Civil Unions

Civil Unions provide a way to become legally commited to a partner, the same way marriage does. They became legal in New Zealand in April 2005, after the Civil Union Act was passed into law in December 2004. This meant that couples could apply for legal recognition of their relationship, regardless of the gender or sexual orientation of the parties involved.

Legally, only people of the opposite sex may marry, but this restriction does not apply to civil unions (about 1/5th of civil unions in New Zealand are for heterosexual, or 'straight', couples.). Couples who were married before civil unions became legal are also able to change their marriage to a civil union - and opposite-sex couples who want to change their civil union to marriage are also able to do so (this is not available to same-sex couples, though).

While many viewed New Zealand's Civil Union legislation as a positive step forward for the rights of same-sex couples, some believe that it is not enough, and that marriage should be made available to all. Still others have argued for the abolition of marriage entirely, with civil unions as the only legally recognised option available for all.

The issue of Civil unions may no longer be as important as it was in the 2005 election, but it's still worth caring about. Whether or not you are planning to become legally committed to someone, being aware of the law and of the human rights surrounding your ability to do so continue to be important.

In the 2002 General Election manifesto, the Labour Party promised to introduce civil unions. After their re-election, they spent 18 months getting the legislation drafted, and the Bills written. After three readings of the Civil Union bill, the Act was passed into law at the end of 2004.

Labour MP's voted with their consciences on the Civil Union Bill. They were 45/6 in favour.

Currently, the familiar problem of Labour and up-to-date policy statements applies. However, given their active push to bring Civil Unions into law, you can be pretty sure they like the Act, and intend to keep it.

In 2004, National MP's voted with their consciences on the Civil Union Bill. They were 3/24 against.

Prior to the 2005 election, National stated that if they were elected, they would alter the Civil Union Act to make unions available only to same-sex couples. As they didn't win the election, there were no changes.

Currently, National have made no statement available regarding their stance on civil unions. There is no official word on whether they still intend to make the change.

In 2004, NZ First allowed a conscience vote on the Civil Union Bill, with 1/12 against. Prior to this, NZ First had called for a referendum on Civil Unions. While very little can be found on the NZ First party website about this issue, Winston Peters referred to it in the final debate as:

"simply a 'sop' to the gay community, but one which ultimately treated them as second-class citizens because it denied them the right to marry."

In the lead-up to the 2005 election, NZ First's policy was to hold a referendum on repealing the Civil Union Bill.

Currently, NZ First's website does not contain any reference to civil unions in their policies, including within the Family, Youth and Social policy, where it would be most likely.

The Green Party have had a policy on Sexual Orientation since 1999. They actively worked on the Bill and were very much in favour of it passing into law.

The Greens opposed the call for a referendum in 2004, stating:

"It is not appropriate to invite New Zealanders to directly vote on whether or not a minority should be entitled to their human rights and equal treatment before the law."

Greens were the only party have policy favouring the the Civil Union Bill, and to vote accordingly. They contributed 9 votes in favour.

Currently, the Green Party include a mention of Civil Unions in their policy on Sexual Orientation, where they say:

"We support the extension of all legal partnership arrangements and rights to same-sex couples."

The Maori Party had one vote to contribute, and it was cast against the bill.

However, Tariana Turia wrote an interesting article about Understanding Difference, shortly after the Bill was passed.

"The concerns that I had around this Bill were not to do with sexual orientation, with sexuality, with sexual preference. It is my firm belief that we must embrace all members of our whanau, of our communities and promote respect as a central value in all of our relationships."

The Maori Party website does not show any current policy, however this particular phrase from their Sexual Orientation policy release (2005) should be noted:

"Values such as manaakitanga, whakapapa and whanaungatanga ask that all peoples be embraced, included and regarded, that their differences be acknowledged and respected, and that the relationships and connections between all peoples be recognised and affirmed."

Very little can be found on the United Party's website about their position on the Civil Union Bill. However, statements made during the readings of the bill are clear. This is what Murray Smith, a United Future MP, said during the final reading:

"This is not a human rights issue. The issue of same-sex marriage is not a human right. It is not a human right to have one’s relationship recognised by the State."

United allowed a conscience vote on the the Civil Union Bill, however all 8 MP's were opposed.

Prior to the 2005 election, United's policy was to amend the law so as to protect gay couples' rights to share and inherit property and be buried together, but remove equal status with marriage. They also proposed a bill to define marriage as between man and woman.

In the lead-up to the 2008 election, neither their Family nor their Gender Affairs policy mention civil unions at all. There is no official word on whether they still intend to make amendments to the Act if they are elected into power.

Act allowed a conscience vote on the the Civil Union Bill. They were 5/4 in favour.

In 2006, Rodney Hide wrote in a blog post about civil unions and marriage that:

"There's now more choice, that must be a good thing."

In the lead-up to the 2008 election, there is no current statement available regarding their stance on civil unions. This is not surprising, as there do not appear to be policy statements about this issue prior to the 2005 election either.

If you're curious as to who voted which way for the final reading of the bill, you can see the results on the CommoNZ Parliamentary Database.