LEGAL AFFAIRS AND COMMUNITY SAFETY COMMITTEE

Members present: Mr PS Russo MP (Chair) Mr CR Boyce MP Mr JP Lister MP Mrs MF McMahon MP Ms CP McMillan MP

Staff present: Ms R Easten (Committee Secretary) Ms M Westcott (Assistant Committee Secretary)

PUBLIC HEARING—INQUIRY INTO THE BIRTHS, DEATHS AND MARRIAGES REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL 2018

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

FRIDAY, 23 MARCH 2018 Public Hearing—Inquiry into the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2018

FRIDAY, 23 MARCH 2018 ______

The committee met at 11.15 am CHAIR: Good morning. I declare open this public hearing for the committee’s inquiry into the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2018. I am , member for Toohey and chair of the committee. With me here today are James Lister, member for Southern Downs and deputy chair; Melissa McMahon, member for Macalister; and Corrine McMillan, member for Mansfield. Steve Andrew, member for Mirani and Jim McDonald, member for Lockyer, are apologies. Standing in for the member for Lockyer is the member for Callide, . I would like to welcome Colin. On 7 March 2018 the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, the honourable Yvette D’Ath, introduced the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2018 to the parliament. Parliament referred the bill to the Legal Affairs and Community Safety Committee for examination with a reporting date of 23 April. The bill’s objective is to amend the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 2003 to remove the restrictions in section 22 on noting the reassignment of a married person’s sex on the Register of Births or Adopted Children Register. The purpose of the hearing today is to gather further evidence to assist the committee in its inquiry into the bill. Only the committee and invited witnesses may participate in the proceedings. Witnesses are not required to give evidence under oath but I remind witnesses that intentionally misleading the committee is a serious offence. These proceedings are similar to parliament and are subject to the Legislative Assembly’s standing rules and orders. In this regard I remind members of the public that under the standing orders the public may be admitted to or excluded from the hearing on the discretion of the committee. The proceedings are being recorded by Hansard and broadcast live on the parliament’s website. Media may be present and will be subject to my direction at all times. The media rules endorsed by the committee are available from the committee staff if required. All those present today should note that it is possible you may be filmed or photographed during the proceedings. I ask those present to turn mobile phones off or to silent mode.

BLACK, Mr Peter, Queensland Aids Council and the Equality Campaign

CARNIE, Ms Lee, Lawyer, Human Rights Law Centre (via teleconference)

CLARK, Mr Thomas, Law Reform Director, LGBTI Legal Service Inc

DICKSON, Ms Roz, Private Capacity CHAIR: I invite you to make an opening statement after which the committee may have some questions for you. Mr Black: As you know, last year the Australian government conducted the Australian marriage law postal survey which saw the yes vote overwhelmingly prevail. Almost 1.5 million Queenslanders voted yes to marriage equality, a total of 61 per cent of all Queenslanders who participated in the postal survey. On 7 December last year a bill to reform Australian marriage law was passed in the Commonwealth parliament and marriage equality is now a reality for most Australians. However, the historic introduction of marriage equality last year was bittersweet for many members of the LGBTIQ community, especially those within the transgender community. Not only were they unfairly targeted by the no campaign, the passage of legislation through the federal parliament still did not provide marriage equality for many within the transgender community as they were forced to choose between changing their sex on official documents and their marriage. The bill before the committee today, the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2018 addresses this injustice. Thomas Clarke from the LGBTI Legal Centre will talk a little bit more about the support for this reform, as will Lee Carnie from the Human Rights Law Centre, Roz Dickson will provide her personal experience as to how this injustice has affected her. CHAIR: Lee, I invite you to chime in at any point when you feel the need. Brisbane - 1 - 23 Mar 2018

Public Hearing—Inquiry into the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2018

