Opposition Defeated On ‘gay' Bill Move (Press, 9 October 1985)

The Homosexual Law Reform Bill was brought back to Parliament on 8 October 1985 with minor technical amendments, as stated by select committee chairman Trevor Mallard. He clarified that no policy changes were made, a decision believed to be reserved for the entire Parliament. The Opposition, led by Venn Young from the National Party, opposed the bill's return due to 85 pending submissions from organisations and individuals who had not yet been heard. However, their motion to delay the reporting back was defeated with 36 votes against 42, despite support from the Democratic Party. Ultimately, the report was tabled, with a vote of 47 to 32. While the voting was positioned as a conscience issue, party lines largely dictated the outcome. Among the few National Party members who supported the bill were Ruth Richardson, Phillip Burdon, Young, and Simon Upton. Conversely, a minority of Labour members opposed it, including Whetu Tirikatene-Sullivan, Geoff Braybrooke, Allan Wallbank, and John Terris. The Democratic Party also remained opposed. Young stressed that many organisations and individuals had been deprived of the chance to provide evidence, labelling this as an encroachment on democracy. In response, Fran Wilde, the bill's sponsor from the Labour Party, shared correspondence from 38 supporters who believed the discussions had been exhaustive. Critics like Graeme Lee claimed these correspondences were predominantly from homosexual individuals. Braybrooke expressed concern about the bill’s divisive nature across various societal groups, arguing that all voices should be allowed to be heard. Mallard defended the process, noting that the bill had gone through two committees that conducted extensive hearings, totalling over 70 hours with numerous submissions. He clarified that the bill aims to decriminalise homosexual acts between consenting males aged 16 and above, reinforce protections against indecent assault on minors, and promote equality in various areas affected by discrimination based on sexual orientation. Opposition to the bill came mainly from fundamentalist Christians, while extreme perspectives emerged from both sides, including a suggestion for a separate electoral roll for homosexuals. Mallard countered common fears about the repercussions of legalising homosexuality, noting that the scientific consensus suggests sexual orientation is established before puberty and that there is no evidence to support claims that homosexual behaviour is learned through sexual abuse. He cited statistical findings, including data from the Kinsey study showing a significant portion of males who had homosexual experiences. Mallard reported support for decriminalisation from various churches, including Anglican, Baptist, Methodist, and Presbyterian. In light of shifting attitudes, he posed key questions about the criminalisation of gay men and the rights of individuals to access employment and housing without discrimination. Helen Clark, also from Labour, voiced her surprise at the National Party’s opposition, suggesting their input had been taken into account during discussions. She affirmed that the committee's consultations had adequately addressed various concerns from differing perspectives, and underscored a broad consensus on the bill's progress to the next legislative stage. The Homosexual Law Reform Bill is now set for a second reading in Parliament.

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