How We Turned The Plebiscite Into A Plebimight

By Samuel Leighton-Dore

This morning Australians woke around the country to a resounding hangover – and not just the kind brought on by copious amounts of booze.

After a long night of cross-referencing contradictory voting projections from every major television network with increasingly erratic and drunken tweets, we collectively felt immense empathy for Leigh Sales when she signed off from her post on the ABC with an exhausted “suck on that Kerry O’Brien” following a marathon 7.5 hours live coverage.

Now, if you’re anything like me, you’re probably feeling a tad frazzled.

Sure, we know that Labor far exceeded the dismal expectations set by the Murdoch media. We know that Malcolm and the Liberals bombed out in a pretty remarkable and unforeseen way. We also know that it’s essentially impossible for Labor to form a majority government – but we could very likely have a hung parliament.

Which, let’s be real, sounds a little bit sexy.

But what does this all mean for the prospect of a plebiscite and, by extension, the ongoing campaign for marriage equality?

In the absence of a Labor majority government (and subsequent free vote), we’re suddenly looking at the very real choice of either facing a Yes/No vote this coming November, or forgoing the plebiscite altogether – waiting unknowable years until Labor win government outright.

And with Labor’s tough anti-plebiscite stance, it could very well be the latter.

“By opposing the popular plebiscite, same-sex marriage activists are willing to sacrifice their entire project just to make sure the people don’t have a right to say.” Writes Miranda Devine in a characteristically patronizing column today.

“What are they frightened of? It’s not really ‘hateful attitudes’. What they fear is that, in the privacy of the polling booth, Australians will decide against redefining the foundational institution of civil society.”

Does Devine actually, for once in her long and retched life, have a legitimate point? Has our passionate all-or-nothing campaign for a free vote on marriage equality ultimately delayed or worked against our own cause?

Maybe.

“Whilst we don’t yet know the result of the election or how marriage equality will be achieved, there is one thing we’re certain of. Over the past eight weeks we have campaigned in over 30 electorates and the support for marriage equality has grown, becoming one of the most important election issues by voting day.” Wrote Australian Marriage Equality in a statement shared on Facebook.

“No matter what the outcome of this election will be, Australia is now better placed to embrace equality.”

This notion of resilience was reflected by others in the community.

“Polling on Friday reiterated that marriage equality support remains at a record high of 70%. Admittedly, there also appears to be strong support for a plebiscite, so people are clearly frustrated with the delay and think a plebiscite will deliver them the reform.” Ivan Hinton-Teoh, LGBTQI activist, tells me.

“However, we know that this isn’t necessarily the case. It’s not an Irish referendum where if we win the vote, we achieve the reform – particularly when MPs aren’t bound and are more likely to look for ways out of voting yes.” He continues.

“We just don’t need to go down the path of splitting the nation on an issue of human rights and establishing a belief that a prejudicial opinion on someone’s access to civil law is equal to the notion that all Australians should be treated equal under law.”

Contrary to Miranda Devine’s comments regarding the LGBTQI community’s supposed fear of basic democratic process, I don’t think our strengthening resolve to achieve marriage equality without stooping to gutter-politics is a sign of fear or cold feet. In fact, I’m pretty sure it’s a sign that we finally understand our own worth and have grown sick-to-bloody-death of compromising on our rights.

After all, you can wrap it up and call it ‘democracy’ all you like. But that doesn’t change the facts.

The plebiscite would be expensive. The plebiscite would be non-binding. The plebiscite would be psychologically damaging to our young people.

And however the cards fall over the coming days, there’s a faster, easier, safer way.