Mr Clark: Thank you, committee, for inviting us to appear today. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Queensland government for its commitment to equality for all Queenslanders with the introduction of this bill. When the bill to reform the Australian marriage law passed the Commonwealth parliament, marriage equality was finally extended to most Australians. As Peter said, it was a bittersweet victory for many members of our community, particularly the transgender and gender diverse community. The bill will bring the consequential legislative issues we are here to address today into line with the win for marriage equality, particularly section 22 of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Act, which is the procedure by which a person may change their sex marker on their birth certificate. This issue exists because section 22 requires that a person be unmarried in order to change their sex marker forcing transgender people to choose between affirming their gender identity through legal recognition and their marriage, a near impossible choice. In any event, unless a transgender person could demonstrate their marriage had broken down, they would be unable to demonstrate the requirements for a divorce meaning a change of birth certificate was unlikely. The rationale and policy considerations for section 22 no longer exist post marriage equality. The exemption for state and territory governments to include the requirement to be unmarried contained in the Sex Discrimination Act of the Commonwealth will accordingly be removed within 12 months. In addition, the United Nations concurs with the moves by the Queensland parliament to address these issues. Prior to marriage equality, in the case of G v Australia it found that by refusing to allow a married person to have a birth certificate consistent with their sex unless they get a divorce was breaching the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In particular, it considered article 17, the right to privacy and family, and article 26, the right to not be discriminated against on the basis of marital status and gender identity, to have been breached. We see these issues first hand through the experiences of our clients at the legal service. One such client is a veteran of the armed forces and after going through an extremely difficult process of accepting their gender identity over many years of active service and coming out to their family was told in order to receive legal recognition they had to divorce their partner. The service thanks the Queensland government for its commitment to the LGBTI community and wider consultation on other issues with the Births, Deaths and Marriages Act through the consultation paper entitled Registering life events: Recognising sex and gender diversity and same-sex families, and we look forward to the opportunity to address other issues contained within this act. Today, with section 22 Queenslanders believe in a fair go for LGBTI people. With the overwhelming demonstration for equality during the marriage law postal survey, we ask that the committee make the recommendation to remove the unmarried requirement from the Births, Deaths and Marriages Act. Thank you. Ms Dickson: Thank you for this opportunity to speak. I am here representing myself. I am a member of the LGBTI community and a member of a couple of community organisations, but I am one of those people personally affected by this law. I began to transition genders in 2011 and with the support of my wife, who supported me through that time, we offered each other a divorce if we should choose to have it and that was a difficult thing to do for me, but it was the right thing. When you think about it, no fault divorce is anybody’s entitlement or opportunity in our law in our country anyway. Neither of us was forcing the other to stay together. Back then we had two young children—sorry for the emotion. As you can see as I run through the memories of those times, it was quite a difficult time. Life is much better now. We are still married raising our two children and our family is stronger than ever. I personally was invited to speak at the marriage equality rallies in Brisbane and shared my story of transition. Cathy and I have done a radio interview about my transition with 97.3 FM Radio with their morning show and been quite open about the experience. One of the difficult times for me was back in the end of 2012 when I had to or wanted to, because I was now living full-time as the woman you see before you, change my identification to match. Prejudices exist in society and fears exist. We hear the old stories and we would have all, or I had, seen the old videos of Carlotta getting arrested for wearing female clothes in that era. You grow up with memories from your childhood of fears of being bullied and so you bury who you are. This bill offers an opportunity to legally complete what I have started. I have spoken before thousands at the marriage equality rallies in Brisbane, shared my story, stood before them and asked them basically, ‘Do you see a man or a woman?’ Brisbane - 2 - 23 Mar 2018

Public Hearing—Inquiry into the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2018

