Transcopic

Supporters of marriage equality have vowed to continue campaigning after the High Court gave a green light to the same-sex marriage postal vote.

Campaigning for the “yes” vote started almost immediately after the decision was handed down on Thursday afternoon, with supporters handing out pamphlets outside the High Court and neighbouring Flagstaff railway station.

But the verdict has stirred up real concerns among members of the LGBTI community who feared the debate had given rise to intolerance they had not seen in decades.

Wil Strack, 52, was among the campaigners outside court and said she was “very disappointed with the decision”.

“If it has to happen then now we need to go full swing into the campaign,” the Footscray woman said.

“It impacts on me, I’d like to marry my partner. We had a ceremony last year with our family and friends because we got tired of waiting.

“Now that we know the decision, we just really need to get on and campaign.

“We’d like it to be legal, the kids would like it to be legal. We’re expecting another grandchild next year and we’re sure our grandkids would like it to be legal as well.”

Preston woman Lee Gibbens said the decision was “like a death to the LGBTQI community” and said the debate had enabled a degree of homophobia.

While waiting at a bus stop last Friday, Ms Gibbens said a group of men in a car abused her and called out “f—ing dyke’ while stopped at a level crossing.

“I didn’t realise how I felt about it until later,” Ms Gibbens said.

“I was emotional and my housemate hugged me and I said, ‘I haven’t had that since I came out in the 80s’.

“I can handle it, I’m a mature-aged woman, but I worry about the kids and the parents that are in same-sex marriages, whether that be two men or two women, that have kids.”

Ms Gibbens said she wanted to be able to get married one day and described the High Court’s two-day hearing as “nasty” at times.

“I’m doing this for myself and my community and for the next generation. This is wrong. It’s absolutely wrong.”

“Malcolm Turnbull should be ashamed of himself.”

‘Yes’ campaigner Nicole Fedyszen is straight but was busy distributing pamphlets on the grey Thursday afternoon.

“It’s a sad day for equality, all we can do now, despite having to do this survey, we’re going to do it right,” she said.

“And every inch of free time I have is going to be spent pushing the ‘yes’ vote, reminding people to vote.

“It affects all of us personally. We want to live in a society where we all have equal rights, that’s the Australia I want to live in.”

This article appeared online at The Age and in print September 8.

This Father’s Day, seven-year-old Max will buy three presents for his three dads.

Kids at school often ask Max: “Where’s your mum?”

Max says he doesn’t have one. Instead he has a “special lady” who helped his dads have him.

“He knows there was an egg donor and there was a surrogate. We’ve explained the process so that a seven-year-old can understand it,” says one of his fathers, Jason Schutze-Stafford.

“He’s very proud of the fact that he’s got three dads in his life. It’s never been an issue for him. He’s very upfront about it.”

Jason, Wayne and Brendan – Jason’s former partner who still plays a role in Max’s life – are gay dads.

They brought a three-week-old Max home after what Jason described as a relatively smooth two-year overseas surrogacy process that calls for a DNA testing to ensure that Max would be an Australian citizen, and preparing passports and exit visas.

“We had moments of stress but also had moments of joy, feeling really blessed that we were able to have Max in our lives,” Jason says.

The men are honest with their son, having regular conversations with him about their modern family. “Every family is different; some have two mums, some two dads, the combinations may be different, but every family is perfect in their own way,” Jason says.

“We don’t judge anyone because they’re different, or because their family is different to yours or anything like that.”

There’s no doubt the family model in Australia is changing. There were 47,000 same-sex couples counted in the 2016 census, up from 33,000 relationships in 2011.

While one-quarter of female same-sex couples have children; for men it is just 4.5 per cent.

Jason has shared books on diversity with Max’s school to encourage conversations around families, difference and acceptance.

“There’s a large proportion of kids who do have mums so we’ve just reinforced the message around diversity and not to assume that every family is the same,” Jason says.

“On a day-to-day basis, our family is very similar to a lot of others in terms of the challenges that we face with the whole parenting and working balance.

