ࡱ> ')(!`  bjbj\\ .>>$t```` l QSSSSSS$ h& *ww   Q Q   x p` Q0 P P P  D0" ww || I would like to reiterate the point that I made at the consultation: That, as well as redressing the specific disadvantages/inequalities faced by same-sex couples, the manner in which these disadvantages/inequalities are redressed is important. I do not think it is good enough to simply include same-sex relationships through a broader interdependency relationships type category as was done recently with superannuation. Same-sex relationships need to be recognised on an equal basis with opposite-sex relationships. Ideally this should be done through marriage, although, recognising this is unlikely to occur in the short term, at the very least through de facto or civil union recognition. And this should be genuinely equal ie open to both heterosexuals and gay men and lesbians because, as was realised in the US 50 years ago, separate but equal can never be truly equal. [Name Withheld] DE  x h@h/hh6h}hEF x y  ,1h. A!"#$% @@@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DAD Default Paragraph FontRiR  Table Normal4 l4a (k(No ListH@H @ Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJ  "&EFxyJJJJJJJEFxy0000000EFxy000000   ~oIDI:::<<<8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplaceB*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-region Ps   //Y5"kCnx^o}t@]c@p~ @UnknownGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial5& zaTahoma"qhCfCf r4d2P)?2Oh+'0d   , 8DLT\ Normal.dot4Microsoft Office Word@@j]r@j]r՜.+,0 px  \  Title  !$Root Entry F` &1Table WordDocument.SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89qRoot Entry Fgy+1Table WordDocument.SummaryInformation( *DocumentSummaryInformation8pCompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q՜.+,D՜.+,< px  \  Title4 $,