HANSARD EXTRACT
| Private
Members' Business: Marriage |
| 19 June 2006 |
Mr HAYES
(Werriwa)
(3.47
p.m.)—I
welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate on the member for
Ryan’s motion about marriage and I actually feel somewhat more than
half qualified to do so. On 22 May I celebrated with my wife our
30th wedding anniversary. Bernadette and I have been married for 30
years and over those three decades she has been not only my wife but
the mother of our three children and the very proud grandmother of
three—soon to be four as of 1 July, I think it is. Over that whole
period—since school actually—Bernadette
has been my best friend. As a matter of fact, when we got married
Bernadette
was 19 and I was 20, so we have actually grown up together. So I do
feel very strongly about the institution of marriage and its impact
on families. That is why I welcome the opportunity to speak here
today.
By and large, families are underpinned by successful marriages, but
I want to say how regrettable it is that every year we have in
excess of 50,000 divorces. That is more than one in three marriages
unfortunately ending up on the rocks. Whilst we have supportive
facilities such as relationship centres and good counselling and
family support services, they have one thing in common: they are
there to help pick up the pieces after the deleterious effects of
modern life have wreaked carnage on modern marriages and, as a
consequence, significantly affected families.
As secretary of the caucus industrial relations task force, I have
recently had the opportunity to visit many locations throughout the
country. One of the things that were continually raised with task
force members was the actual and perceived impacts that the
industrial relations changes will have or are likely to have on
families. Over the last three decades we have seen continual
stresses on families as a consequence of changing working hours,
particularly after the introduction of non-standard working hours.
In 2002 the Prime Minister said that balancing family life and work
was a priority of his government. As a matter of fact, he went on to
describe that issue as ‘a barbecue stopper’. I know that term has
been used once or twice today, but that is the way that he described
the issue in 2002. I also note that at a recent breakfast
Pru Goward, the federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner, described
balancing work and family life as an ‘epic struggle’—and clearly it
is. That is why we are so concerned about the impact of these harsh
industrial relations laws not only on individuals but also on
families. Like the member for Ryan, I would be equally concerned
about what they will do to marriages. We should be providing, as the
motion says, positive policies to underpin and support the
institution of marriage. I am all for that. We should be doing that.
We should be looking at a set of policy frameworks that help support
marriages and a diminution of the current divorce rate that we are
experiencing. It is not something that we need to be very flash
about in terms of how we position the words around it; it has to be
something that we do.
If we are looking at track records, let us look at the one on Work
Choices. This is something that we are poles apart on, given what is
proposed. Mr Deputy Speaker, it is not just
Chris Hayes who stands up to say this. Family after family visited
the industrial relations task force to complain about the impacts
that the industrial relations legislation will have on them, their
relationship with their family and their being available for their
family. People are very concerned about the likely impact this
legislation will have on successful family life into the future.
I commend the member for
Ryan for moving the motion. I think he has provided a service to the
parliament and, therefore, I hope that he will join me in looking at
a set of industrial frameworks that would support families into the
future—(Time expired)
Return
to Speeches Menu.
