Smith Nick: Civil Union Bill — Procedure Third Reading 
Smith Nick: Civil Union Bill — Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:17654] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 This bill comes down to a contest. We have a Government that is more interested in the wants of adults than in the needs of children; a Government more interested in the politics of the present than in the future of our nation. I make no apologies for being a staunch defender of the importance of family and by family I mean a mum a dad and their children. 
Not a single week goes by in this Parliament without hand-wringing concern about issues like child abuse declining literacy declining immunisation rates youth suicide drug abuse and increasing youth crime. In all those areas where this nation’s statistics have become worse so too has there been a decline in the number of children being raised by their mum and their dad. So why on earth would we want to pass a bill that kicks the family union in the guts again? We passed the Prostitution Reform Bill. Only 2 months ago we passed legislation that said that women could be fathers. Well natural law is actually even more important than parliamentary law. It is simply a matter that all relationships are not the same. The relationships of a de facto couple a married couple and a same-sex couple are not the same. 
I also want to put on record the appalling way our democracy has been treated by the way that this bill has been advanced. Why is it needed urgently? Why has this Parliament been in urgency all week? There is only one reason: the Government wants this issue off the agenda before the election next year because it knows that the majority of New Zealanders know in their heart of hearts that this law is wrong. Secondly I want to know why we have only the door of a bill not the complete house. Why have we separated the two bills when every member in this House knows they sit side by side? Why were 93 percent of the submissions to the Justice and Electoral Committee completely ignored? I say shame on the members who have referred in a derogatory manner to those New Zealanders who because they cared about families made submissions to the committee. 
Also let nobody pretend that civil union is anything less than gay marriage. In 1034 pieces of law marriage and gay union are to be identical—absolutely identical. The Government is proposing that in education in health in family law in superannuation law—in every single area—there will not be any difference and I question why it will not be honest and simply front up and say that civil union is gay marriage. There is a simple historical quid pro quo: that this Parliament provide in the law of the land special recognition of marriage because marriage between a man and a woman is the beginning of the next generation of a family and of the future of our country. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If any further comment is made by anyone other than a member of Parliament the person making it will immediately be leaving. I want to make that clear. Members of the public are here because they have been invited to hear our citizens who have been properly elected in a democratic way. I am sorry to have interrupted Dr Smith and I will not take time off his speech. I just say that all speeches will be heard in silence by those people who are witnessing the debate. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: There is a further flaw in the whole approach to this important law and it is about men and women. Men and women are equal but they are different. When people try to pretend that men and men relationships and women and women relationships are the same as relationships between men and women they are wrong. I plead with members opposite to read the statistics about the appalling disparity in relation to the boys of our country. I say to the people in this House that until we recognise those sorts of social statistics and the background to them there is a sorry future for this country. The boys in this country need mums and they need dads—not mums and mums and dads and dads. 
I also want to say that this is the most anti-family Government in the history of New Zealand. That is a fact. I fear for what will come next. I know that work is going on with the adoption law. I am sure that gay adoption will be the next piece of legislation this Government will attempt to ram through this House. I note that Georgina Beyer wants to introduce another bill to the effect that in this country we not only will have men and women but will separately recognise through another set of legislation a third so-called sex transgender. I say that too will be a step backwards for our country. 
It is a sad day for Parliament today because we are failing to recognise the most important institution in this country and that is the institution of family. I say that the only way in which we will stop the ongoing undermining of and attacks on families which provide the best future for the children in New Zealand is to sack this Government. That is the only way in which I have confidence that this Parliament will start to recognise that families are the foundation of our society and if we want a strong country and a strong future we need to start passing laws that back strong families.