Homosexual Bill Voted Out (Press, 5 July 1975)

On 4 July 1975, Mr V. S. Young, a member of Parliament from Egmont, expressed disappointment after his Crimes Amendment Bill, aimed at legalising homosexual acts between consenting adult males in private, was denied a second reading by a vote of 34 to 29. The vote followed a lengthy debate lasting over five hours, during which various members of Parliament spoke their opinions on the bill. A noticeable increase in public attendance occurred right before the vote. The outcome of the vote was closely contested, reflecting the divisive nature of the issue among MPs. Of the 34 members who voted against the bill, 18 opposed it, while 15 expressed support. One MP, Mr F. D. O’Flynn, indicated that he would abstain from voting, acknowledging he saw some merit in changing the law but lacked confidence in the proposed safeguards. Mr Young commended the quality of debate in Parliament, noting that numerous MPs were willing to articulate their individual viewpoints. Among them was Sir Keith Holyoake, who revealed a shift in his perspective on the bill compared to previous years. He had once been opposed but now recognised the mental distress individuals faced due to the current laws and decided that the penalties were excessive and unjustifiable. Despite the defeat, Mr Young took some comfort in the support from key figures, including the Prime Minister, Mr Rowling, and other cabinet ministers who remained in the House for the vote. He noted the importance of having more widespread backing on such controversial issues, expressing that a tighter margin of victory would not have satisfied him. Looking ahead, Mr Young believed future legislation on homosexuality was likely, though he was unsure when this might occur. He speculated that significant change in parliamentary representation or public sentiment would be required for progress. His own work on the bill had consumed a year, attracting a mix of support, congratulations, and opposition through correspondence. While he welcomed logical arguments against his proposal, he condemned any expression of bigotry related to the topic. He reassured supporters that their efforts had not been in vain and remained optimistic that societal change regarding homosexuality would eventually materialise, asserting his belief that "the change which must come, will come."

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