This group wants to ban the Liberal Party and police from Mardi Gras

This group wants to ban the Liberal Party and police from Mardi Gras
Image: Mardi Gras Parade 2018. Image: Ann-Marie Calilhanna.

A group hoping to return Mardi Gras to its protest roots–while removing police, the Liberal Party, and corporations from the parade–have announced their intention to run for Mardi Gras’ board later this year.

The collective known as Pride in Protest will put their hands up at Mardi Gras’ annual general meeting next month, where Mardi Gras members will be able to elect the board.

In a position statement on Facebook, Pride in Protest have said that if elected they will remove the “violent” NSW and Federal Police and the “homophobic” Liberal Party from the annual parade, and take it back from for-profit organisations “that are taking over”.

Speaking to the Star Observer, spokespeople for Pride in Protest said the group had already liaised with several ’78ers who endorsed their campaign and what they stood for.

“Institutions that cause harm should, as organisations, be removed,” they said.

“LGBTI people who are members of those organisations can march as individuals, with their families, as community members, or in other floats, rather than as active representatives of institutions that perpetuate violence.

“When the presence of harmful, violent institutions makes some members of our community unsafe in community spaces, a political choice has to be made as to whose side we’re on… to stay silent is to side with the powerful.

“We want to see a Mardi Gras that represents every day people, not the interests of the elite, and that is open and and inclusive to the most marginalised in our community.”

Last month, New South Wales Police Commissioner Mick Fuller delivered an official apology on behalf of the state’s police force to the ’78ers over the brutality they suffered.

’78ers present were brought to tears by the apology, which came 40 years after the first Mardi Gras ended in police assaulting, jailing, and persecuting those involved in the protest.

And this week, the NSW Legislative Council has moved to establish a parliamentary inquiry into hate crimes committed against LGBTI people between 1970 and 2010.

Despite this, Pride in Protest have said police attacks on the LGBTI community persist, and cited Toronto and London’s decision to ban uniformed officers from marching in Pride as examples to follow.

“The police as an institution is one of the biggest perpetrators of violence against queer people,” the group’s spokespeople said.

“We’ve seen scandal after scandal: a mentally ill man brutalised by police in Victoria, a victim of domestic violence outed to her former husband in Queensland, hundreds of deaths of Aboriginal people in custody, and sloppy investigations into over 30 gay hate crimes here in NSW.

“It’s clear that the role of police in Australia has nothing to do with protecting us, and everything to do with criminalising people based overwhelmingly on race, class, and sexuality, and protecting the elite from protest.”

Pride in Protest are also adamantly against allowing the Liberal Party to march in Mardi Gras’ annual parade.

In recent weeks, Prime Minister Scott Morrison has come under fire from the LGBTI community for dismissing gay conversion therapy and referring to teachers trained in trans inclusion as “gender whisperers”.

“If the choice is between including the NSW Police or including all of the people they regularly harass, or between including the Liberals or including refugees, the choice is clear,” the spokespeople said.

“Many of us in Pride in Protest are from diverse backgrounds – working class people, immigrants, Aboriginal people, and so on – and as LGBTI people we think we deserve to feel that Mardi Gras represents us.

“At the moment, there is a massive sense of disillusionment and alienation from Mardi Gras for a lot of us, because the festival seems to be run by and for the rich and powerful.”

As part of the group’s position statement, Pride in Protest have called on Mardi Gras to review its corporate relationships with ANZ and Qantas, given the former’s position as a major financier of the fossil fuels industry, and the latter’s “participation in the deportation of refugees”.

The group hope to make Mardi Gras parade floats exclusive to community and not-for-profit entrants, and to eliminate membership fees.

“Mardi Gras can and should be parade, party, and protest,” the spokespeople said.

“[But] Mardi Gras has never stopped being political: its politics have simply changed and become more conservative, and less about liberation and equality.

“We bring a different kind of politics, that actively supports struggles, campaigns, and movements against injustice.”

This year Mardi Gras celebrated its 40th anniversary, drawing in record crowds and a headlining performance by pop icon Cher.

On the night of the parade and party, the state government relaxed its lockout laws to allow revellers to celebrate through the night, a move spearheaded by Councillor Christine Forster.

Mardi Gras’ Annual General Meeting will be held on Saturday 27 October.

Related reading: ‘Why Liberals shouldn’t have marched in Mardi Gras’ and ‘Don’t exclude Liberals from Mardi Gras’.

