M.P. Sought Compromise (Press, 11 July 1986)

On 11 July 1986, the New Zealand Parliament witnessed a significant vote regarding the Homosexual Law Reform Bill, which ultimately passed with a margin of 49 votes to 44. This legislation legalises homosexual activities between consenting males aged 16 and over, marking a notable shift in New Zealand's legal stance on same-sex relationships. Additionally, the bill decriminalises sodomy between consenting heterosexual couples. Dr Bill Sutton, the member of Parliament for Hawke’s Bay, revealed that the bill could have garnered support of 13 additional votes if the age of consent for sodomy had been adjusted to 18, rather than remaining at 16. In a detailed five-page statement, he outlined various strategies employed by members of the House as the bill neared a final reading. Dr Sutton proposed an amendment to return the bill to committee stages to reconsider increasing the age of consent for anal intercourse. He argued that this amendment would not undermine the principle of the bill and would align more closely with the views of the majority of New Zealanders. However, this proposal was overwhelmingly defeated, with a vote of 68 to 18 against it. Dr Sutton indicated that the amendment might have found favour with the bill's sponsor, Ms Fran Wilde, and her supporters, suggesting that it would not discriminate against homosexuals. Yet, he claimed they opted for a more expansive reform at the age of 16. Contrarily, Mr Trevor Mallard, the member for Hamilton West and a close ally of Ms Wilde, challenged Dr Sutton's viewpoint, stating that supporters of the bill had initially considered the amendment only if they felt delaying the bill was necessary due to insufficient votes. He expressed that he personally favoured the current reform at age 16. Dr Sutton recounted discussions with Ms Wilde following the failure of another crucial part of the bill that aimed to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. They had decided to keep the proposed amendment confidential until the last moment to shield supporters from intense lobbying against the bill. Throughout the week, Dr Sutton engaged with National Party members, attempting to sway additional support towards his amendment. He claimed that several members had indicated they might vote for the third reading contingent on the success of his proposed changes, yet as confidence grew among the bill's supporters, they resolved to proceed without any modifications. The final decision to endorse the bill in its ultimate form was made during a dinner meeting, where Dr Sutton was the sole advocate for a compromise. He later described the experience leading up to the vote as challenging and isolating, mentioning that he faced hostility from some members of the public in attendance, yet he maintained that his efforts were significant. The progression of the Homosexual Law Reform Bill has been viewed as a pivotal moment in New Zealand’s social and legal history.

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