“The real thing that I always encourage is to have the conversations with your kids about diversity – different is OK. There’s nothing to fear about difference and not to judge anyone because of that difference.”

This article originally appeared online at The Sydney Morning Herald and in print September 3.

When people ask Brett Eagleton if toddler Katie is his granddaughter, he laughs.

Katie, who is 20 months old, is his first child.

But 59-year-old Mr Eagleton is not fazed by what others might think about his age. “People see that our bond is very strong,” he says.

The disability support worker married his long-term partner, Kim, when he was 51.

Kim, 36, who works at a Salvation Army store, wanted to have children, and supporting her was important to Mr Eagleton. The couple’s only concern was ensuring they had a child-friendly home.

When Katie was born, it only reaffirmed their decision to have children. “It’s the most beautiful thing that’s ever happened to me in my life,” Mr Eagleton says.

“It wasn’t a practical and available option for me when I was younger, so I don’t dwell upon it at all.

“I’ve definitely got to maintain my health and thankfully that is the case. There are practical realities when you have a child when you’re older, but I don’t regret that I couldn’t do it; it just happened at the time when it was meant to happen.”

Mr Eagleton  has become accustomed to the usual fatherly duties, such as changing nappies and getting up in the middle of the night.

He attends a dads’ group, and says that older fathers are not an anomaly at the get-togethers. In fact, seeing a young dad is “unusual”.

“I think that the older dads are more motivated to attend these groups, so I haven’t felt conspicuous or the odd man out because I was older. There have been numerous older dads.”

In Victoria, the median age for fathers is 34.

Research from Roy Morgan shows that about 14 per cent of Australian fathers of children under the age of 16 are aged 50 or older – an increase of 20 per cent in four years. By contrast, 7 per cent of mothers over 50 have children under the age of 16.

“I live in the St Kilda area, and it is remarkable how many older dads there are,” says Mr Eagleton.

“There are just older dads everywhere. And at the childcare centre when I’m dropping off Kate, there are numerous older dads. It’s just not an issue.”

For Father’s Day, the family will attend a YMCA dads’ fun run.

“The way that my life played out, it could well have been the case that [fatherhood] never happened,” says Mr Eagleton. “And the fact that it has happened is remarkable.

“I’m not taking it for granted at all. I’m aware of the experience I’m going through – how remarkable it is – and trying to take in every moment.”

This article originally appeared online at The Age, and in print, September 2.

When it comes to naming Melbourne’s new train stations, commuters are torn between the creative and the bleeding obvious.

A competition to name the Metro Tunnel’s five new underground stations has prompted a wide range of suggestions, from the culturally significant to the contemporary (hello ‘Smashed Avo’ station).

But Daniel Bowen from the Public Transport Users Association said that while it might be tempting to name the landmarks after celebrities or historic figures, the monikers should, most importantly, tell people where the stations are.

“These stations will be with us for decades, hopefully centuries to come, and it is important that the names help people trying to navigate their way around Melbourne,” he said.

“What we don’t want is another station name like Southern Cross, which is basically meaningless – it tells you nothing about where it is in the city.”

“Much easier for everyone concerned. Spencer Street was a better name than Southern Cross. Museum was better than Melbourne Central,” one reader said.

“Call it where it is geographically located rather than some gimmick name that will sooner or later be irrelevant,” another wrote.

“A geographical name makes life so much easier for all travellers including tourists. Revert Southern Cross to Spencer Street at the same time!!”

Another dismissed the usefulness of a public vote: “It will cost the taxpayers … and in the end the suits will name them: Arden, Parkville, Domain and Swanston.”

The stations will be built as part of the $11 billion Metro Tunnel project at Arden, Parkville, Domain and under Swanston Street in the CBD.

Premier Daniel Andrews announced the public vote on Sunday, saying an advisory panel would assess suggestions and submit a shortlist of names for the government to consider to ensure “sensible names”.

Rules of the vote say names should be relevant to a specific location, be clear and easy to write, and no longer than 25 characters and three words (except for Aboriginal names).

