Spare the pink and greys this well-intentioned bill

Wednesday, 7th January 2009

Rudd’s Same Sex Relations Bill is a challenge to the well-earned privacy of retired gay couples, says John Izzard

Pensioners standing up for their right to privacy is the last thing the gay marriage lobby wants — hence the lack of support for the elders of their tribe.

The champions of the Same Sex Relations Bill are an exotic lot who will most likely never have to enter a Centrelink office or seek pension assistance.

In the political arena we find Senator Penny Wong and Senator Bob Brown. Wong is Australia’s first openly gay cabinet minister. Brown is Australia’s environmental wunderkind and Australia’s first openly gay Senator. A key supporter of the new law was Judge of the High Court of Australia, Michael Kirby.

Michael Kirby’s justified eagerness stems from his imminent retirement, and the need to sort out the superannuation issues for his lifetime partner. The push by the government was to ensure the bill passed in time for Kirby’s retirement next month.

Other players in this saga include Senator Robert McClelland, Australia’s Attorney General, who announced ‘a system of registration of personal relationships’ in April 2008, and whose department drew up the legislation.

Australia’s Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission initiated the introduction of the new laws. How they will handle any complaint or legal challenge will be interesting.

Strangely, the new laws will be given Royal Assent by the new Governor General, Quentin Bryce, who, in a previous life was Queensland’s human rights and equal rights commissioner and sex discrimination commissioner for the federal human rights agency.

Perhaps Kevin Rudd should re-read The Wind in the Willows to remind him his heart should be on the River Bank, not in the Wild Wood.

While many in government see the ‘pink and greys’ as an easy target, and a chance of reducing the pension budget by about $9 million a year, they should not underestimate the bent-aged as a fighting force.

While Zimmer frames and electric wheelchairs may affect mobility, their plan to use the internet to take their case to world forums is something Kevin Rudd should be very wary of. An internet campaign, high-lighting what the Australian government is up to, might not be a pretty sight.

As one old tottering ‘pink and grey’ said last week: ‘Our legs might be buggered but our fingers can still type.’

Previous page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

More articles from: John Izzard | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (3)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Addam Stobbs

January 11th, 2009 7:04am Report this comment

Thanks for a good article, the imagery that older gay man and lesbian women are frail and helpless with wheel chairs in tow etc is not quite a positive image.

Bobby

January 11th, 2009 9:40am Report this comment

What a load of crap - with equality comes responsibility!

I can assure you that most gays are wholehearteldy supportive of these law changes..

As for the comment that wealthy gays are pushing for these laws, so what?

Eric Glare

January 12th, 2009 5:40am Report this comment

This article could have made some credible points about the implementation of recognition of Aussie gay relationships but fails due to errors, over picky tangents and sensationalist stuffing. Why doesn't the author know that Centrelink has been distinguishing heterosexual de factos from single people for decades? How does staff numbers make Centrelink "Australia’s most powerful bureaucratic body"? What is so terrible about keeping a recipient's relationship status on a database? Are they really going to ask for specific sexuality, ie bi vs gay vs transgender, etc? Do people in nursing homes really have problems with presumed relationships? Just because some famous wealthy gays lent their support does not mean that they were the sole proponents of the changes. Why is it so strange for an equality law to be approved by the GG an ex-equal rights commissioner? Who remembers 'Wind in the willows' and why? Can the author remember the inequality that this law dispels?

Post comment