Liberal Party Of Australia Rejects Conscience Vote On Marriage Equality

This disappointing news is breaking in the last few minutes:

Coalition MPs have decided not to allow themselves a free vote on same-sex marriage, after a marathon meeting at Parliament House.

Fairfax Media understands Coalition MPs spoke against allowing a free vote on the issue at a rate of about 2:1, effectively scuttling plans to legislate same-sex marriage in this Parliament.

One MP - who backs the existing marriage definition - described it as a "very comprehensive" victory.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott called a special joint Liberal-National parties meeting on Tuesday afternoon so government MPs could discuss whether they should have a free vote.

However the decision to include National MPs  - who are more conservative as a group - in the discussion, has concerned some supporters of same-sex marriage who believe it will sway the Coalition against a free vote.

It is understood Christopher Pyne argued that only Liberal MPs should be involved in the decision on a free vote and a move to include the Nationals would be seen as "branch stacking" to sway the outcome.

A senior Liberal source predicted there would be backlash against the Prime Minister's leadership because of the joint party room move.

1. The chance of the passage of marriage equality under our current Parliament is now extremely low, although technically not impossible. Liberal MPs who vote against party policy are not expelled from the party (although cabinet members have to resign). If enough non-cabinet members came to support marriage equality, and they chose to defy the party, it could still pass, but in practice, that will never happen. Unfortunately, we will have to focus our sights on kicking this government out at the next election.

2. Prime Minister Tony Abbott has taken a risk with his perception. He has not had a good year (but what else is new?), and his biggest problem is being out of touch. This year began with a brush with political death following his decision to award a knighthood to England's Prince Phillip. He survived a challenge to his leadership and recovered, but in the last month, his government has been dogged with a scandal concerning the use of taxpayer money for travel purposes (including for travel to Liberal Party fundraisers by helicopter when a drive would have taken just an hour) by former House Speaker Bronwyn Bishop, who was staunchly supported by the government before the scandal broke. Even after it broke, she continued to be supported, and her refusal to apologize, and Abbott's refusal to hold her to account, has now damaged him politically. I was hoping that he might show himself to be receptive to the wishes of Australian citizens and allow a conscience vote on marriage equality to win back some support, but he's decided not to. It's possible that many people will see this as a big middle finger, because it does so blatantly ignore the majority's wishes. But as marriage equality is not a higher order issue, it may also not cost him.

3. There is one way that marriage equality could still pass this Parliament. There is talk that the government will call an election earlier than usual, over six months before their term expires. This is because they want an election before they have to present another budget. As budgets in Australia are handed down in May, this means that an election is likely to occur in March. This leaves 7 months for Abbott to turn around his bad opinion polls, which I'm hoping will deteriorate further with this new development. If he doesn't do so, then it's possible that he will face another leadership challenge. I had read in the lead up to this decision that if he allowed a conscience vote, there could be a leadership challenge from the Right in anger over allowing a free vote. But as the people's problem with Abbott is that he is too conservative, and that a March election would allow a timeframe of just 7 months to get the people to support an even more right-wing Prime Minister, I consider a leadership challenge from the Right extremely unlikely. This does leave open, however, the possibility of a leadership challenge from the Left, and the MP considered most likely to take over if Abbott leaves is a guy called Malcolm Turnbull, who has actively campaigned for marriage equality. If he gets in, a conscience vote would be a certainty.

4. The Labor Party should keep a conscience vote for now, which is their current platform, in order to still give the government a reason to allow one while it is still in power. If Labor gains power at the next election, it should immediately scrap the conscience vote and move to a binding vote, which would force all party members to support marriage equality. My position on conscience votes is that all votes should be conscience votes, for all bills, for both the government and the opposition; but if the other side is playing by a different set of rules, then continuing to play by yours will get you nowhere. So I will set aside my support of conscience votes to adapt to the government's stubbornness.

5. Marriage equality campaigners should press ahead with the bill anyway. We should not send the message that they can make this issue of justice and equality go away by continuing to be on the wrong side. Going ahead with it would force them to put their money where their mouth is, to walk the talk, and to once again stand in the way of equality and justice. When the people see that this is what they are doing, I think this will increase their dissatisfaction.

6. This development may necessitate one tactic that supporters of marriage equality are concerned with: a popular vote called a plebiscite. This is a non-binding vote that the government can use to see what the people want. I cannot see how a successful plebiscite on marriage equality could not lead to its passage, given the time and money they cost, which would be wasted, and given the blatant ignoring of the wishes of the people that this would be. Obviously, a popular vote is not preferable. If, however, our goal is to see it passed under this Parliament, it would greatly improve the chances of that happening. If we don't have one, we are much more likely to have to wait longer.

I think the only thing to do now is continue to campaign for it, and not let them think that we will lie down. There's a rally for marriage equality in Melbourne on Saturday, which I'll be at. We might have to wait a little longer to see it be successful, but it will be.