Suggestions honouring people should ensure the person is held in high regard by the community and preferably connected to the location.

The rules also suggest avoiding the names of people who are still alive.

Many readers have suggested the names should pay tribute to Melbourne’s Aboriginal heritage.

“Would be good to see stations named after the traditional owners of the land to recognise that the land was taken from them,” Toby Jones said.

Reader Richard Knight took a more lighthearted approach: “Should just call them Australian slang words, imagine arriving at ‘You Beauty’.”

People have until October 22 to submit their station name suggestions at metrotunnel.vic.gov.au.

This article originally appeared online at The Age and in print, August 29.

Upset Fitzroy residents have been petitioning against a large new development planned by Australian Catholic University that they fear will impact on the area’s liveability.

The ACU’s proposed 14-storey building and underground parking lot has generated local concern about congestion and noise.

Residents fear that the proposed parking lot for 350 cars will cause severe traffic issues, noise pollution and endanger cyclists of Napier St, the narrow one-way street which will face the brunt of the development.

The development proposes to convert Napier St into a two-way street and place a roundabout at the southern end of the street, disrupting one of Melbourne’s busiest bike paths. Permit parking on the west side of the street will also be removed.

Napier St is also renowned for its heritage and conservationists fear that the development will destroy the street’s history, especially with part of the development to include building on top of heritage buildings.

The concerned residents formed the South Fitzroy Protection Group Inc (SFPG) to lobby for a more sympathetic development design to suit a small inner city suburb.

Group member Phillip Campbell said he doesn’t oppose the development but is concerned at the proposed size of the additions.

“We don’t oppose it, we just oppose the scale of it,” he said.

The first Development Plan (DP) was submitted in 1998 and was approved by the council and ACU constructed a series of new additions.

In 2016 neighbouring property owners were then advised by the City of Yarra of ACU’s proposal to amend the approved Australian Catholic University Development Plan in line with a Yarrar Planning Scheme clause to provide for new additions to the development.

Currently a development plan can lay out guidelines for future development, indicating on a map the propositions. But once the plan is implemented, pending Council approval, the plan is then exempt from third party notice and appeal rights for individual building projects.

“They’re taking advantage of the rules and pushing the boundaries of those rules,” Mr Campbell said.

“And to our view what they’re doing is they’re not being honest with what they intend to do with the total site.”

“We understand that the university needs to do things, but these things have got to be done in the right scale.”

The group of more than 115 residents lobbied for a public meeting with ACU representatives to present their intentions with supporting documentation to the attendees.

ACU has re-submitted its plans, but in a slightly reduced format which residents feel did not sufficiently take notice to what is required in the area.

At a recent council meeting, the council’s planning department agreed with the university, but the members of the SFPG lobbied individual councilors who voted unanimously to overturn the planning department’s decision.

The plan of the 15-storey building has now been reduced to 12, all on-street parking [to be retained?] on the east side of Napier St, and the removal of two trees.

But residents continue to find the designs problematic and unsuitable for the area.

Local businesses on Victoria Parade will also face the brunt of the changes, particularly those who use Napier Street for parking.

Athena Papas, owner of Scent of a Flower, says that the development will make parking her delivery van problematic.

“They’re going to cut back a lot of the parking,’’ she said. “We may have to park underground, but then we don’t know if that will be at a cost, or if we’re going to have designated spots for whoever has been affected,” she said.

“The other thing is security. If I’m leaving late at night, and I’ve got to walk through a car park, there’s no safety there either. It’s just a hassle.”

Ms Papas says that she understands the purpose for development, but says that the university should “think of the locals and how it will affect them.”

“If they’re going to bring more traffic into Napier St it’s going to become a very busy road again,” she said.

“They made it a one-way road 15 years ago, just to detain [not sure this is the right word?] how much traffic goes through.”

“It’s more for cyclists now because cyclists have [right of? ]way on the road, so you’ve always got to look out for things like that. If they make it a two-way it’s going to become like Victoria Parade, it’s going to be busy.”

