Mr BARRESI (11:04 AM) —Yesterday over 1,000 people came to Parliament House for the National Marriage Forum organised by the Australian Christian Lobby. I want to record my congratulations to Jim Wallace from the lobby and Warwick and Alison Marsh from the Fatherhood Foundation for their work and for combining with other groups to form the National Marriage Coalition. With less than three weeks notice, the forum saw people with a passionate view about the institution of marriage come from all over the country.

I was pleased to offer my support to the forum and for the values it seeks to espouse in our society. It comes at a time when the parliament is still to pass the amendments to the Marriage Act. One thing resonated above all else yesterday: the undeniable fact that the marriage of a woman and a man is more than financial and even transcends procreation. The marriage of a man and a woman is sacred. For those who look to the Judaeo-Christian faith underpinning our values, this is paramount. But it is also a perspective widely accepted in non Judaeo-Christian faiths. I know the forum yesterday was heartened by the press release from the Islamic community also supporting the traditional interpretation of marriage.

I am not going to suggest that, as a result of being underpinned by our faith, all marriages are infallible. Marriages fail, and for many that often leads to the greatest regret and disappointment in their lives. But the fact that some marriages fail and that that leads to some people exploring alternative models of union cannot be used to advance an argument against enshrining in law a definition of marriage. In some instances same-sex couples may live together. They may love each other and be happy. I respect them, as I hope they would support my choices in life. But, because I accept the reality of an alternative lifestyle, surely that should not be confused with an endorsement of it being enshrined in our legal definitions of marriage.

The respect that we have for marriage is well-established in our culture and has long been accepted as a given, yet it has never been definitively formalised in law. The definition of marriage through the national parliament is extremely important. It establishes a clear and unambiguous legally recognisable definition which can be relied upon, particularly by the judiciary. In my opinion it would be grossly improper for an issue of this kind to be left to the courts to decide. Whilst I have the utmost respect for the judiciary, I am sure they will acknowledge that definitions of this nature are best left to the legislature. If we were to leave this definition for the courts to decide, future generations would reflect on this point in our history and feel betrayed. That is unacceptable.

The second point I would like to make relates to the importance of marriage in raising children and its role in strengthening the fabric of society. The benefits children get from their parents living together, through the ups and downs, the highs and lows, cannot, in my opinion, be replicated. Whilst those of us who are separated and have failed marriages strive to do our utmost for our children, it never does replace the original family unit of having mum and dad together. Where children are conceived and born into the care of their loving married parents, that is the best scenario for all concerned. Of course there are extenuating circumstances where that is not always possible. However, despite the claims of some individuals and contrary to their aspersions, this actually still does occur: believe it or not, happily married couples are raising children in homes right around Australia today. And I know that others, who have had failed marriages, are trying to do exactly the same thing.

I wish to reaffirm my belief that the union of man and woman in holy matrimony, living as a family with their children, is an institution that belies all critics. This leads me to my final point. A society ought to be judged by the respect it shows for its institutions. These institutions help define who we are and certainly play a part in determining where we are going. They give otherwise despondent members of society hope and comfort. They provide us with direction and a sense of purpose. Our schools now teach the importance of acceptance and tolerance. Our children are taught to appreciate that we are a diverse nation and that we stand as a bastion of democracy and freedom.

I believe there is one question that governments ought to ultimately be judged on. That is: is the fabric of the nation stronger than it was when it we were elected? In my opinion, inserting a definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman will embolden an institution that I respect and that our nation relies upon for the stability of relationships and the upbringing of our children.