Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Recruiting experts in
Accountancy & Finance

Same-sex unions to be automatically recognised in ACT

By Charlotte Harper - 15 December 2016 31

Photo: iStock

Same-sex marriages and other same-sex relationships with formal recognition in other jurisdictions will be automatically recognised in the ACT as a Civil Union under new laws introduced by Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay today.

The ACT legislated for marriage equality in 2013, before an intervention from the Federal Government prevented same-sex couples from having their relationship recognised through marriage.

The ACT Government continues to support the recognition of same sex relationships and Mr Ramsay said it would continue to advocate for the Federal Government to act on marriage equality.

The Attorney-General said the Justice and Community Safety Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) would amend the Civil Unions Act 2012 to ensure same-sex relationships recognised in other states, territories and countries have the same status as civil unions entered into in the ACT.

“We are and will clearly remain committed to enhancing equality for all Canberrans, and recognising the strength of love,” Mr Ramsay said.

“This change will mean same-sex couples who were married or entered a civil union outside the ACT will automatically have their relationship recognised under ACT law.

“This way the broadest number of ACT residents who enter into one of the growing number of same-sex civil union and civil partnership schemes available around the world have their relationships recognised in the ACT.”

In order to be recognised under the Civil Unions Act 2012, the relationship must:

· be between two adults;
· have been entered into consensually;
· not be a prohibited relationship as defined by section 7 of the Act;
· have not been entered into by a person already married; and
· have not been entered into by a person already in a relationship recognised under the law of another jurisdiction.

The Bill also amends the Juries Act 1967 to restore the provision allowing airline crew members to apply to be exempt from serving on juries. This was previously available under the Air Navigation Regulations 1947 (Cth), which has been repealed.

“The Government acknowledges the nature of the work performed by airline crews often makes jury service impractical,” Mr Ramsay said.

“As a result, we have updated our legislation to ensure they can continue to apply to be exempted from serving on juries.”

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
31 Responses to
Same-sex unions to be automatically recognised in ACT
Mysteryman 10:26 am 20 Dec 16

I am a Rabbit™ said :

Good. Now all we need to do is get the Federal government to abolish the concept of civil marriage contracts and replace it with civil union contracts. Religious terms like “marriage” do not belong in a modern & secular Australia. It’s people want to play make-believe and pretend that an imaginary figure in the sky endorses their relationship, but that should have no official legal acknowledgment.

“Modern and secular Australia”. I always laugh when I hear that. As if somehow, the last 40 years of human existence is so drastically different that we should ignore everything that preceded them.

The bad news for you is that a majority of Australians still identify as religious, so we’re not as secular as you’re making out. In fact, it sounds like you’re in the minority.

rommeldog56 8:23 pm 19 Dec 16

justin heywood said :

Things must be going pretty well ’round here if this is among the first order of business for our new chief law officer.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to how many couples will actually benefit from this legislation? 10? 20?

Surely there’s more important work to do than to dog whistle the ‘progressives’.

True. However, u are talking about an ACT Labor/Greens Govt that pi#@ed $800K of Ratepayers $ up against the wall when they legislated for legalised same sex marriage, only to have it, as forwarned, overturned by the Feds. So this action is probably small change by comparison.

So, the “progressives” and highly educated voted ACT Labor/Greens back – despite a raft of issues, including that.

With such a mandate. expect more of the same.

dungfungus 1:49 pm 19 Dec 16

justin heywood said :

Things must be going pretty well ’round here if this is among the first order of business for our new chief law officer.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to how many couples will actually benefit from this legislation? 10? 20?

Surely there’s more important work to do than to dog whistle the ‘progressives’.

Few people are complaining- nothing from the Liberal opposition.
Labor appears to be able to make policy on the run with political impunity.

justin heywood 12:25 pm 19 Dec 16

Things must be going pretty well ’round here if this is among the first order of business for our new chief law officer.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to how many couples will actually benefit from this legislation? 10? 20?

Surely there’s more important work to do than to dog whistle the ‘progressives’.

dungfungus 11:07 am 19 Dec 16

HenryBG said :

dungfungus said :

bronal said :

I assume the Commonwealth will have the power to disallow this legislation, which it presumably will do, at least in relation to recognition of same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.

