“The Attorney-General’s Department says the new fee is necessary to fund industry reforms and stop unprofessional celebrants ruining wedding days, but it would not apply to religious celebrants because the department did not incur any costs for registering or regulating them.” … ” A spokeswoman for the Attorney-General’s Department said the Government was concerned there were celebrants failing to maintain appropriately professional standards.”
Reference: Waverley Leader News Story Hitch for Civil Weddings
Truth about complaints and standards:
20 Statutory Complaints in 2009 from 8546 celebrants performing 72070 marriages.
ie complaint rate of 0.23 % of those celebrants
or 0.03% of all marriages performed by Commonwealth marriage celebrants.
(See Marriage Statistics from freedom of information - scroll down to Complaints).
Surely $ 4.2 million is a high price for civil couples to pay for such a low complaint rate?
How can the Commonwealth Government which is responsible for THE Marriage Act and Regulations that determines ALL Australians marriages say it only concerns itself with one third of all registered marriage celebrants?
The issue is rather complex, with the government using the old boundaries in the Marriage Act to justify this cost recovery from only one sector of the marrying public.
- Basically when the current Marriage Act was created in 1961, the Commonwealth allowed religious celebrants to marry couples on its behalf.
- As a religious organisation selects its celebrants and supervises them, the Marriage Act only requires that the religious organisation apply to the Commonwealth Attorney General's Department to be "Recognised" and when approved, is able to nominate a number of its celebrants to the relevant State Registry Office for registration. This assumes that all Recognised religious celebrants are Fit & Proper persons.
- It is assumed also that the Recognised Religious Organisation ensures that their celebrants do ongoing professional development and meet all the same requirements of the Act as does any celebrant, except for the form of service and the wording within.
- Recognised Religious under Section 47 are free to add extra requirements as well as decline to provide their marriage services as they see fit.
- Similar principles underpinned the appointment and regulation of all types of celebrants until 2003.
- In 1973, an existing section of that Act was used to appoint independent civil marriage celebrants on a needs basis.
- In 2003 new appointment criteria was introduced to improve transparency and measures to increase professionalism such as compulsory OPD and 5 yearly reviews established.
- Also in 2003 the needs based system was dismantled and a Registrar of Celebrants position created to overisght the new 'open market' based marriage celebrant program.
However the effect of these changes to improve professionalism now means that independent Commonwealth Appointed Marriage Celebrants can have their appointments cancelled on grounds that do NOT apply to ALL marriage celebrants
- With the so called "Professional Celebrants" fe, failure to pay this annual also will provide another grounds upon which to cancel appointments!
Likewise DISCRIMINATORY in that Recognised Religious Celebrants do not pay and will not be required to pay an annual fee to stay registered either to their religious organisations or to the BDMs.
In fact, I recently came across an article that proposed a solution to the sort of discrimination problems that are inherent in the Australian Marriage Act. Basically the author Peter Norden, A.O., a Vice Chancellor's Fellow, in the Melbourne Law School at the University of Melbourne, proposing a system such as operated by France. That is that all marriages be done by civil celebrants and that religious organisations offer a religious blessing of the marriage according to the rights of their church. Peter's paper Marriages, weddings and same-sex couples: a new approach was prepared as a response to the recent debates about same sex marriage.
Australia is different to America and the United Kingdom, where the church/ state divide is much clearer and enforced. Australia has a much more tolerant attitude to people with religious belief systems, which can be argued as important from a human rights perspective. However, what Australia is lacking, both Constitutionally and in practice, in equal respect for people with belief systems based upon spiritual values that support human and civil rights, whether one has a religious affiliation or not.
In raising these difficult issues of fairness and equity of the appointment of Marriage Celebrants in Australia, the CCN Inc is not arguing for low standards at all.
Rather that if the Australia public should be reassured that all marriages meet the same requirements for validity, whether the marriage is conducted in a religious or civil setting. Therefore the same grounds for de-registration need to apply to all marriage celebrants.
This is an important matter that the CCN Inc is raising in its submission to government on behalf of its members and the civil celebrant community as a whole.
Rona Goold
CCN Inc Chairperson
Civil Celebrations Network Inc.
THE LONG VERSION
In Western Tradition marriage started as a secular (civil) function, with priests not being involved until about a century later.
A half a century ago Federal Marriage Act 1961 was created by Sir Garfield Barwick as a amalgamation of States and Territories Marriage Acts.