In 2012 I had a female driver’s licence because my doctor certified that I should be permanently considered female. As part of the process as well I had to see a psychiatrist for being able to have approval for gender realignment surgery, or gender affirmation surgery as we prefer to call it these days. My psychiatrist signed off as well. I had that surgery in 2016. I had some medical issues that delayed my access to that surgery and they were resolved with specialist care beforehand. My GP, who has been my GP through my transition and helped me with the medical aspects of hormones and so on, when I came to her late last year and said, ‘Can you assist me with filling in the paper for my change of sex marker application?’, was surprised and she said, ‘I thought you would have already done that.’ I said, ‘Why? I’m married. What’s the point?’ Another story I could tell you is when I applied to Births, Deaths and Marriages for my name change back in 2012, a lovely lady rang me back as part of the process, because I had actually included my letter from my GP which was primarily intended for Medicare to say I am permanently to be considered female, and said, ‘Please understand that you can’t change your sex marker at this point because you haven’t had surgery.’ I said, ‘Yes, I know. At this point I am just applying to change my name.’ She said, ‘I note that you’ve applied for a full copy of your birth certificate. Are you aware that when you do that it will have “sex: male” against your female name?’ The female name I had selected was Roz Caroline Peta Dickson. My prior name was Ross. I thought I would make it easier for everybody so that if someone called my name I could still hear the similarity and turn around, because I transitioned at work. I did not quit my job. Work was supportive. She suggested that I get a change of name certificate, which I did. It eased the ability to present identification for things like bank accounts and so on, but it just has a change of name without having the obvious ‘sex: male’ written on it. I delayed getting my passport until I needed to go overseas. In 2014 I had to cross that bridge, so I had to apply for my birth certificate. I am an adoptee, so when the sex change is registered it will be in the adoption register, not the birth register. At the top in the header it said ‘birth registered schedule 54’, I think it was, ‘of 1964’. I contacted the passport department federally, and they were tightening up on legislation about what was actually a birth certificate and what was not. The conversation between Queensland BDM and the federal office that looks after passports went on. Queensland BDM kindly re-issued me a birth certificate. I received that birth certificate, and the ‘schedule’ bit from the header was gone but it still told the world that I was an adoptee by saying that my birth was registered under schedule 54 of 1964, whatever the act is, and there was my female name with my male sex. That was a painful experience for me emotionally because I had been living as a woman, considered myself a woman and had felt this desire to be living this way since I was a child. The post office was quite understanding, but you have to go for that post office interview. In order to get a female passport you have to present your medical documentation, a male birth certificate and a letter from medical people saying that you are female, and it is a strange experience. I have lived the last few years with a female driver’s licence, a female passport and a male birth certificate. I would like to legally complete my transition. I had a car accident in 2013, I think it was. I was in a roadworks zone and the airbag went off and I was knocked out briefly. One of the considerations I thought of afterwards was if I had passed away, how would I be remembered: male or female? CHAIR: Lee, do you have anything that you would like to add to the discussion before we go to questions? Ms Carnie: I will keep my statement very brief because I have had the opportunity to hear what Peter, Thomas and Roz have said. No-one should have to choose between being recognised for who they are and being married to the person they love. As listening to Roz tell her story so courageously just now has driven home, it is an impossible choice between two fundamental parts of who you are. As the ‘yes’ campaign maintained from start to end, marriage equality is fundamentally about fairness and equality, dignity and respect. The postal survey last year took a serious toll on the mental health and resilience of many LGBTI people, but it did provide clear and unequivocal proof that the clear majority of Queenslanders support marriage equality and it is time that all of our laws do as well. The bill before the committee will finally deliver full marriage equality to all of the transgender people like Roz Dickson and their families who are affected by these laws today and the countless more who will not have to face this injustice and indignity in the future. It is a small but significant change that will mean transgender people can be free to be who they are while maintaining their commitment to the person they fell in love with. Brisbane - 3 - 23 Mar 2018

Public Hearing—Inquiry into the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2018

I also congratulate the Queensland government on being the first state or territory in Australia to table a bill that will remove this unfair barrier to legal recognition after marriage equality was introduced federally last year. Members of the committee are no doubt already aware that the LGBTI community waited many years for the day marriage equality became a reality, and we are hopeful that if this bill is passed it may soon truly become a reality for every single member of our proud and diverse community. CHAIR: I will open it up to committee members for questions. James, do you have any questions? Mr LISTER: I have no questions, but thank you very much to everyone for appearing today. Mrs McMAHON: Thank you all very much for attending. I would like to acknowledge that Roz is a constituent of mine and I have previously had meetings with her on this topic before the bill was even tabled. Thank you, Roz, for coming today. You have obviously told us your personal story, but can you explain what it will mean for trans people in general to not have to divorce their partner to note a change of sex on a birth certificate? We have heard your story, but what will this change of legislation mean for you personally in terms of what you will be able to do? Ms Dickson: There are other couples in Queensland who are married. There is a couple who appeared with me in a Courier-Mail article in 2015, but since marriage equality has meant community acceptance as a couple they have no great desire to participate publicly in this process, but they eagerly await the outcome. Stigma hurts lives, and in the early days transgender people feared marriage annulment. That is our history of common law in Australia. Those couples who I am friends with are very hopeful that this will just happen and it will be gone for them. For me personally, even though I am post-operative I still have concerns about visiting certain places in the world. There are places where they push bathroom bills and there are countries where your birth certificate is the primary reference of your sex or gender. I obviously have concerns because when I enter a country I do not know whether entering with a female passport is sufficient evidence. I do not know every country’s local laws, but to be consistent would be wonderful. It would take away those worries and fears. Married people who are considering transition will be able to have discussions with their partner about the future of their relationship aside from something that feels coercive. The expectancy of society is that divorce should happen because you cannot stay that way and be completely transitioned. That stigma passing away and going from our society will help the mental health of many transgender people and it will help my mental health as well. I applied for my birth certificate change on my birthday on 18 December. I wandered into the births, deaths and marriages office and walked out without anything. The paperwork is there. It is pending. After years of campaigning for marriage equality, to still not have it hurts. It hurts a great deal. Mrs McMAHON: Tom, from a legal services point of view why is changing this legislation so important? Mr Clark: As Roz has so articulately mentioned, forcing people in the community to choose between two of the most important aspects of life—their identity and the person they love—is an impossible choice. Legally it creates a lot of issues for these people arising from having to prove your identity to schools or law enforcement and that kind of thing. Every single time you might have to prove your identity you are at risk of outing yourself and identifying with someone that is not who you are today. We have not provided legal advice to an extensive number of members of the transgender community looking to change their birth certificates because it is widely known that you cannot. It is not an option, so people have had to accept that for years. When I mentioned before the veteran who we did provide advice to, we did so on the basis that we wanted to be clear as to what the law is. People know that you cannot change a birth certificate, and the fact there is no hope is really hurtful to a lot of members of the LGBTIQ community. Ms McMILLAN: Thank you sincerely to each and every one of you. I acknowledge Roz for sharing her very courageous story today. It is something that is very important to the Palaszczuk government. Peter, what does the Palaszczuk government’s record and commitment to equality mean to members of the LGBTIQ community? Mr Black: I think it is very clear that the Palaszczuk government, especially in its last term, passed a series of law reforms that were very important to the LGBTIQ community. Indeed, the president of the LGBTI Legal Service, Matilda Alexander, described those reforms as a ‘rainbow revolution’. There is no doubt that the Palaszczuk government has had a good track record with matters ranging from age of consent to expungement and other issues as well. That is not to say that there is Brisbane - 4 - 23 Mar 2018

