Chance For Bill On Homosexuality (Press, 19 June 1975)

On 19 June 1975, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, Mr. Rowling, indicated that the Crimes Amendment Bill, which aims to legalise homosexual acts in private between consenting adult males, would progress through Parliament if it received majority support. This statement was made in the context of a parliamentary debate regarding the prioritisation of government business over private members' legislation. Mr. Rowling noted that the bill would be treated as an issue of conscience, meaning that MPs could vote according to their beliefs rather than party lines, and time would be allocated for a second reading debate. If the bill received enough support at this stage, it could proceed through committee and third-reading stages toward becoming law. Conversely, if rejected during the second reading, the bill would stop progressing. The Prime Minister was responding specifically to remarks made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Taiboys, who had expressed concern that the government caucus had already decided that the bill would not progress beyond the second reading. Mr. Rowling reassured Parliament that the bill would move forward for debate. However, Mr. Taiboys and Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Muldoon, contended that the government was attempting to sideline the bill due to the sensitive nature of the issue, particularly in an election year. Mr. Muldoon referred to the timing of the resolution to prioritise government business as unprecedented in his 15 years in Parliament and implied that the government's urgency to pass financial and electoral bills was pretextual. Mr. Rowling argued that timely passage of the Crimes Amendment Bill was crucial and that certain financial bills following the budget had deadlines for enactment, particularly those necessary for government departments' operations before the upcoming election. Mr. Faulkner, the Minister of Labour, critiqued Mr. Muldoon's focus on the Crimes Amendment Bill, arguing that other significant issues, such as redundancy measures and the Waterfront Industry Bill, needed attention since they had broader implications for the populace. In summary, the debate highlighted the tension between the government's desire to push through critical financial legislation and the necessity for a broader discussion about social issues such as homosexuality, which the Crimes Amendment Bill represents. The split within the Labour Party on this contentious issue also suggests deeper divisions on social reform within the government ranks.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand