SSM Plebiscite

[Gointocarlton]

Very sensible NM. Nice post.

x2 Cheers NM

[Baggers]

yes, agree. Gutless non existent leadership.

Spot on.

Headline should read: Govt Cowardice To Cost Taxpayers $M122.

[DJC]

yes, agree. Gutless non existent leadership.

Absolutely!

Howard didn't need a $120M opinion poll before he changed the Marriage Act but Turnbull has to have one before he changes it back to what it was before Howard intervened. 

I'm not all that far off the principles Turnbull has espoused over his career but has now sadly consigned to the too hard basket.  It's a real pity that he can't stare down the ultra right troglodytes and champion policies that will make a difference.

[cookie2]

Turnbull is either completely spineless or is a fraud.

[Thryleon]

They're all spineless.

Get paid a lot of money to posture about things and then whittle away our tax dollars on crap.

We could have rolled this plebiscite into the next election at a discount if they were so hell bent on showing how weak they are.

[DJC]

They're all spineless.

Get paid a lot of money to posture about things and then whittle away our tax dollars on crap.

We could have rolled this plebiscite into the next election at a discount if they were so hell bent on showing how weak they are.

But why have a plebiscite?  Howard didn't need one before he changed the Marriage Act.

The conservative rump of the Coalition are desperately trying to put off a parliamentary vote on marriage equality.  That's why Dutton came up with the idea of a $120M non-binding opinion poll.  It's not about democracy or letting people have a say, it's about delaying an inevitable change to marriage equality for as long as possible.  Who knows, Kim Jong Un may start a nuclear war before a bill is put to the Parliament and blokes like Bernardi, Abbott and Abetz will be able to go to there graves happy in the knowledge that they didn't allow that first step down the slippery slope to men wearing dresses.

People elected to Parliament are supposed to lead.  That often entails implementing policies that, while they may not be popular with everyone, serve the public interest and have long term benefits.  That's leadership, a quality that's sadly lacking in our current conservative government.  Whether the alternative government is any better waits to be seen ... but they don't have a terribly high benchmark.

[Mav]

One of the many great lines from Yes, Prime Minister was something like this from the PM, Jim Hacker, referring to the people of Great Britain:

I'm their leader - I must follow them.

But in this case, the idea isn't that the Coalition wants to follow the people; the idea is to frustrate the will of the clear majority of the electorate which supports a same-sex marriage amendment.  After all, this is a non-binding marketing survey.  Hell, even the plebiscite that was proposed but thwarted was non-binding as well.  No doubt, the Coalition is hoping a bit of arm-twisting can happen.  They'd be hoping they can approach members of all political persuasions who are in marginal seats with a view to convincing them that the survey shows that supporting same-sex marriage may cost them their seats (if they can break the figures down to show that voters in their electorates aren't supportive).  If they can create enough uncertainty, they might stop any parliamentary push for change. 

[LP]

But in this case, the idea isn't that the Coalition wants to follow the people; the idea is to frustrate the will of the clear majority of the electorate which supports a same-sex marriage amendment.

Mav, where have you been lately?

It's become very interesting, it seems to me in recent times the bullied have become the bullies, one in the very same with those they accuse!

I was indifferent to the whole idea, I don't see how a piece of paper matters so much that we can waste hundreds of millions of dollars on such an issue. This isn't like the right to vote!

Especially when the country has so many other more important issues that could be easily addressed with that money.

I was happy to vote yes, but after so much recent aggressive behaviour from the group I viewed as pacifists, I'm re-thinking my approach. In effect the extreme "Yes" lobby's behaviour has turned me off supporting them!

As you know, I hate nothing more than being labelled, and it seems I've been labelled as "them" by both sides! Perhaps I will vote to retain the status quo, perhaps that is what the coalition want, they've let the bullies expose themselves! :o

People in my age group have a lot of friends and associates who for various reasons have strong opinions one way or the other, but they are entitled to have that opinion and they are free to voice it in Australia, not get shouted down by a bunch of fanatics. As is often the case the debate has become the domain of extremists.

Surprisingly, there seems to also be a very strong push back from the youth, they are well educated and experienced in recognising bullying. Do not be surprised if things do not go as cleanly and clearly as apparently planned by the "majority".

Thank-you Mr Media. You have proven yet again how destructive and unproductive you can be. I suppose you've cracked the sads because the Victorian's cancelled your state government sponsored private party!

[PaulP]

.........................

I was indifferent to the whole idea, I don't see how a piece of paper matters so much that we can waste hundreds of millions of dollars on such an issue. This isn't like the right to vote!

Especially when the country has so many other more important issues that could be easily addressed with that money.
........................

It matters a lot to gay people, and rightly so. It's not just a piece of paper. The paper has legal, moral and symbolic weight attached to it. A small quote from Elton John :

"There is a world of difference between calling someone your 'partner' and calling them your 'husband'. 'Partner' is a word that should be preserved for people you play tennis with, or work alongside in business. It doesn't come close to describing the love that I have for David, and he for me. In contrast, 'husband' does."

The money angle has nothing to do with gay people. That such a concept even needs an opinion poll is laughable. Blame the pollies.

[LP]

If this poll ends up marginal, things are going to get very bad!