Adams Paul: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
Adams Paul: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
[Volume:624;Page:19180] 
PAUL ADAMS (United Future) 
: 
 It is always a pleasure to follow the previous speaker who gave a very confused speech. It was a religious speech from a religion known as secular humanism which she follows. I will start with the point about bringing up grandchildren. I love my grandchildren and they are absolutely fantastic. Like all young children they always ask “Why?” and that is a very good question. So being a grandfather I will often tease them. I asked my grandson: “Why do you ask ‘Why?’ ” and he stopped for a minute looked me straight in the eye and said: “Because that’s how I learn Grandpa.” I thought what a very good answer that was from a 3-year-old. However why do we not ask ourselves why we are bringing in this sort of legislation? I think that is a very relevant question to ask. Why are we going against the trend of the rest of the world? 
I heard one speaker—I think that it was the honourable Lianne Dalziel—say that we are only following the trend of the world. Well no we are not following the trend of the world. I would remind the House today that the Doha Declaration on the Family was passed by 139 nations— 
Dail Jones 
: How many? 
PAUL ADAMS 
: I tell Mr Jones that it was 139 nations. They passed it on 6 September 2004. The Doha declaration calls on nations to uphold preserve and defend the institution of marriage. One thing we need to understand very clearly is that this legislation is in the process of destroying marriage because if the Government does not build something promote it lift it up high and say that it is the preferred institution it will be destroyed. 
I believe that the Government has a special responsibility especially when we consider the generations to come. I have heard many speeches about children but if we do not have the generations coming through then we will all disappear within a hundred years we can be assured of that—and looking around this House it may happen far sooner than even in that period of time. 
So we should promote an institution such as marriage where parents are committed to each other and a vast majority of them will choose to have children and to bring them up. I have heard many statistics quoted about marriage. I heard the honourable Lianne Dalziel yell out about adultery but this is the most adulterous legislation that I have ever come across in regard to the marriage laws. If we do not uphold marriage and promote it and esteem it above other sorts of relationships what message are we sending to the children—the young children? 
We have to stake a young tree for it to grow and we can even look at the gangs in our country for an example of that now. Many gang members joined gangs as young teenaged boys. They were looking for security that they perhaps did not find in their homes and they were looking for the companionship that perhaps was missing. Yet there is something within the hearts of men and women that makes us want to be loved be esteemed and be recognised for what we can contribute to society. There would not be one person listening today who would not have that wish. Yet sadly in today’s world that encouragement is missing. 
But those men in the gangs have all of a sudden recognised that they too have children. They do not want their children to follow the same pathway that they have had to follow. They want them to follow a better pathway because they realise on looking back that the thing that they thought was good and that would build has actually been destructive. We stand in this House today and we are destroying something that is vital to society—we are destroying the institution of marriage. 
I have heard much spoken about human rights and this bill is always and in every way about individual rights but a family is not about individual rights it is about responsibility. As a father I have responsibilities; I also have the responsibility to love and to look after my wife. I have the responsibility to guide my children in the best way that I can—and people can be assured that they will say that I am not perfect. Marriage is not a perfect institution. It has its problems and its challenges—just ask anybody who has been married for more than 12 months and he or she will confirm that—yet despite its imperfections it is still better than any other institution that we have had. I have heard statistics on divorce and nobody wants to see anybody go through the pain of divorce. Sadly in this country yes the divorce rate has been increasing and yes that has affected children. But let me also assure people that most people who get married—most people—firstly get married and then they may plan on having a family and their children bring challenges in their own measure. 
Likewise many couples who choose to live together have done so at first because a child was on the way although that is not always the case. Therefore those couples have to go through the challenges not only of learning to live with each other but also of how to bring up children. The statistics on the rate of those relationships breaking up and of those parents parting to the detriment of their children is double that of the rate of marriages breaking up. 
When we start to bring in things that bring confusion to young people who are now given a multitude of different relationships to choose from any young person will experiment. We know that; we were young once ourselves. However does the Government not have a responsibility as the Government—instead of passing this type of legislation—to pass legislation that states that we have discovered that history has shown and that the evidence is overwhelming that the best type of relationship to bring children up in is marriage. 
Is it not time for once that the Government brought in laws that actually built marriage up and that helped people in their relationships instead of saying: “Well if that sort of relationship did not work that is fine. Give it away. You chose the wrong sort of relationship. Go off and have another sort of relationship.” 
 I have had to counsel wives who have had the heartache of having a husband go off with another man. I ask members what they think that does to the self-esteem of such women. To be a homosexual or lesbian is to choose a lifestyle. I have dealt with many who have chosen to come out of that lifestyle and sadly we see that the pattern of why they entered those types of relationships which has probably been well debated and well discussed is a sad indictment on society. It is another reason why we need to promote and build marriages and not to pull them apart. We need children to grow up in households where mum respects dad and dad respects mum and where they love each other and show good principles to their children—show them a preferred pathway. 
No Government can ever legislate against people’s choices and neither do we but I believe we have a responsibility to make a clear pathway if we again want this nation to be the great nation I want it to be. I have always said that I entered politics because I want to be a generational politician. I see the potential in the young people of our nation yet with the lowering of the drinking age and the legalisation of prostitution I ask what choices we are putting before them. They are not choices that I know as a father are the right choices. We are asking them to make decisions when we should really be guiding them. We should not be giving them a free-range choice because one thing about young people is that they love to know what the boundaries are. 
When we start to break down the boundaries in society as we have been doing in recent times we will have a disrupted society—which we have now. As a United Future MP I stand as one who is proud to be a father and as one who wants to build marriage. I will be voting against this bill.