You May Also Like

23 responses to “This group wants to ban the Liberal Party and police from Mardi Gras”

  1. How ridiculous can any person or group get?
    That Star Observer even gives this lot any publicity is beyond comprehension.
    After all the years of effort the GLBTIQ Community, Police, Political Parties have put into trying to get acceptance (not just tolerance) of Mardi Gras and our sexualities to have this mob want to destroy it all is sheer madness.
    Or is this lot just a religious – be it Jewish, Christian, Islamic, Hindu – group posing as a GLBTIQ group which wants to destroy Mardi Gras and then have us all made illegal and non-people? Or are they some sort of ultra-ultra Right-wing Fascist, if not Nazi 1930’s group.

  2. This is a very retrograde step for the community as a whole. People may not agree with the policies of a party but it is not about exclusion as that just fuels the hate groups activities. Its about education and inclusion of those in their ranks who support us. They then can make a difference within their party or within the Police. That does not mean we can’t call out the behaviours of those in the party or Police who want to revisit or engage in homophobia and I would take to the streets in an instant in that situation.

  3. So much for inclusion and diversity. I won’t be attending a mardi gras again. I take no pride in a community that excludes people

  4. May I add to the debate by way of a small history lesson, it was the Hamer Liberal Government that decriminalised Gay sex in Victoria, long before the Labor Governments of WA, NSW, QLD and Tasmania which was as usual well and truly last, and Don Dunstan started it all in SA.

  5. The usual suspects using our movement to promote their divisive politics. I wonder how many Marxists and Trotskyites are behind this crap. To use Wotherspoon’s phrase, ‘incidentally homosexuals’ who describe themselves as ‘Queer’. I can see the poster for nest year’s Mardi Gras, ‘Only post-structuralists need apply to be part of Mardi Gras.’ And they accuse others of being elites. Wow.

    • Pretty sure both Marx and Trotsky had exactly fuck-all to say about Mardi Gras, the police attitude to gay folks or anything else queer so why bring them into it?

  6. I think this article is very disturbing. Here we go again. Trying to exclude people who do not share our vision of the world. It appears you have to pass a series of tests before you can qualify to be part of Mardi Gras. I am not surprised that some fellow 78ers are supporting such crap. These nutters should come out and declare their support publicly. There are some 78ers who are desperately trying to make themselves relevant. They were irrelevant during the 1970s and they remain so today. Luckily the overwhelming majority of gay men and lesbians rejected this divisive politics. What do they mean by taking back Mardi Gras? Mardi Gras was never a protest, you clowns. Stop listening to the political propagandists who did so much harm to our movement during the 1970s and who now hail themselves as heroes. BTW, some 78ers were not even at Sydney’s first gay Mardi Gras. I am a proud 78er and proud that policemen and women, conservatives and corporations join us. This is what we fought for. This is what we achieved. Of course, the gay Far Left is bitterly disappointed since its history is the history of declension. They are still waiting for the dictatorship of the proletariat.

    • You are dead wrong in saying “Mardi Gras was never a protest”. Mardi Gras was and always will be a protest march, which is what sets it apart from pride marches in the rest of Australia and the rest of the world. However it is a cheeky and flamboyant protest march, where we make our serious political points with humour and satire. Of course we should be inclusive and create space for the protest of individuals who are changing the culture in repressive organisations like the Liberals and the Police.

  7. I volunteered for Mardi Gras because I wanted to celebrate the lives and achievements of the people who make up our anything-but-homogenous community. After the dark days of brutality, it became a vehicle of hope and joy that we could all be a part of as NSW and Australia embarked on the bumpy ride towards a fairer and more equal society.

    Pride in Protest seeks the opposite. This narrow and exclusionary movement has more in common with the fascism than it does with the liberal democracy that has immeasurably improved the lives of lesbians, gays and other sexual orientations and gender identities.

    Given that it has fewer than 150 likes on Facebook several days after going public, I hope this is a rejection of ‘us vs them’ divisive takeovers of Mardi Gras.

  8. Pride in Protest propose the elimination of membership fees. This proposal is short-sighted and will effectively kill off Mardi Gras.

    As a ‘78er and Mardi Gras Life Member, this proposal will be first and foremost in my mind as I consider my vote in the forthcoming election of Mardi Gras Board members.

  9. I understand the frustration but I maintain the best way to catch flies is with honey, not vinegar. The broad left today makes this mistake each and every time. We’d never have even heard of dickwads like Milo Yianopoulos (probably spelled wrong but who cares?) or that stupid woman who went to Lakemba if the left didn’t maintain their profiles by protesting and protesting as if they were actually some sort of threat. They’re not, don’t inflate them. But the antifa crowd just want to rumble, they don’t actually give a solitary shit about issues or the real victims of oppressive policies.

