Senator HARRIS (8:14 PM) —I rise to speak in response to the House of Representative's message 172 relating to the Members of Parliament (Life Gold Pass) Bill 2002. I want to convey to the chamber that, until I heard Senator Faulkner's vitriolic attack on Senator Abetz, I was not really moved one way or another in relation to the message. I believe that that attack, while it may have been directed primarily at Senator Abetz, was actually an attack upon the entire basis of our parliamentary process. If we look at the procedure that we follow each morning in this chamber, the President before taking the chair reads the following prayer:

we directly request from God a blessing on this place—

so we as senators within this chamber are calling upon God for clear direction for the decisions that we are going to make—

that is to the advancement of the glory of God—

We do that each morning when we commence each day's sitting of the Senate. The document upon which our entire Commonwealth is predicated is the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia—the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act— and the opening paragraph that we agree to states:

The unity of this nation is based on our relying on the humble blessing of Almighty God. So our constitutional base is that of a Christian society. The process that we follow in this chamber each day is based upon Christian principles. How can we, when it does not suit our purpose, turn our back on those principles and walk away from that basis—the entire foundation of everything that we commit and swear allegiance to when we come into this place? The message from the House of Representatives clearly indicates that it cannot agree to the definition of the word `spouse' contained in the Senate's amendment, which states:

Let us look at the biblical definition of a husband and wife, and that of a family.

Upon the question of marriage, Paul wrote in chapter 7, verses 1 to 5 of his Letter to the Corinthians:

We could not find a more defining definition than that of a husband and a wife—that is, a person who has entered into the sanctity of marriage.

We talk about consistency in our laws. How do we achieve consistency in our laws? We achieve consistency by looking to that direction that we request each morning when we commence each Senate sitting. If we want to have even more clarification than that, let us look at some of the quotes from our eminent High Court judges. I would like to cite Her Honour Justice Mary Gaudron in the Wakim case in 1999:

I go back to the section of our Constitution that I quoted from, which clearly sets out that our Constitution is an act entered into by the people of all of the states that were in existence at that time `humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God'. So it is with some sadness that I see in this place such an attack upon the basis of our Constitution and upon the process upon which this chamber relies on a daily basis, and that is direction from Almighty God. The day that we return to that, we will see laws in Australia that are, as our prayer says, to the glory of God and the welfare of the Australian people.