The Rudd Government is being openly contemptuous in its treatment of the citizens of the ACT over the issue of gay marriage. That is the only valid interpretation to be placed on the Government's hint it will overturn a law that has been passed by the Legislative Assembly.
At the heart of the debate over the rights of gay couples is the expectation of Canberra people to be treated the same as people in other parts of the nation. That equality should be accompanied by respect and dignity.
Instead of that, however, it appears Canberra is about to witness a betrayal of the ideals that Mr Rudd campaigned on at the election. It is always disappointing when a politician backtracks on a promise or commitment. The community is inured to that, to some degree at least, but what excuse can there be for an abrogation of the fundamental right to self-determination?
In December 2007 Mr Rudd said it was not Labor policy to interfere with state and territory legislation. ''On these matters, state and territories are answerable to their own jurisdictions,'' he said. ''The ACT Government has indicated it wishes to head in a particular direction and the ACT Government is therefore in a position to be accountable to its citizenry for that.''
Mr Rudd is keen on symbolism, as seen by the apology to the Stolen Generation and next Monday's apology to the children who were sexually, physically and mentally abused while in institutions. Both were long overdue to give some closure to many people and he is to be congratulated for doing so. He answered the call from Australians for action on these two issues which had not been addressed by the Coalition government.
Former prime minister John Howard declared that marriage was to be solemnised only between a man and a woman. Many people would not quibble with this definition. Following this principle, Mr Howard overruled the ACT Government three years ago by striking out the civil union laws which included legally binding ceremonies. The result of his determination to halt gay marriage, however, was to flout the right of Canberra people to self-determination.
Mr Rudd cannot be criticised for holding similar reservations about legalising gay marriage.
He capitalised on what he portrayed as the outmoded thinking of the Coalition government to campaign on a so-called fresh approach to the business of government. He undermined that expectation by forcing the ACT Government to back down last year on gay marriage and instead adopt civil union laws that have a ceremony with no legal status. The ACT Government was prepared to accept this compromise which is in line with the situation adopted by some Labor state governments.
It was no surprise when the Greens decided to call the bluff of the Rudd Government and test the resolve of Jon Stanhope's administration by introducing legislation to give legal status to the ceremony for gay couples. The Labor Party backed the legislation in the Legislative Assembly last week and both the ALP and the Greens believe it is consistent with the Commonwealth's constitutional right to legislate exclusively with respect to marriage.
The immediate reaction from the Rudd Government was a strong indication the laws would be overruled because such provisions ''undermine and mimic'' marriage between a man and woman.
Greens leader Bob Brown, who is openly gay, will move a disallowance motion in the Senate if the Government vetoes the civil union ceremony provisions. This is only partly a gay issue it revolves around whether the people of the ACT are to be treated as second-class citizens.
The MPs and senators elected by the voters of the ACT must stand up for their constituents on this important matter of principle. The three Labor representatives Bob McMullan, Annette Ellis and Kate Lundy should vote for Canberra rather than be railroaded by the Prime Minister into betraying their constituents. They will be respected for a principled stand if they decide to break caucus solidarity.
The Liberal Party senator for the ACT, Gary Humphries, has vowed to cross the floor against his party on this issue. He should not have to. It is not too late for Mr Rudd to stand by his convictions.
The people of the ACT are waiting to hear if he meant what he said two years ago or whether that was a disposable ''core promise''.
Email a friend