    The fact is that this might have made sense 15 years ago but now the police have gay liaison campaigns and there are out gay Liberals in the Parliament. Work with them to make the world better not against them to prove an increasingly irrelevant point.

    Invite them all. If they say no, that’s their problem and send them another invite next year just to prove how lovely you are.

  10. No, I disagree. I like seeing Police involved and it’s good for corporations to show support. As for banning conservatives, I enjoy seeing the Liberal float receiving dead silence. They need to hear that.

    • What smug and out of touch nonsense! The Liberal float should be cheered the loudest, not receive any silence! Without them, we would not have the right to marry. Some self reflection and gratitude is important.

  11. Ad a gay liberal voter..im am disgusted….
    Labor and greens should be baned…they dont care about our community…all they want want are votes…thanks liberal for SSM

    • Can’t let this go unanswered.

      In New Zealand and the UK (and feel free to name closer neighbours to us in Oz with regards to our political and cultural history, I think you’ll struggle) same sex marriage came about entirely because the conservative mainstream parties on those great countries gave their MP’s a conscience vote. Here in Australia your precious Liberal party denied their MP’s a conscience vote, which is why Malcolm Turnbull and Chris Pyne voted against same sex marriage in the House of Reps in 2012, when Shorten voted yes but admittedly Rudd and Gillard voted no.

      The Coalition opposed same sex marriage right up until there was a public vote on a minority civil rights issue unprecedented in Australia’s history (unless you count WW1 conscription, which was actually a matter of life and death and worthy of plebiscites). If you think that the survey was a good thing for the gay community quite simply you’re wrong. It’s hardly surprising that many in the gay community regard the Liberals as homophobes, particularly since their new leader wants to legislate for people to be sacked for their sexuallity.

      And yes, I’m the same guy saying they should be invited to the Mardi Gras. Let them turn up and work out for themselves how the community feels.

      • Dave I cannot let your ignorant post go unanswered. It was, once again, the Liberal party who gave women the right to vote (minority status), and who also held the plebiscite/referendum to recognise the Indigenous and grant them the right to vote (again, proof of a vote on minority civil rights). If you think this plebiscite was wrong, you are a fool. It proved that Australians overwhelmingly support our community, and that PROOF was worth every penny, everything money could buy, every debate, every leaflet, every hurt. Wake up please and finally and gratefully accept it was the BEST way forward. And with women’s suffrage, with Indigenous rights to vote and to be counted in the census, with the first woman politician ever elected to an Australian parliament (Lyons) and the first ever Indigenous person elected to an Australian parliament (Senator Neville Bonner), it is, as usual, the Liberal party that comes to the rescue and implements these reforms, but receives no gratitude because they are apparently a ‘conservative’ party, thus not as ‘deserving’ as the socialists and left parties. I for one am steaming beeping fed up with this ungrateful and rude behaviour. Time the Liberals were not only included, but received a front and prominent position on the march as thanks and gratitude.

        • Hard to know where to begin explaining how wrong this is, but I’ll try.

          1. The Liberal Party was founded by Menzies in 1946 an entire generation after women got the vote, so pull the other one.

          2. Aborigines had the vote some years before the referendum. That referendum was of course constitutionally necessary to provide other legal equality and was supported by all sides of politics. The “statistical survey” had zero legal or constitutional weight, the High Court told us this was entirely a matter for the Federal Parliament in 2013, it’s simply wrong to conflate the two things.

          3. if as you claim the statistical survey proved Australia’s overwhelming support why is ScoMo forever banging on about religious freedom so he can undermine gay rights? Because the survey was never about proving anything, that’s why. It was about Tony Abbott giving the green light to public opposition to gay rights (as we saw from church groups and unfortunately even neo-Nazi groups throughout the “campaign”) and Malcolm Turnbull sucking up to the right of the Liberal Party rather than staring them down and that’s all it was about. We didn’t need a $100 mill survey to “prove” 62% support, we already knew that was the number from years of public polling.

          The Libs have some good people and have done some good things, shout-out to the likes of Warren Entsch and Trent Zimmerman, Neville Bonner was a good one too I agree. But for every one of those folks is an Eric Abetz or a James Paterson, whose marriage bill would have enabled decisions of “religious conscience” about marriage but ONLY if they were used to discriminate against gay people and not, say, straight divorcees.