- At the time 2% of weddings were civil Registry Office weddings.
In 1973 Federal Attorney General Lionel Murphy used a section of the Act to appoint "Independent civil celebrants" to provide a meaningful and dignified alternative to Religious and Registry Office weddings.
- This program was a world first in granting equal status to civil celebrants as to religious celebrants.
- By appointing women as well as men also granted equal rights to all adults (whatever their gender or sexuality). One could say an affirmative action for women.
- And the Marriage Act gave the Religious Celebrants the right to marry under the Act, with high degree of autonomy and respect.
- So in both these ways, civil and human rights principles were applied to the Marriage Act.
- Given the climate at the time, approximately 60,000 religious men and a few civil men, were performing all the marriages in Australia, this was a controversial move.
- This government initiative was set up as a needs based system, initially conceiving "community leaders" taking on a "specialised community celebrant" role with fees set by the government. Thus the appointment requirement for volunteer community service, public speaking experience, character references and local MP endorsement.
- Early civil celebrants were advised to ensure that they "did not step on the toes" of the religious celebrants.
- The Federal Attorney was directly responsible for the administration of the Act, and one Public Servant looked after the program.
- There was no Registrar of Celebrants, nor a Marriage Law and Celebrant Section.
- For 40 years, this program grew in strength and civil celebrants commenced offering a range of rites of passage at the request of their communities. eg civil namings and funerals being the most obvious.
- As Australian society continues to become increasingly secular, civil celebrants are evolving to offer similar services to religious celebrants to mark life transitions.
- As such civil celebrants were developing into a full profession, rather than a largely weekend activity.
In the 1980s, the Attorney General’s office introduced a policy of only employing celebrants over the age of 35 years.
- This meant that by 2000 in a needs based program with high retention of celebrants and thus little turnover, that 70% of civil celebrants were over the age of 50.
- This had not been the case with original appointments, many of whom were in their twenties.
In 1993, legal action was commenced on the basis of restriction of trade under the Trade Practices Act against the Government Set Fee.
- It was argued that the work of providing personalized ceremonies for couples and their families, meant the independent civil celebrants were doing more work than either registry office celebrants or recognized religious celebrants.
- Thus that independents should have the same rights as religious celebrants to set their own fees.
In 1995, as the result of the successful court action on the set fee, the government changes its rules to allow independent celebrants to set their own fees for marrying couples.
- In 1995, still under the needs based appointment system, the ratio of weddings per celebrant per annum was 64, meaning most celebrants would have covered all their out-of-pocket expenses, and many would have been making an hourly rate for their still part-time wedding work.
- To ensure that these independent community marriage celebrants did not take advantage of the general public, the Attorney General at the time, raised the ratio of celebrants per head of population, virtually doubling the number of celebrants over night.
- For the first time, independent community marriage celebrants were placed in a situation of competition between each other for wedding work.
- Also the false public perception that community celebrants were running small businesses was strengthened.
- This perception has dogged community celebrants, as the majority of the work they do is not seen by the guests at a wedding.
By 1999 the numbers of weddings per celebrant pa had dropped to an average of 32
- Independent civil celebrants must cover all their own set-up and running costs unlike registry celebrants who receive a government wage or Recognised religious celebrants who receive a stipend, accommodation and other support by their religious organizations.
- Thus the ratio of weddings per celebrant pa of would need to 100, for community based marriage celebrants to make a full-time sustainable wage equivalent from weddings work alone.
- Analysis of the details of these figures showed only less than 4% (64 out of 1671) civil celebrants were able to make a weekly wage equivalent from wedding work alone.
- 62 % of community celebrants were doing 25 or less weddings pa ( of these 7% doing none) and 21% doing between 25 and 50 weddings per annum.
- These figures demonstrate that from the mid nineties, the work of community based marriage celebrants has not been able to sustain a full time wage equivalent for the vast majority of marriage celebrants.
In 2003 the Federal Government made major changes to the Australian Marriage Act.
- Needs based system, which was initially conceived as "community leaders" taking on a "specialised community marriage celebrant" role with fees set by the government, was dismantled.
- New changes were that Commonwealth appointed Civil and Independent religious (minority group) celebrants (CMCs) were now required to:
- be trained prior to appointment
- abide by a "Code of Practice"
- provide couples with Complaints information
- do 5 hours compulsory Ongoing Professional Development each year and
- provide appropriate information to the Attorney General's Department (AGD).