Perhaps Mr Ramsay can underwrite the cost of the defending any action from the Commonwealth then?

No, he won’t.
They need to triple our rates in order to spend our money on time-wasting fruit-loop nonsense like this.

I like gazket’s “pedaling” though, because that’s exactly what it is.

The echo of the 2012 “triple our rates” prediction is getting louder every minute.

dungfungus 11:04 am 19 Dec 16

TuggLife said :

I am assuming this is very similar to the law recently introduced in South Australia, in response to the awful situation when the husband of a British man died while they were on their honeymoon in Australia. It is absolutely the right thing to do, and I applaud Labor for not turning it into an election issue, (after all, it’s no secret ACT Labor are pro-marriage equality)

So, is the surviving husband a widow or a widower?

TuggLife 10:14 am 19 Dec 16

I am assuming this is very similar to the law recently introduced in South Australia, in response to the awful situation when the husband of a British man died while they were on their honeymoon in Australia. It is absolutely the right thing to do, and I applaud Labor for not turning it into an election issue, (after all, it’s no secret ACT Labor are pro-marriage equality)

HenryBG 10:24 am 18 Dec 16

dungfungus said :

bronal said :

I assume the Commonwealth will have the power to disallow this legislation, which it presumably will do, at least in relation to recognition of same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.

Perhaps Mr Ramsay can underwrite the cost of the defending any action from the Commonwealth then?

No, he won’t.
They need to triple our rates in order to spend our money on time-wasting fruit-loop nonsense like this.

I like gazket’s “pedaling” though, because that’s exactly what it is.

I am a Rabbit™ 2:34 am 18 Dec 16

Good. Now all we need to do is get the Federal government to abolish the concept of civil marriage contracts and replace it with civil union contracts. Religious terms like “marriage” do not belong in a modern & secular Australia. It’s people want to play make-believe and pretend that an imaginary figure in the sky endorses their relationship, but that should have no official legal acknowledgment.

dungfungus 8:54 pm 17 Dec 16

bronal said :

I assume the Commonwealth will have the power to disallow this legislation, which it presumably will do, at least in relation to recognition of same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.

Perhaps Mr Ramsay can underwrite the cost of the defending any action from the Commonwealth then?

bronal 1:43 pm 17 Dec 16

I assume the Commonwealth will have the power to disallow this legislation, which it presumably will do, at least in relation to recognition of same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.

planeguy 7:24 pm 16 Dec 16

dungfungus said :

Was this a Labor election policy ?

Don’t recall this being discussed specifically at the election, however it is well and truly in line with what they have been saying for many years, and there attempts to legislate for full blown marriage equality (well as much as they incorrectly thought they could get away with).

This shouldn’t surprise anyone in the electorate.

Acton 5:16 pm 16 Dec 16

Surely our government has more urgent and pressing things to occupy its time and resources. But apparently not.

Look for who gains and who loses from any proposed policy change to understand the real motivations. Those who push for change often use other reasons to justify the change, rather than expose their own selfish drives. Public benefit is usually cited as necessitating changes in laws and regulations by those who stand to gain in some way, rather than being pushed for by the general public.

So who stands to gain the most from legalising, formalising and regulating same-sex relationships into marriages? What shadowy puppeteers lurk behind the constant push for same sex marriages?

With no formal marriage, no formal divorce is required. With formal marriage you need formal divorce avenues. Divorces need lawyers. So the group who stands to most financially benefit from same sex marriage (and probably doing the behind the scenes manipulations to enhance their own pecuniary interests) are divorce lawyers and the legal profession.

Gay divorce – the coming boom for law firms:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/7/3/1398870/-You-knew-this-was-coming-right-The-Country-s-first-gay-Divorce-Firm

dungfungus 4:14 pm 15 Dec 16

Was this a Labor election policy ?

gazket 3:29 pm 15 Dec 16

Mr Ramsay I thought you were elected to work for the people of the ACT and not the people who lives out side it. you’re just like the rest of them pedaling your own personal agenda.

1 2 3

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site