Shorten dismisses Plibersek's call for binding vote on same-sex marriage
|
Version 0 of 1. Bill Shorten has dismissed his deputy’s call for the Labor party to adopt a binding vote in favour of same-sex marriage, saying the best course of action was “to convince people, not to force them”. The opposition leader said he recognised people had different views on the topic and the focus should remain on pressuring the prime minister, Tony Abbott, to allow Coalition MPs a free vote on the floor of parliament. Labor’s deputy leader and a senior figure of the party’s left faction, Tanya Plibersek, is pushing for the party’s national conference in July to adopt a stronger position in favour of legalising same-sex marriage. Labor has a policy of supporting such legislation but its members are free to vote according to their conscience on the floor of parliament. The shift, if accepted at the national conference, would bind Labor MPs and senators to vote in favour of a bill to allow same-sex marriage. Shorten, who is from the Victorian right faction, said he strongly supported marriage equality, but reaffirmed his position that Labor should preserve a conscience vote. “I believe that we’ve waited too long to see marriage equality in this country,” he said in Sydney on Thursday. “I certainly have a view, though, that the best way to win the argument on marriage equality is to convince people, not to force them. “But Tanya’s got a very long track record of speaking on this issue so I am entirely satisfied this is an important issue and that the Labor party is committed to achieving marriage equality.” Shorten said he did not believe Plibersek’s decision to speak about the issue while he was out of the country earlier this week was an attempt to boost her own personal popularity. “Not at all,” he said. “Tanya’s spoken about this issue previously and so therefore I don’t think anything that she said is any different to what she’s said before.” Three Liberal senators said this week that a Labor decision to bind MPs in favour of same-sex marriage would undermine the push for Coalition MPs to be granted a conscience vote. At present, Coalition policy is to oppose same-sex marriage. Shorten sought to turn the focus back onto the Coalition by saying the challenge was in the government’s court. “What are they going to do, compel people to vote against marriage equality when they believe in it? I think that’s the challenge here,” he said. The Labor frontbencher Kim Carr, a member of the Victorian left, said he did not believe the party’s national conference would scrap the conscience vote. “Bill’s position, I think, has been articulated and carried by the last national conference,” Carr said at a media conference with Shorten. “I would be very surprised if the position that is taken at this conference would be any different.” Plibersek, a senior figure of the left in New South Wales, argued on Monday the party should adopt a binding vote because it was an issue of “whether we support discrimination as a party or whether we don’t”. “I think this is an issue of legal discrimination against one group in our community,” she said on the ABC’s Q&A program. “Do we have a conscience vote about [whether] we allow racism, sexism or ageism? We don’t. “This is legal discrimination which prevents one group in our community accessing the legal rights and obligations marriage confers and it’s discrimination that prevents one group in our community from accessing the social acknowledgement of their relationships which, in many cases, are longstanding, loving, committed relationships.” Members of Labor’s left overwhelmingly support same-sex marriage, but the push for a binding vote is not universally accepted within the faction. Some members of the left and right are concerned that removing a conscience vote would trigger an unnecessary fight with several Labor parliamentarians who have said they will never vote for same-sex marriage. The conservative Shop Distributive and Allied Employees’ Association warned such a decision would result in some Labor parliamentarians crossing the floor to oppose a bill, an action that would trigger expulsion or resignation from the party. Shorten’s argument on Thursday was similar to one advanced publicly by the Labor frontbencher David Feeney, who is also from the Victorian right. Feeney said he supported marriage equality but people should not be coerced to vote for it. “I also think it’s pretty messy for Labor to insist that the Coalition have a conscience vote while at the same time proposing to abandon our own conscience vote,” he told Sky News. “I think the conscience vote is the right mechanism for us to advance this issue on both sides of the parliament.” Deborah O’Neill, a NSW senator who opposes same-sex marriage, would not speculate on crossing the floor in the event of the vote being made binding. “Of course, this is still some time away, and will depend on the conference decision,” she said. “I’ll consider my options over the coming months.” O’Neill argued the party should continue to allow MPs and senators to vote freely on the issue, saying it was only at the last national conference in 2011 that the party resolved to allow a conscience vote. “This was done in recognition of the religious and moral aspects of the proposed amendment to the Marriage Act,” she said. “I voted in favour of a conscience vote then and I’ll continue to advocate for members and senators to vote according to their minds, their beliefs and their hearts in this matter.” Plibersek’s push for a binding vote has the support of Labor’s Senate leader, Penny Wong, who has previously argued that marriage equality should be party policy rather than a matter of conscience. Another member of the Labor left, Jenny Macklin, played down the potential for an unnecessary internal fight. “This will be a debate at our national conference in July and I’m sure it will be resolved then,” she said. “I do think it’s a matter of discrimination and so, no, I don’t think it should be a conscience vote.” |