No advance for Australian fairness

I'm not joining the chorus of people who seem to be giddy that new Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has said his government won't stand in the way of Australian states and territories recognising same sex relationships. It's actually little better than the situation under defeated right wing Prime Minister John Howard.

Rudd said, "On these matters, state and territories are answerable to their own jurisdictions. State and territory governments are elected to govern, they are accountable to their constituents.''

Fair enough. But Rudd, who during the campaign said he's opposed to federal marriage or civil unions for same sex couples, apparently wants these registries to be limited to residents of that one state. So, a couple in one state would have to register all over again if they move to another state or territory. Moreover, due to the likely variety of structures and benefits, state registrations, unlike a federal union, may not be recognised by foreign countries that recognise same-sex unions, like New Zealand.

Already, the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) has announced it will delay introducing its civil union registry after a meeting between the ACT and Commonwealth attorneys general. Now, it appears that ACT have a weak register than originally planned.

In Victoria, the state government is moving to establish a “Relationships Register” which they think will somehow make it easier for same-sex couples to claim benefits. Victorian Attorney General Rob Hulls said "The Relationships Register will offer conclusive proof of a relationship with one certificate.” He says, for example, couples won't have to prove a relationship in the event of a medical emergency.

Make no mistake: This is progress. But if a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, this is the equivalent of beginning to lift the foot. Of course Rudd's government should be applauded for ending the blatantly partisan meddling on the issue practiced by Howard's government. Without real and meaningful legal recognition, however, it will end up satisfying no one, least of all the couples who are waiting to be treated as ordinary citizens.

This isn't about the word “marriage”, but about the legal rights and privileges that all citizens and taxpayers are entitled to as a fundamental human right. Call it whatever you want, but make it fair and just. Come one, Rudd, advance Australia's fairness.