Same-Sex: Forum: Hobart
Same-Sex: Same Entitlements
National Inquiry into Discrimination against People in Same-Sex Relationships: Financial and Work-Related Entitlements and Benefits
back to menu
WRITTEN NOTES
NOTES FROM HOBART PUBLIC FORUM 2 - 4pm (24 September 2006)
No audio files are available for this forum.
Fifteen people attended the community forum at Hobart and discussed a range of issues.
The following is an overview of the comments made during the community forum.
These comments reflect the views of the participants in the forum, they do not necessarily represent the final conclusions of the Inquiry.
Death of same-sex partner
A woman shares how her partner's family blocked her out of funeral and intestacy arrangements when her partner died suddenly a few years ago. As her partner died intestate, the family was able to deny her access to any of her partner's possessions, including photos. It all went to the tip rather than being given to her. Nor was she able to claim any of her partner's superannuation.
She says that to this day, she still doesn't know where her partner's ashes are. She says that these laws must be changed otherwise people in same-sex relationships will remain second-class citizens.
Superannuation
One person talks about the importance of educational campaigns accompanying any legislative change in the area of same-sex law reform. He cites the 2004 amendments to superannuation laws as an example, saying that many people in the gay and lesbian community are still unaware of their rights in that area. He says that both people who are affected by the laws and those who administer the laws need educating.
Another woman, who is a Commonwealth employee, said that she is a compulsory contributor to one of the Commonwealth superannuation funds. She says that although her Will nominates her partner as the recipient of her superannuation, her superannuation policy does not allow her to nominate her partner. She believes that it is reprehensible that such decisions are left to the discretion of the board of trustees of her superannuation fund.
Immigration
One man talks about the process of immigrating to Australia as a member of a same-sex couple. He says that when he was trying to immigrate, the interdependency provisions had just been introduced. However the decision to grant him an 'interdependent' visa in Australia was still left up to the discretion of the Minister. He says that nothing happened until he took his case to various politicians, after which it only took two weeks.
He talks about how unfair it is that people who are straight and get married overseas can come to Australia and have their relationship recognised. Gay couples, on the other hand, are not recognised, even if they are married.
Parenting rights
One woman talks about her partner who has twin girls from a previous heterosexual marriage. She says that the ex-husband lives on the mainland and is opposed to his ex-wife's new relationship. She fears that if something happens to her partner, her relationship with the children will not be recognised.
When her partner's marriage came to an end, she got legal advice and made a very detailed Will which included that she be granted access rights to her children in the event of her death. However, she also received legal advice suggesting that her claim would most likely be unsuccessful if it were to go to court. She fears that even though she has been in the children's lives for ten years, her partner's ex-husband could come down from the mainland and take the children away.
Relationship recognition
A woman talks about the flow-on effect of relationship recognition. She says that if the federal government were to grant some level of relationship recognition to people in same-sex relationships, then that would go a long way to educating people about their superannuation rights amongst other things. She believes that the concept of interdependency is insulting, and says that people in same-sex relationships are not second-class citizens.
Centrelink
A number of couples talk about how Centrelink will not recognise them as couples even though they have explicitly made their relationship known to Centrelink. Some couples fear that the government will change the so-called 'positive discrimination' in which members of same-sex couples are paid single person pensions, without addressing more significant 'negative discrimination' in other areas. Many of the couples say that they would prefer to lose the benefit of being classified as a single person if it meant they were treated as equal citizens in other areas.
