Here’s Everything That Happened At The 2025 Mardi Gras AGM

Today was the 2025 Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras AGM (Annual General Meeting), following one of the most closely watched and heavily debated lead-ups in recent years. 

After some issues with the online meeting and sound, the meeting began at approximately 10:30 this morning (Saturday 29 November 2025). Initial attendance included 134 online participants and 97 members in the room, forming a significant quorum after weeks of public discussion, community organising, and campaigning from both major factions: Protect Mardi Gras and Pride in Protest.

The tensions between these groups have shaped much of the conversation in the lead-up to this year’s AGM. Each faction has spent recent months outlining different visions for the future of the organisation.

The resulting debate has been widely covered by Star Observer and other LGBTQIA+ media, with members expressing strong and varied views on governance, political alignment, police participation, public funding, and the festival’s core values.

Before the first item of business was heard, the meeting confirmed its formal starting numbers: 1,012 total proxies were submitted, including 127 directed and 875 undirected. Of these, 104 proxies were held by the Chair, made up of 81 directed and 23 undirected.

These figures set the foundation for voting on nine member-proposed ordinary resolutions. As outlined in the AGM documentation, these resolutions are non-binding and advisory (meaning the Mardi Gras Board is not required to act on it), requiring a simple majority to pass, and are intended to express the collective views of the membership. 

We’ve provided a breakdown of each of the nine resolutions presented to members today, a summary of what was discussed within each, and what the final results of each motion — as well as the candidates who have been elected to the Board. 

Resolution 1 – Reaffirmation of Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Commitments

A motion to reaffirm Mardi Gras’ core commitments to inclusivity, unity, respectful dialogue, historical recognition and relationship-building across the LGBTQIA+ community.

MOTION PASSED

535 for
41 against
494 abstentions

Discussion on Resolution 1 opened with the mover describing the motion as speaking “to the heart of who we are as a community and who we must continue to be.” They told members that from the earliest days of protest, Mardi Gras carried a promise that “every queer person belongs, every identity is valid,” and said the resolution aimed to reaffirm unity across the organisation. 

A procedural question was raised about an amendment submitted prior to the meeting, with multiple members seeking clarification on whether it could be formally acknowledged. The mover told the room they had not received the amendment and requested more time to consider it.

Several speakers then addressed the motion, saying the language of the motion lacked specificity and argued that it did not clearly articulate which groups required inclusion, particularly marginalised groups such as transgender and Aboriginal communities.

A number of other members spoke to lived experience, including a 78er, who reflected on past divisions and urged the organisation to focus on collective progress. 

Resolution 2 – Embrace Trans Rights, Not Trump

A proposal urging Mardi Gras to condemn the Trump administration, discourage partnerships with Trump-aligned supporters, and encourage parade participants to put the transgender and trans rights in the spotlight.

MOTION PASSED

578 for
546 against
62 abstentions

The mover of Resolution 2 opened by stating that trans rights were “not at the front of everyone’s minds” and argued that international political rhetoric was influencing local debates.

They said the resolution aimed to ensure Mardi Gras did not platform Trump-aligned individuals or organisations and encouraged parade participants to centre trans rights in their messaging. They added that corporate sponsors appealing to Trump-aligned audiences were not aligned with the community’s interests.

One member spoke against the resolution, saying Mardi Gras did not endorse Trump, stating that “a common-sense individual would never endorse Trump,” and emphasised that the organisation does not direct float commentary or determine parade messaging. They said float builders maintain creative independence and that members were free to advocate for trans rights through their own floats or community organising.

Another speaker, aligned with Pride in Protest, addressed the impact of anti-trans legislation in the United States and recent developments in Queensland, urging members to consider the broader safety and wellbeing of trans people.

Resolution 3 – To Ensure Political Neutrality in Board Governance

A motion for the Board to ensure Directors suspend any roles in political parties during their term to prevent conflicts of interest and maintain organisational neutrality.