Public Hearing—Inquiry into the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2018 not much work to be done, particularly in the area of laws relating to trans and intersex people. This bill is one step along that path. We would certainly encourage the Palaszczuk government to continue its commitment to equality. I think what has also been very pleasing in the last term of government is that the suite of reforms that were passed by the Palaszczuk government were done in a bipartisan manner, and that was really important to the LGBTIQ community. These should not be bitter partisan issues. These are issues of respect and equality for all Queenslanders. CHAIR: Peter, do you have something to add in relation to the previous discussion? Mr Black: If I could briefly reply to Mrs McMahon’s question about some of the legal background. The other legal reason is the fact that there is currently an exemption under the federal Sex Discrimination Act that allows the states to discriminate on the basis of their gender for the purposes of being able to change your birth certificate or not, depending upon whether you are married. When the marriage equality legislation was passed last year, there was a provision in that act that provided for the repeal of section 40(5) of the Sex Discrimination Act that would take effect 12 months as of passage of that marriage equality legislation. What that means is that up until 7 December this year the states are not in breach of the Sex Discrimination Act for continuing to have this requirement in our birth, deaths and marriages registration legislation, but as soon as that 12 months is up Queensland—as well as the other states if they have not acted—will be discriminating on the basis of a person’s gender and could well face repercussions from the Human Rights Commission. I wanted to throw that into the mix in terms of another cold political and legal reason as to why it is so important for the state government to act this year. Ms Carnie: I want to comment briefly, following up from Peter about some of the other legal reasons in addition to it making a real difference to the everyday lives of transgender people, I wanted to ask: did you say 7 December 2018? Mr Black: I think that is what I said, but I probably meant the date that the law came into effect rather than the date that it was passed. Ms Carnie: Yes. I think the Queensland government has until 9 December. I did not hear you clearly because I am on the phone. Mr Black: No, I misspoke. I said the 7th, not the 9th. Ms Carnie: In addition to that there are three other legal reasons I can think of. Firstly, we often present that there is an option for transgender people to choose between divorce or being legally recognised, but when it comes down to the Family Law Act it is not properly a choice because in order to apply for a divorce you have to swear or affirm that there are irreconcilable differences between you and your spouse. If there are not actually irreconcilable differences, if you still very much want to be married to your spouse, you are not able to apply for a divorce unless you perjure yourself. The second reason, and I think Roz mentioned this briefly, is that having this requirement may lead to inconsistencies between state and federal identity documents where, for example, passport guidelines do not have the unmarried requirement but currently the Queensland bill does. The third reason relates to a case before the United Nations human rights committee last year. This was a decision they made in relation to the New South Wales equivalent provision which said that, essentially, differential treatment under births, deaths and marriages laws between married persons and unmarried persons when it comes to recognising and registering an amendment of their sex on their birth certificate when it is not based on reasonable or objective criteria does constitute discrimination on the basis of married and transgender status under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Ms Dickson: Lee has basically covered this, but I was going to come back to G’s United Nations case. I know Grace personally, and as soon as she received notification of the UN finding that it was discrimination she contacted me and we have had these discussions. I really am looking forward to changes in the law to remove the discrimination. CHAIR: Thank you, Roz. That concludes this hearing. Thank you very much to the witnesses who participated today. We would also like to thank the witnesses who provided written submissions to the legislation. Thank you to the Hansard reporters for helping. A transcript of these proceedings will be available on the committee’s parliamentary web page in due course. I declare this public hearing for the committee’s inquiry into the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2018 closed. The committee adjourned at 11.47 am.

Brisbane - 5 - 23 Mar 2018