Planning Minister Richard Wynne said he was aware of community concern.

“I’m aware that many members of the community are concerned over Australian Catholic University’s plans to develop in Fitzroy and I appreciate their sentiments,” Mr Wynne said.

“I would encourage the university to work with the local community to find an outcome that satisfies both parties.”

Mr Campbell said: “I think the university has taken a very arrogant attitude to the neighbors and to the community.”

“They’ve got their agendas and I understand their business imperatives but you’ve always got social responsibility and responsibility to the community in which you live.”

“I just don’t think that they’re willing to understand their social responsibility.”

ACU declined to comment but said in a project overview that the development would accommodate the university’s growth and “continue to provide the very best education to a changing, growing community.”

Mr Campbell warned the university about sticking to the proposal. “If the university goes ahead with the way they’re proposing, I think you’re going to have a community here that feels pretty betrayed by the council and the whole state planning department and you’ll see a reaction at the next election,” Mr Campbell said.

Missing locks on main doors at the Dight Street walk-ups in Collingwood concern residents about their safety and security. Photo: Stamatina Hasiotis

Tenants of a Collingwood public housing estate are concerned for their security because the Office of Housing does not have enough money to install new locks on the apartment blocks’ main security doors.

A majority of security doors at the Dight Street walk-ups are missing locks and handles, allowing unauthorised access to the building and leaving some residents feeling unsafe.

One tenant, who did not wish to be named, said that he had called housing security or police about drug dealers and intruders easily entering the building.

“We still see people injecting themselves in the hallway and other drug use,” he said.

The tenant said that he had contacted the Office of Housing to install new locks on several occasions and was told by the Department of Housing and Human Services (DHHS) that funds were not available for new locks to be installed.

City of Yarra councillor Stephen Jolly said he had written to Housing Minister Martin Foley about the issue and was told that funding had been approved.

But Cr Jolly said he and the residents were subsequently informed that there was no funding available for new locks.

“There was some money put aside by the Minister for Housing, by his department, and then we were told that there was no funding available,” Cr Jolly said.

Mr Foley’s office declined to comment on the matter.

A spokesperson from the DHHS said that the Department of Health and Human Services takes security issues seriously and funds a range of services across the Estate, including foot patrols, mobile patrols and CCTV cameras at various locations.

“The department also works closely with Victoria Police to promote tenant safety”, the spokesperson said.

“While access to the foyer of some apartment blocks is locked and is limited to tenants with a key, foyer doors are often propped open.  Locks are also vandalised and regularly replaced.”

Following an inspection of the premises with a Housing Office representative, Cr Jolly, a senior officer and council director, it was suggested [by whom?]that installing new locks would be redundant if in the future they would be removed or disabled.

Joanne Murdoch, director Advocacy and Engagement at the City of Yarra, said the main issue was tenants removing or disabling the locks and then putting rocks in the doorways to prevent them from closing.

“They’re not faulty locks, they’re not locks that over time have broken; they’re actually being disabled, so people keep the doors open,” Ms Murdoch said.

Ms Murdoch says that the problem is “quite complex” because some residents were trying to keep the doors open, while others wanted them locked.

“If you replaced all the locks would the same thing happen again with the new locks because people actually want them open?” she said.

Cr Jolly said that department was displaying a lack of duty of care towards their mainstay residents.

“It’s disrespectful and it’s unsafe for residents. The DHHS in Collingwood should really be hanging their head in shame and it may come to the need for some type of protest,” he said.

Ms Murdoch says that while the tenants are Yarra residents, they were also tenants of the state’s department of housing.

“From council’s point of view, our role is an advocacy role and we’ve met with DHHS to advocate on behalf of the few residents that came along to the council meeting,” she said.

Cr Jolly said residents would use their votes next year against any candidate in the election who was refusing to fix the problem.

“In the more immediate period then, they may have to organise a protest on the estate to get more pressure on the local MP and the housing minister, Martin Foley,” Cr Jolly said.