Australia's Labor government
There has been a lot of fuss and discussion – and rightly so about these comments here from Penny Wong and Julia Gillard’s ‘personal view’ that marriage is between a man and a woman. But how would a re-elected Labor Cabinet actually vote on marriage equality if the issue were ever put to a vote?
The answer may surprise you – and give strong hope of progress if we can get a real debate happening. Having dealt with most of these people in various capacities in the last 10 years, in my analysis there are Definite yes: 6, Probable yes: 5, Swinging: 3 Probable no: 7, Definite no: 0
TOTAL LEANING YES: 11 SWING: 3 TOTAL LEANING NO: 7 (full reasoning later in article)
How is this possible you might be wondering?
It is not simply because all politicians are liars, rather it is more to do with their fears and HOW change would have to happen to be acceptable to them. Penny Wong is never going to risk being sacked entirely for just randomly making up a new policy in the middle of an election campaign. It’s true she could be much braver, and Labor can’t say ‘we need more debate’ and then refuse to have it. But the point remains that Wong has never said she opposes gay marriage and there isn’t a thing about Gillard’s background to suggest she is implacably opposed either. As many have pointed out, their current position actually lacks credibility given their respective backgrounds.
The second thing to understand is that gay marriage is unlikely put forward to a formal Cabinet vote, at least in the 2010-2013 term of Parliament. What is more likely is that Prime Minister Gillard could launch an extended consultation or convene a debate, which might lead to a free vote (non-party whipped) vote in the Parliament. And this would be a good thing for really changing the minds of people in your street and office, instead of the law just being re-written overnight without a debate. Nevertheless, in any such debate the moral leadership or political position of Cabinet members and the Prime Minister herself would still count for a lot within Labor ranks.
There are in fact several important factors holding back a full and free debate amongst MPs and Senators (but that is for another article), and don’t forget that the Cabinet will be different after the election, even if Labor wins (likely supporters of marriage equality like Lindsay Tanner and John Faulkner are stepping down, but they also stand to be replaced by definite supporters like Sydney’s Tanya Plibersek).
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Julia Gillard, Prime Minister – swinger.
Political fear is the only thing holding the PM back. No-one seriously believes that a woman of the Labor left living a non-traditional family and who does not believe in God, actually supports inequality. Her own state branch (Victoria) backs equality and she grew up in Don Dunstan’s liberal-era Adelaide. She has gay friends and advisers and even Cabinet members. Give her solid proof that the population backs equality and she would give her full backing too.
Wayne Swan, Deputy Prime Minister – probable no
His only public comment on the issue is: “We’ve made it very clear that we’re not supporting gay marriage,” from 2004. From a reasonably conservative electorate and the right-wing of the party.
Chris Evans – probable yes
From the left wing of the party in a state that has full equality and a good record in putting forward gay and lesbian candidates.
Penny Wong – definite yes.
Lesbian; left-wing; no direct constituents to deliver a backlash; long-time supporter of Rainbow Labor. It’s weak that Wong won’t take a personal stand now – she of all people is the one who wouldn’t be sacked for doing so. But past silence would convert into golden moral weight the second she decides to out her support.
John Faulkner (leaving Cabinet – would have been probably yes)
Stephen Smith, probable no.
From the right wing of the party, no track record on gay rights.
Nicola Roxon, swinger.
Personally sympathetic to gay rights, but also known to have dropped that in favour of aligning with conservative Christian voices for political expediency. Her legal background would mean that judicial support or jurisprudence in favour of equality would be a convincing argument for her.
Jenny Macklin, definite yes.
Very left wing in social issues, from Victoria whose ALP branch supports equality.
Lindsay Tanner (leaving Cabinet – probable yes)
Lindsay’s inner city electorate of Melbourne demands he support equality. As someone who has written books about the quality of our modern relationships rationality also demands he supports it. A great loss to the Cabinet for these reasons.
Simon Crean, possible yes
Nothing in his centrist background and suburban electorate suggests he is a sure supporter. But as Minister for Social Inclusion he would be making a mockery of his portfolio if he starting dictating a shortlist of who is allowed to be fully included in our society and who is not. For these reasons he should be a major target of gay activists. As a former leader he still commands wide respect in the party, and with his trade union background has a natural affinity with the underdog.
Anthony Albanese – definite yes
Gay rights’ best friend in the Cabinet. Left-wing factional leader who pushed the party to vote on the issue of gay marriage at its 2009 conference, where proposals were narrowly defeated. Will lead the charge in rounding up as many left wing and right wing votes as he can.
Stephen Conroy, probable no
Long associated with the more conservative parts of the right wing of the Labor Party, Conroy is probably personally open to persuasion on the issue, but for political expediency will not be seen backing a pro-gay marriage line.
Kim Carr, definite yes
Hard left factional warrior, who aligns with every traditionally left-wing and progressive cause. Can be guaranteed to back it just prove he is more left wing than Julia Gillard.
Peter Garrett, definite yes
Garrett is on the public record as supporting gay marriage, and reconciles this view easily with his Christian beliefs, because he has a strong belief in strong families and has gay family members that he remains close to.
Robert McClelland, probable no
This is the most disappointing prediction of all – born out of McClelland’s ridiculous enforcement of the previous Howard Government’s Commonwealth hijacking of marriage from the states (because of the ACT’s approval of gay marriage that was then over-turned by the Commonwealth arbitrarily). As the man who oversaw the 58 positive changes in legislation to give us near full equality in 2008, you’d think he could go the last mile. I doubt it.
Joe Ludwig, possible yes
The only MP who’s ever surprised me with his thorough knowledge of transgender issue. The only MP who’s gate-crashed a lobbying effort of Rainbow Labor’s to enthuse about what he can do. Despite his conservative factional background, I think he’s open to good arguments and the idea of a fair go.
Tony Burke, swinger
Tony Burke is another person who would consider the idea but probably struggle to put his hand in the air to support equality. But rest assured – he’s come a long way from the days at the turn of the millennium when he first entered the NSW parliament under the backing of the very conservative SDA union. Then Burke was considered radical for abstaining on the issue of equalising the NSW age of consent. But I remember that abstention warmly and the gratitude he had for gay activists sincerely putting their case to him. He would listen again intently on the issue of marriage, and if the lobbying is good enough, could vote yes.
Martin Ferguson, probable no.
Martin would probably cop out along the current Julia Gillard lines – that the population isn’t ready; that marriage has always been between a man and woman.
Chris Bowen, probable no
Conservative in both social and economic approaches. Young for a Cabinet member and friends with plenty of people who support equality – so would face social if not political pressure to support gay marriage. Would need a lot of convincing. Has aspirations for higher office and would not want to damage them.
Candidates for promotion to the Cabinet ….
Tanya Plibersek – definite yes.
Long-time supporter of gay rights; represents Central Sydney which is an electorate that heavily favours equality.
Kate Ellis – probable yes.
Would be the youngest member of the Cabinet by far and represents an equality supporting electorate in central Adelaide. I remember her being surrounded by gay friends and other supporters of equality from a young age as a student politician. It would take some internal political courage to defy some factional pressures to vote yes, but she would regret voting no deeply and I think that fact would weigh on her.
Mark Arbib – probable no
Last time I discussed gay rights with Arbib he pointed to an electoral map of NSW and asked me to point out which marginal seats Labor would win with a gay rights agenda. Then he answered for me: one, the state seat of Bligh in inner Sydney. That was in 2002 – but I suspect Mark would be counting the next election’s votes before he stopped to think about voting for equality.
Greg Combet – probable yes
Even if he wasn’t personally favourable – and he probably thinks there are a many greater problems in Australia than a bunch of whining gays – he generally ethos of fairness and fighting for the underdog, plus all the left-wing factional pressures he would face, means he is a probable yes.
Tags: ALP gay marriage, gay marriage australia, Julia Gillard gay marriage, Labor MPs on gay marriage, marriage equality, penny wong gay, Penny Wong gay marriage, peter garrett gay marriage, Ryan Heath, same sex marriage
unless it is the same marriage as heterosexual marriage it is not equality
Another reason to doubt the credibility of politicians – as if any more reasons were required. Are we surprised at the rise of independent candidates? It seems ridiculous that a smart articulate and openly gay senator should have to go on the public record saying she supports her party stance – opposing gay marriage. What a joke!
More evidence that religious conservatives dominate our policy makers. When they have this level of control, no wonder they are fighting so hard to keep secular ethics out of schools. Much better to teach our children to fear a mythical sky man!
Penny Wong a definite yes?? Have you seen her recent comments in the media? Pretty shameful stuff…
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/wong-backs-labors-antigay-marriage-stance-20100725-10q37.html
Openly gay Minister for Climate Change Penny Wong says she agrees with her party’s opposition to same-sex marriage.
‘‘On the issue of marriage I think the reality is there is a cultural, religious, historical view around that which we have to respect,’’ she told Network Ten today.
‘‘The party’s position is very clear that this is an institution that is between a man and a woman.’’
Hi Ryan,
Just wondering if you’ve seen Penny Wong’s recent appearance on Q&A (26 July episode at about 39 min):
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/
A bit more of a nuanced perspective…? It made me think that the issue is perhaps a bit more about the mechanics of the ALP rather than her own personal integrity.
I don’t believe in straight marriage so I definitely won’t support gay marriage.
Penny Wong is a fraud. This is what she had to say in 2006:
“I hope there will come a time when this country can look back and wonder why some in this place and some in this government were so frightened of and antagonistic to certain types of relationships. I look to a day, to paraphrase a great man, when we not only judge people by the content of their character but also where we judge their relationships by markers such as respect, commitment, love and security and not by the gender of their partners. I look to a day when government policy and articulation is not so mired in prejudice that it can address these issues fairly. One thing I do know is that that will only come under a Labor government.”
You are being unfair ‘puhlease’. Penny Wong is disappointing, but she is not a fraud. She has never ever said she personally would vote against gay marriage, she is simply doing what a loyal Labor MP would do given the party’s policy. She is not saying what she truly feels, but that is the point of being in a government – you all have to do it collectively. What Penny Wong has said this week is no worse than if he straight male colleague had said it.
What would be really wrong is if she doesn’t push for a proper and formal debate after the election about this. In the meantime people who think that isn’t enough can vote for the Greens.
But I am personally horrified that people are running around calling Penny Wong a ‘bitch’ and ‘despicable’ and ‘traitor’ … we need this women to support us, and to have confidence to speak out about equality. Abusing her and complaining – especially when some of the people complaining have never written a letter, protested, or maybe even voted in their life, they just prefer to whinge – is not really going to help us move forward.
Lay off Penny Wong , where in the middle of an ellection, to go agaist your parties polices now , would undermine the integrity of the party as a whole, Gay marriage will not be an ellection issues this time around, but if enough internal pushing is done, I believe in 2012 at the Labour partys national confrence the labour party as a whole could change its stance on the issue.
2 days ago I returned from a 10 day trip to San Francisco, where as we know over the last week or so there has been a lot happening to overturn the draconian Prop 8 and it’s conservative supporters. Returning to Australia the week before our own Federal election has certainly made me re-evaluate my own political viewpoint and accordingly my vote tomorrow. Can we expect change this election? Most likely not but what we can do is make our voice heard to ensure that our main political parties hear our voice – being given the opportunity to marry is not a priveledge but a fundamental right we should all receive regardless of our sexual orientation. Make your vote count!