Marriage Act amendments exposure draft
These are the key points on the draft amendment released by George Brandis yesterday (10 October 2016):
1. The definition of marriage would change: The definition of marriage in s5 of the Marriage Act would be changed to replace “a man and a woman” with “two people”.
2. The conditions for a valid marriage would stay the same: It will continue to be the case that a marriage would be void if, for example, the parties are in a ‘prohibited relationship’, consent was not real, or one or both parties are not of marriageable age.
3. Foreign same-sex marriages would be recognised in Australia: All valid marriage solemnised under the law of a foreign country, including same-sex marriages, would be recognised in Australia if they are consistent with Australian law. A foreign marriage would not be valid in Australia if the marriage would be unlawful in Australia, for example, if the parties are siblings, in a parent-child relationship, or are polygamous.
4. Existing protections for ministers of religion would be retained and strengthened: ministers of religion would be able to refuse to solemnise a marriage on the grounds that the marriage is not the union of a man and a woman, if that refusal conforms to the doctrines, tenets or beliefs of the minister’s religion, or is necessary to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of the religion, or if (irrespective of the teachings of his or her church) the minister has a conscientious objection to same-sex marriage.
5. Marriage celebrants (including those who are not ministers of religion) would be able to refuse to marry a same-sex couple: In addition to the existing law whereby marriage celebrants are under no obligation to solemnise marriage, the Marriage Act would be amended to allow marriage celebrants who are not ministers of religion to refuse, on the basis of conscientious or religious beliefs, to solemnise a marriage on the grounds that the marriage is not the union of a man or a woman. Religious bodies and religious organisations would also be able to refuse to provide facilities, goods or services for the purpose of solemnisation of a same-sex marriage, or for purposes reasonably incidental thereto, if the refusal conforms to the doctrines, tenets or beliefs of the religion, or is necessary to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents to that religion.
In the event that the parliament passes the plebiscite bill, the government proposes the establishment of a joint select committee to review and report on the exposure draft. The composition of the committee would be as agreed by the government, the opposition, and crossbench parties.