          I DO support the Liberals being invited to Mardi Gras but don’t pretend they’ve done much for the gay community in the past. I strongly support a better relationship into the future but that doesn’t need a historical whitewash like you’re creating eg on women’s suffrage.

          • Hard to grasp how truly wrong you are Dave. Absolutely mis-informed, Sally was spot on.

            1. The Liberal Party was formed in 1944. Not 1946. However it was the conservative forces (later united under the Liberal party) who had the first female parliamentarian. And ” While the Commonwealth Franchise Act allowed women to stand in the 1903 and subsequent Federal elections, it was not until the 1943 election that Enid Lyons became the first women to be elected to the Australian Parliament.” Enid was a conservative.

            2. False. In 1962 the Menzies Government amended the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 to enable all Indigenous Australians to enrol to vote in Australian federal elections. YET In 1965, Queensland became the last state to remove restrictions on Indigenous voting in state elections, and as a consequence all Indigenous Australians in all states and territories had equal voting rights at all levels of government. So Indigenous did not have full voting rights across the board, it was state by state. Hence it was not until 1967 that Indigenous rights nation-wide were enshrined into law. Sally was right. It is not Sally that is trying to whitewash history, Dave. Everything Sally has said vis suffrage and Indigenous is factually correct.

            3. I am neither here nor there regarding the postal plebiscite, however until November 15 2017, there was no hardcore proof of Australia’s support. ‘knowing’ from polls taken over the years is not the same as actual having proof. The only poll that matters is election day as they say. So too, with the actual plebiscite. It gave proof, and that proof was very very important on two fronts. 1. It neutralised the Christian side who continued to claim ‘silent majority’ status as the evidence was there that they were not in fact, the ‘silent majority’, rather the noisy minority which leads me to 2. The psychological lift this had on the LGBT community having this hard proof that Australia supported them. Until then, the Christians could always hold over our heads that Australians don’t support us. That date changed it. It is one thing for a government to legislate it, another entirely to know our fellow countrymen and women support us. That is priceless and the value of which can never have a price put on it.

    • Exactly right, the liberal party is liberal enough to actually legalize SSM. Labor and the Greens did nothing for LGBTI rights when in power for 6 years between 2007 and 2013 and just use us as political “vote for us” pawns.

      As a 32 year old libertarian gay man who is a member of the Liberal Democrats and the IPA for the past 3 years and “as a supporter of small government, civil liberties, free speech, classical liberalism, marriage privatization, $900 billion debt reminders for Australia and taxation is theft policies” – both major parties (Labor and LNP) and the Greens has lost their way within the forest and need to be bought back to reality in 2018.

      • The Liberals DIDN’T legalise SSM, Paul, you’re trying to rewrite history and you’re getting it badly wrong.

        Where in the world has one party legalised marriage equality? It happened in Australia like it did in NZ and the UK – with bipartisan support from all parties. The reason it happened years later here is that the Liberal Party REFUSED to give their members a conscience vote until they’d had their bloody “statistical survey”. It would have happened in 2012 if the Liberal party (which claims to be the party of individuality) hadn’t forced most of their parliamentary members to oppose marriage equality.

        Labor isn’t perfect of course, Rudd and Gillard did drag the chain and they voted ‘no’ in the House of Reps in 2012, but so did Turnbull and Pyne and many other progressive Liberals.

        “The Liberal Party is liberal enough to actually legalise SSM” is a farcical claim if you have paid any attention to this issue over the last 7 years.

        • Dave, what is it about legislation that you don’t understand? How can you get it so wrong? You can argue semantics and say it was bipartisan and Liberals voted against it before, but the FACT remains that marriage equality was legislated under a LIBERAL GOVERNMENT.

          That, is FACT. Would have happened in 2012, bipartisan etc are all irrelevant to the issue. It was legislated by a LIBERAL GOVERNMENT Dave, and you know it.

          • Thanks for your posts correcting my deficiencies Heather. I appreciate your focus on fact-based debate, it’s a rarity these days, I’ll accept I was wrong by 2 years on the foundation of the Liberal Party and I accept that I was correct that Aborigines had the vote prior to 1967 but I have no concern whatsoever that the broader progressive community overwhelmingly do not reward the Liberal Party for holding out on a conscience vote and not treating this as a normal civil rights deal as per our close politicai/cultural/historical cousins the UK and NZ. The fact it FINALLY happened under a Liberal government is something you can celebrate all you like but most of us remember the actual details of the last several years. At no point has anyone explained why they held out other than the obvious: Tony fucking Abbott.