Kerry O'Brien roasts Robert McClelland over gay marriage

Phil sent me this exchange between Kerry O'Brien and Robert McClelland on the 7.30 Report last night. Really, by trying to walk both sides of the street at once, Labor are just asking for this kind of pwning:

KERRY O’BRIEN: ... decision to remove discriminatory practice from Commonwealth laws so de facto same sex relationships will now be legally recognised, but not formal same sex marriage. I’m just curious to know what the logic is in that discrimination, if you like, that difference, because surely it is fundamentally discriminatory?

ROBERT MCLELLAND: The logic is essentially Labor Party policy. We went to the election ..

KERRY O’BRIEN: That’s not necessarily logical.

ROBERT MCLELLAND: ... with a - but, we’re honouring the election commitment. We’re removing discrimination from some 100 pieces of legislation that have real practical significance to people in same sex relationships. In terms of the issue of recognition of relationships, we favour and positively favour and indeed encourage all states and territories to implement a uniform system of registration of relationships that are in existence whether they be same sex or close personal relationships. Indeed, the policy was based on the Tasmanian model. We positively encourage all states and territories to do that. But what we don’t support - and again, consistently with our policy - we don’t support a measure that mimics marriage. We ...

KERRY O’BRIEN: Well, just before you go on. I’m not asking you to defend party policy. I’m just asking to explain what to me seems, on the face of it, to be undeniably discriminatory. A male and female de facto couple has the right to choose to formally legally marry or not to marry; a same sex couple does not.

ROBERT MCLELLAND: The system of registration essentially recognises a relationship that is in existence. The system that is proposed or has been discussed as being proposed in the ACT would be a system that would, as a result of a ceremony, create a legal relationship which essentially is something akin to the traditional concept of a marriage.

KERRY O’BRIEN: But the mere fact that you use the word “mimic” to describe that could imply for some that you’re essentially looking down your nose at it.

ROBERT MCLELLAND: People in same sex relationships are entitled to - for too long they’ve been discriminated against. I think that’s accepted across the political spectrum happily today. In terms of the issue of marriage, both parties supported during the course of the last 18 months or so legislation that defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. It was the policy of the Labor Party before the election ...

KERRY O’BRIEN: Yes, but I’m asking you why it’s not discriminatory to say that a same sex couple can’t engage in that ceremony legally but a man and a woman. Why isn’t that discriminatory under law?

ROBERT MCLELLAND: Well, we - what you are talking about is providing a positive system of recognising at law a relationship that is in existence as a result of the registration of that, as is occurring in Tasmania and as is occurring in Victoria. That is something that is appropriate because it actually recognises something that is in existence. What we don’t support is legal measures that create a relationship that is akin to marriage.

KERRY O’BRIEN: I’m still not sure why that’s not discriminatory, but I think that’s where we’re gonna have to leave it.

ROBERT MCLELLAND: Sure. [Thinking: "thank god, it's over!"-S]