help the Western world. So the problem of AIDS not just for ourselves, but for the homosexual community. For people who have contempt for what I say tonight, may well be alive next year because of public expansion. Take your somebody in Tata, whose agreement whose views they may not agree with, has paid up the money for their salvation. Now, sir, surely we in the parliament can do a little bit to assist in this bill is the wrong bill at the wrong time. And those members who do not believe that as got a face this thing, that an 87 we may well face five or six mount airbases in terms of the age skirts in this country and obey on their conscience not mine. It's a wrong bill to at the wrong time. NASA we have a god bless taxpayers. But during the discussion tonight, I know from some members they particularly concerned to attempt to identify the problem of discrimination as it affects homosexuals. What firstly Mary's and with that of Nazi Germany. Now, I believe the memo for Southern Mary as well accounted for any attempt to link those two forms of discrimination that Obama sexuals with mountains. And frankly, I tell you this as a person with a married background, I'm sick and tired of people linking their discriminatory beliefs with the beliefs and the history history of the my people. I'm frankly sick and tired of it, because it's a linkage of convenience. And when they're finished with that, they will move on to something else and leave the marriage where they are still in the same situation. And we will not stand by and see that happen to us. [00:34:58] Now, this is big. This is big [00:35:05] The banks, the speaker, we have been running a system all night and there's probably a few students tonight for a member seeking a second call, seeking a second call and being given it. Now the member for down one of the South Island seats. [00:35:21] Sydney did not [00:35:23] was not quick enough to not taken any, in fact acknowledged that my colleague and friend the member for terror can take a second call. [00:35:29] And we're much obliged to him. [00:35:34] The Honorable Jeffrey Parma the floor in that [00:35:37] theory is [00:35:38] that the member for Tarana didn't call either Chairman. Chairman I Well, I think that it can be really resolved the the situation is one in which throughout the evening members have given way to other members, but of course have another member calls and a member on his feet is seeking a second cool I must give preference to the members Seeking a call I fresh, call it therefore in the hands of the member facism if he wishes to remain seated at this point, and if the member for Tarana wishes to seek the colon continue his speech well in, he may proceed. [00:36:17] Forward, I am aware of the [00:36:20] way in which the debate is being conducted, I am aware that members have taken a second call, and I don't really think that would be appropriate to [00:36:27] to take the call of the member has a second call [00:36:29] to make at this point. Thank you, Mr. [00:36:33] Member for setting them and just go on and say this, that the American Negroes are well aware of what happened respect to the Vietnam debate. Because when in the middle of the civil rights movement for Negros, the Vietnam debate began, the liberals got off the Negroes and moved on to something else and the Negroes remained where they were. And I'm not going to and I don't believe the members of the memory or the member [00:37:00] chin. I found him on a trivet Maillard? Chairman. This is this member second cool he is yet [00:37:07] to get to a close [00:37:09] but close analysis analysis of [00:37:12] the boat as you required earlier. [00:37:17] The member was, as I understood giving support to the previous speaker who in raising the question of clause five of the penalties attached the two and the effect on pollination, you gave the opportunity for me to to endorse your views, but I think the members had all of [00:37:36] two or three minutes Oh, yeah. [00:37:39] I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I just I just finish it. Finish the point by saying that I think the members had ample opportunity now to give us his views on that particular topic. And I'd like him to can do other clauses in the bill, which of course is the proper consideration at this at this stage of discussion on the short title. That's [00:37:58] certainly true. And I would refer [00:37:59] the Member [00:38:00] for Hamilton west to pay 36 speakers rulings and he will find privately we don't order now we don't discuss merrily unless the member signifies a further point, I think we should go on from from the point from the point where I rolled and the man that picked up a speech Miss Paris. It is a it's a very appreciative of the path to soon as a this is a short title speech. I'm talking about those who would say that we must pass this bill that we must support for us too. Because to not do that would be like Nazi Germany. Now that's the argument of the metaphor went to the central and she has conveyed that argument countless times in the south tonight