- Reasonable requirements to increase the professionalism of marriage celebrants providing marriage services to the community on behalf of the government, except all these new requirements do not apply to Recognised Religious and State Registry Office celebrants, many of whom also receive remuneration for their services.
- Training for appointment as a Marriage Celebrant was set a single unit of a VET/TAFE despite celebrant associations advising an 11 unit Certificate IV in Marriage Celebrancy.
- This very low standard for such an important legal community function was exploited by some commercially based Registered Training Organisations (RTO), who misled the public to believe that lucrative career could be had as a Independent Marriage Celebrant.
- This low entry level and its delivery by commercially motivated RTOs has created many problems.
- Also the "open market" approach has resulted a huge rise in the number of Commonwealth appointed marriage celebrants from 3400 (1700 civil and 1700 non-aligned religious) in 1999 to 10,800 in 2009
- Thus a corresponding huge drop in the average number weddings per celebrant per year from 64 weddings per celebrant pa in 1995 to 6.6 weddings per celebrant pa in 2009
- This means the average income per Commonwealth appointed marriage celebrant is less than $ 3,500 gross.
The "open market" approach has further stigmatised civil celebrants as simply commercial motivated small businesses who deserve no special recognition or respect as given to religious marriage celebrants.
- This "commercial" approach also means the high degree of more professional sharing information and resources has been limited by an increasing climate of "competition" between Commonwealth appointed marriage celebrants.
- In response to these problems the government has become increasingly narrow in its interpretations of the Marriage Act, especially as related to Sections 45 and 46. Ie "Words to that effect" are being substituted to "Words that mean exactly the same as",
- Now Commonwealth appointed marriage celebrants are being threatened with de-registration, should they allow their couples any variation in their vows other than those approved by the AGD.
- Recognised Religious Celebrants are given the freedom to interpret Sections 45 and 46 to suit their own circumstances, even to the point that the vows so not need to be said in any similar format to those required of CMCs and all their marriages are considered valid
- Commonwealth appointed marriage celebrants are being advised that their couple's marriages may be invalid if these narrow approved interpretations are not followed.
- Given the freedom of interpretation given Recognised Religious Celebrant have, it is now obvious that the Marriage Law and Celebrant Section is now creating problems that did not exist before 2003.
In May this year 2011, Budget Announcements of new Regulations to the Marriage Celebrant Program (including the imposition of Registration fees on only Commonwealth appointed celebrants), by the Attorney General is further measure upon which Commonwealth appointed marriage celebrants can be deregistered.
All options proposed in the Regulation Impact Statement by the Attorney General’s Department are based on the premise that review regulation and discipline of existing Commonwealth appointed marriage celebrants (civil and independent religious) by an increased number of federal public servants would reduce the number of marriage celebrants who do not
-
comply with administrative requirements (give change of contact details within 30days)
-
do not do their OPD (5 hours pa untested activity)
-
adhere to sections 45 and 46 of the Marriage Act as strictly as the MLCS requires (even though Recognised Religious and BDM marriage celebrants are given full flexibility)
Even though there is no guarantee that compliance with the above, as assessed by the Department in a one-off review every five years, can be guaranteed to translate into practical application by the marriage celebrant in their on-going performance of their duties.
In fact, if all the arguments posed in the Regulation Impact Statement ware true – that is –
-
none or little training in legal and compliance requirements by marriage celebrants
-
failure to do the mandatory “Ongoing Professional Development”
-
failure to comply with Section 45 and 46 of the Marriage Act
-
little marriage experience ie average 6.6 weddings pa
-
poor paperwork supplied to the state Registry Offices.
threatens the validity of marriage and means a lack quality and professionalism of services provided by marriage celebrants .....
then one can seriously question the competence and compliance of all Recognised Religious marriage celebrants who
-
have no specific training in the Marriage Act and its Regulations required for appointment
-
are not required to do the specific, improved, “Ongoing Professional Development”
-
Are free to choose their own interpretations of Sections 45 and 46
-
also provide poor paperwork to the state Registry Offices of the Marriage Act
-
perform an average of less than 2 weddings pa
-
are not required to adhere to a Code of Practice.
So measures that were brought in to enhance the professionalism of independent marriage celebrants is now being used to withdraw their government appointments - essentially sacking these people!
But not so for state appointed mariage celebtants, the bulk of whom are the 23,500 thousand non-aligned religious marriage celebrants from 120 religious organisations.
SUMMARY: