Coalition rejects a free vote on marriage equality after six hours of debate

Coalition rejects a free vote on marriage equality after six hours of debate

AFTER almost six hours of debate, the Coalition’s party room meeting this evening has reportedly failed to adopt a free vote on future marriage equality legislation with 66 to 33 votes.

Liberal and National Party MPs met at 3.15pm to decide whether the Coalition would a position in favour of marriage equality and to allow a conscience vote.

[showads ad=MREC]The news comes influential backbencher Warren Entsch reportedly initiated discussion on whether Liberal MPs should be a allowed a conscience vote at a party room meeting this morning without their Nationals counterparts.

There was no decision on whether to allow the free vote, but Abbott — who opposes marriage equality — then announced at lunchtime that would be in the Coalition party room meeting this afternoon that the government would reconvene specifically to discuss marriage equality.

According to SkyNews, front bench ministers such as Joe Hockey, Julie Bishop and Scott Morrison all pushed for a plebiscite after 2016 Federal Election. A plebiscite is like a referendum, but is carried out because the issue at hand does not affect the Constitution. Results of a plebiscite will only advise the government and does not necessarily mean reform will be successful as they still need to debate it in Parliament.

It is also understood that if the Nationals were not present at the Coalition party room this evening, a free vote would have still failed with 46 to 31 votes.

Commentators have said that regardless of the results of the next edition, it would still be at least two years until marriage equality could become a reality due to the set Senate terms.

Meanwhile, Entsch has given notice for a cross-party marriage equality bill to be introduced in the House of Representatives next Monday, which was approved by the parliament’s selection committee.

Today’s developments comes after months of intensified media coverage and pressure from advocates for the Coalition to adopt a conscience vote on marriage equality.

At the moment, backbench Coalition MPs such as Entsch can vote against marriage equality legislation without consequences, but frontbench ministers will have to resign should they defy party policy and cross the floor whenever a marriage equality bill is debated in Federal Parliament.

Earlier today, Australian Marriage Equality said the proposed introduction of Entsch’s marriage equality bill next Monday — co-sponsored by fellow Liberal MP Teresa Gambaro, along with Labor MPs Laurie Ferguson and Terri Butler as well as cross-bench MPs Andrew Wilkie, Cathy McGowan and the Greens’ Adam Bandt — would be a historic moment.

Abbott has repeatedly said the government had other reforms to focus on and that marriage equality was not a priority, which advocates saw as attempts to delay the issue despite polls consistently showing most Australians now support it.

There are three other marriage equality bills doing the rounds in Parliament House — one each from the Greens and Labor one from NSW Liberal Democrat Senator David Leyonhjelm.

With dissenting voices on both sides of parliament, a conscience vote for Coalition MPs — which Labor has until 2019 — is considered essential for marriage equality to get across the line. The Greens have said they will vote in favour of marriage equality.

RELATED: MARRIAGE EQUALITY ADVOCATES CAUTIOUSLY WELCOME BREAKTHROUGH PRIOR TO COALITION PARTY ROOM MEETING

RELATED: MARRIAGE EQUALITY ADVOCATES PREPARE FOR BIG WEEK IN CANBERRA AFTER A BUSY WEEKEND

[showads ad=FOOT]

You May Also Like

13 responses to “Coalition rejects a free vote on marriage equality after six hours of debate”

  1. It has been exactly 11 years since the Marriage Amendment Act 2004 passed the Australian Parliament and went into law on Assent! It is time that Act got repealed!

    MARRIAGE AMENDMENT ACT 2004 NO. 126, 2004 – SCHEDULE 1
    – Amendment of the Marriage Act 1961
    1 Subsection 5(1)

    Insert:
    “marriage” means the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.

    2 At the end of section 88B

    Add:
    (4) To avoid doubt, in this Part (including section 88E) “marriage” has the meaning given by subsection 5(1).

    3 After section 88E

    Insert:
    88EA Certain unions are not marriages
    A union solemnised in a foreign country between:

    (a) a man and another man; or
    (b) a woman and another woman;

    must not be recognised as a marriage in Australia.

    • Tell me Simon why Labor?

      Labor are NO BETTER than the current mob of German cockroaches (i.e. the LNP)!

      • Vote for the Greens, if you want 100% marriage equality – NOT Labor or the LNP, who are both suck and are full of bigoted unintelligent power-seeking assholes! Vote 1 Greens!

        SIMPLE PEOPLE!

  2. Surprise, surprise – NO REFORM!

    That is what you plainly get – when you vote for the LNP!

  3. Reactionary far right wing idiocy…so messy and stupid.

    Australia has moved on…sadly our p.m is a pathetic and narrow minded shallow bigot.

    No leadership at ALL!

    I exercise my right to discriminate against them all in my cafe and restaurant

    Corrupt and screwing the tax payer as a result

    I hope everyone does the same and boycotts them all around Australia.

    Menzies is turning in his grave!!

  4. As much as I hate Tony Abott, people who blame him don’t realise that the PM only has so much influence on the decision. Our national representative isn’t who we should be blaming. It’s the senate and groups who approve such rights to be called privilleges.

  5. In 1989 Paul Keating called the Senate “unrepresentative swill”, seems that now applies to the House of Reps as well…