The Press Saturday, June 21, 1975. Law On... (Press, 21 June 1975)

On 21 June 1975, a discussion took place concerning an amendment to the Crimes Amendment Bill, which sought to address laws regarding homosexuality in New Zealand. The amendment, proposed by Dr G. A. Wall, the member of Parliament for Ponrua, aimed to make it illegal for anyone to lead individuals under the age of 20 to believe that homosexual behaviour was "normal." This proposal received little support, with critics asserting that it was repressive and infringed on the right to hold and express opinions. They argued that such a restriction would complicate valuable educational efforts that contribute to personal and social development. Despite the proposed amendment, it was widely expected that it would be rejected by Parliament if put to a vote. Meanwhile, the main aspect of the Crimes Amendment Bill intended to amend the Crimes Act and legalise consensual homosexual behaviour among adults remained a focal point. However, the current draft of the bill set the age of consent for male homosexuals higher than that for heterosexual and female homosexual behaviours, raising concerns about legal equality for male homosexuals. The Government had indicated that private members' legislation, including this bill, would take a back seat to government business, which is not unexpected given the political climate of the time. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister reassured that time would be allocated for the Crimes Amendment Bill to proceed to a second reading soon. Political parties, both major ones, appeared hesitant to take a strong stance on the issue of homosexuality, likely due to fears of potential backlash from voters at the polls. However, an abundance of expert evidence from medical, psychological, social, and legal perspectives overwhelmingly supported the liberalisation of existing laws to at least the extent proposed in the Amendment Bill. To mitigate the damage done to the Labour Party's reputation by Dr Wall’s controversial amendment, it was imperative for the Government to ensure that procedural obstacles would not delay the bill's progress once it was brought forward for further consideration. This situation reflected the broader societal tensions surrounding the legal status of homosexuality and underscored the complexities of political leadership on such socially sensitive issues.

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