and around the country of recent months. And historically, it's not true. It's not true. And I can recite, recite to her many historical examples from historians on eminent reputation, not just in this country, but throughout the West and will who refused that it does not know that the brown shirts was started by Ron and his mom was a leading homosexual in Germany and that he had 4 million brown shirts, which made it possible for Hitler to get going in his political career. [00:39:25] Does he not know that? Does he not know that the leading officers in the brown shirts were themselves homosexual? [00:39:34] Does he not know that? She not know that the brown shirts create a deck out where many of them in time because they will have lost their lives. But they created the monster [00:39:47] which the beldam [00:39:49] does she not know that? [00:39:51] Well, I can recite to her historical precedent argument, which refutes categorically, the kind of argument she has been vetted around this And that is why Part two is a mockery is an absolute mockery. And if you're going to come out of the closet, bring out the truth out of the closet. Bring the whole truth out of the closet, something denied from this country thus far. And does she not know what happened? 934 and from the side with the brown shirts that he would demand I an official place in the gym anomic and consequently, the brown shirts, the leading officers of the brown shirts last in [00:40:32] last night did they lost their lives? They lost know that the tea? That's the great argument. [00:40:39] That's the great myth and why not? [00:40:45] I think we now will away from [00:40:50] discussion appropriate to the short title and in the course of eating I've tried to draw members attention to what is relevant at this particular stage with dealing with the technical details. I have a number of closes at a time in order to tie up our consideration of them at one on the same time. And the the material that is appropriate at this stage is is is is the details of the drafting of particular clauses. Now, that's that's the point that that has the aura aura. That's the point that has been made several times in the course of the discussion on the short title. And I'm afraid that the man before Tara, is well away from that and is indulging in which was really second reading material. So I'd asked him in the time that he has two minutes to come back to a discussion of the technical and drafting details of the of the various clauses of the bill and the way that they interrelate and of course, the way that the amendments which were also discussing impinges upon them. [00:41:54] I must have been, Mr. Jim, [00:41:57] the member the member of a crisis [00:41:59] Northwest, and [00:42:00] streaming on the fence and others such [00:42:04] as user from the back of the house nice Yes, you invite him to apologize and withdraw the MC my brother well say hello to my conservative suggestion from the member of the newcomer. I think the member filled in for his for his suggestion, I'm not going to follow it because I think that at the stage where I I interrupted the member who was on his feet, it was because I was concerned about general disorder in the house, I noticed that there was some some kind of a gesture going on the back from the member for Christchurch north, but there were a number of other members who were also joining in and the member for Tarana was was debating with them and that was why that was why I raised to make the make the point that I did, I felt that the behavior of the house was degenerating and the member for Christchurch, nor was one of those certain taking pattern that the sort of which Which I think that the men before Tara will assist by coming back to the bill. I thought about was to win again. Very briefly, sir, I listened to your earlier ruling, not the last in respect to the short title in its relation to the total bill, Sir, my understanding and I would be glad of your confirmation or otherwise have a short title debate, particularly given the fact that we have five minutes or four times five [00:43:29] was [00:43:30] that it could be wide ranging in its nature, because must of necessity deal with the principles of the bill. As I understand it, say what's the name of the Tara was doing was relating the principles of legalized homosexuality to the stormtroopers in the Weimar Republic in Germany, about 40 to 50 years ago. So if we can just kind of sit on the principles of a measure of this time, surely, we mastery. So in that context, that health of the title immunity and the Alec I have the members point is I think the main before. Now I have ruled on the point yes. Now, I don't think is the side because the point has been right, that we should be inside to discuss in this particular state of the discussion on a bill, the principle of general principles as a bill given that it is a wide discussion, and this is an important distinction to be made. If I can refer members to page 41 of speakers rulings it says there, and I think clarifies the issue raised by the member for pepakura. The second reading the Bible is concerned with the principles of the bill, the Committee stage [00:44:41] with the details of the bill now, [00:44:43] the main man is right at the point, how does that relate [00:44:46] to the fact that the short title debate is I wide? [00:44:50] Tara was not addressing any clause of the bill that was a difficulty that I had with it. Everybody is what probably is ranging across closes then he is relevant [00:44:59] cannot finally [00:45:00] There are members are not prepared to be relevant, [00:45:03] then I must consider that they [00:45:06] are being tedious and repetitious. I have no other choice. I happen to be [00:45:10] Mr. Peter. Well, of course either I Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chairman, I was speaking to the men, very simple. [00:45:18] Third bus then go to the biggest room. [00:45:20] And it doesn't relate to what you just ruled on. I will speak to the amendment. I'm telling you, sir, and the house. I'm telling us what's appropriate that we should have a royal commission, as moved for the [00:45:31] nnamani. Want us to speak on that better? [00:45:34] I believe I am. And I'm saying so the country is entitled to know the truth and to have exposed the species arguments posed by the metaphor one considerable, and what do because the truth historically, that she saw to the skies around the country, is not what what situation is, simply sir, [00:45:53] Hitler, [00:45:55] the foundations in in large part [00:45:57] to that [00:45:58] my Michael ratio To I homosexual older. That's the truth of the matter. Listen, I got the books this year here. Nobody disputes his authenticity. So I've got a second book here, the Nazi extermination of homosexuals by Frank Richter. Nobody disputed disputes, whether he's the leading authority [00:46:16] by john talan. [00:46:17] Nobody refute that. And she should read it. Before she tries to put that sort of argument around the country. The fact of the matter is that the so called linkage with the Jewish extermination [00:46:29] is not true. [00:46:30] This is not true. And it won't Wash, wash and as spacious and as horrible as Hitler was it there's no way that they're going to pound and advance their argument by saying that they also suffered from that monster because in large part, [00:46:47] they created Dr. Khan [00:46:48] to move into the report progress and lastly Pacific in the [00:46:57] a great 2000 tables. I I was with the company. [00:47:15] Now I will hear [00:47:16] one one member on a [00:47:20] that member will be [00:47:22] available, I believe, in view of the new arrangements [00:47:26] for Wednesday for standing orders. The house before it is asked to vote on this matter should know the implications for the balance of the evening. I believe [00:47:42] entitled an explanation Well, the main [00:47:44] the main, the main that puts me into divinity because they the notion that that is proposed must be put [00:47:50] to the house of that debate now I'm not I [00:47:52] don't want occasion by buyers were great agreement or concession on the part of the of the government to allowing some form of explanation but I see nobody, nobody on the government side is willing to do that. The question therefore is that I do report progress. Well now the now we've had this difficulty before too and I hope that we're not going to in fact extend the point and inside doing enter upon the Vice [00:48:21] Chairman, I just I just wish you to address the fact that I haven't been in the house school evening. Is this the first time that most has been? [00:48:29] The members member is quite [00:48:31] quite a quite [00:48:34] at variance with the fact the notion is that I do report progress, this is not a closure motion. The question is that I do report progress and the safely that is in favor say aye those the country opinion will say no, the eyes have no division called for ring the bells. The eyes will go to the right the night as well got a delay [00:49:04] Jealous for the eyes. Dr. Cullen and Trevor Maillard tell us tonight is Mr. McKinnon and Roger mcli. But again the eyes of 43 the nose or 33. I will report progress [00:49:16] unlock the doors unlock the door. [00:49:23] The house is resumed [00:49:26] on the homosexual Laura phone bill has direct me to report private [00:49:30] and it's also directed me to leave to sit again. [00:49:33] The chairman of committees report that the committee on the homosexual Law Reform Bill has directed him to report progress and has also directs him to move forward. He says again, the question is that the report the agree to those who left opinion will say I the contrary opinion will say no. [00:49:55] eyes have the speaker [00:49:59] this bill is down for further consideration and comedy. Next thing they are Mr. Speaker, [00:50:05] the Honorable [00:50:06] Jeffrey Brown.

This page features computer generated text of the source audio. It is not a transcript, it has not been checked by humans and will contain many errors. However it is useful for searching on keywords and themes.