MOTION WITHDRAWN

Resolution 3 was discussed as first of the day, due to a member’s time constraints. A point of order was immediately raised by a member who noted that the motion presented on the floor differed from the inital submitted text and asked why it had been altered after the submission deadline. The revised motion called for the establishment of a Standards and Integrity Committee to assess interests — including political affiliations, advocacy involvement and personal conflicts — and to provide guidance to current and potential Directors and senior leadership.

A procedural vote then went ahead, and it was later was confirmed that the amended wording would not be considered, determining that the motion would be closed, rather than reverted to its original text. Resolution 3 therefore did not proceed to a vote.

Resolution 4 – Bi Visibility 2025

A proposal calling for formal consultation with Bi+, pansexual and multi-sexual communities to understand the impact of past exclusionary membership policies and develop recommendations for reconciliation.

MOTION PASSED

449 for
140 against
551 abstentions

The mover introduced Resolution 4 by encouraging members to consider the historical impact of membership policies from the late 1990s, which excluded bisexual people. They described the motion as an opportunity to document and understand that impact on Bi+ people, and to develop a structured consultation process with Bi+, pansexual and multi-sexual communities. They emphasised that the resolution was intended to support long-term inclusion and strengthen future community engagement.

One member speaking against, said Mardi Gras’ history included harm experienced by several different groups, not just Bi+ people, and questioned whether revisiting past policies risked reopening grievances. They argued that many members had faced exclusion over the decades and expressed their preference to “move forward and not revisit the past.” 

In response, another member speaking for the motion said the consultation process was not about re-litigating history but about “future proofing,” noting that younger LGBTQIA+ people increasingly identify within the Bi+ spectrum.

Resolution 5 – Equality Bill and Religious Exceptions

A motion requesting Mardi Gras to formally write to state and federal governments demanding urgent reform of anti-discrimination laws, including the removal of religious exemptions, and make all correspondence public to ensure transparency. It also states that politicians marching in the Mardi Gras parade must make it explicit they have pro-LGBTQIA+ views.

MOTION PASSED

664 for
455 against
64 abstentions

The mover opened Resolution 5 by outlining concerns regarding outstanding anti-discrimination reforms at both state and federal levels. They noted that politicians “have far too often marched with us and not stood with us,” and referenced unresolved matters relating to religious exemptions, and lack of protections for LGBTQIA+ people in education, employment and service access. 

Members expressed broad support for the intent of the motion. Discussion centred largely on the status of the Equality Bill, its referral to the NSW Law Reform Commission, and ongoing delays to federal anti-discrimination amendments.

No major objections were raised, and the motion proceeded swiftly to a vote.

Resolution 6 – Pursuing Public Funding for Mardi Gras

A proposal supporting efforts to move Mardi Gras toward full public funding, reducing reliance on corporate sponsorship and increasing access to free or low-cost events.

MOTION PASSED

573 for
564 against
47 abstentions

A speaker described the proposal as an opportunity to return the festival to its community roots and lessen corporate influence, saying that “100% funded by public money”. They explained that this would remove pressure from sponsors who “ask for space in advertisement” and said many companies saw Mardi Gras as a branding exercise, noting that those companies “are fair-weather friends.”

They also said the festival’s strongest offerings were its free events, and that increased public funding could support accessibility and reduce cost barriers for attendees.

One speaker, who identified themselves as a 78er, questioned the feasibility of securing sufficient public funding to support a festival of Mardi Gras’ scale, noting that Mardi Gras “costs millions” to put on. Another member speaking against said governments “change, and they can be fair-weather friends as well,” arguing that relying on public funding could create new dependencies. They cautioned that government involvement already occupies significant space within the parade, and suggested that further expanding that influence could limit community control. The member added that while corporate presence is visible, it is at least subject to community scrutiny in ways government may not be.

The motion proceeded to a vote with one of the closest margins of the day. 

Resolution 7 – Mardi Gras Cut Ties with Genocide

A motion recommending Mardi Gras adopt Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) principles, refuse partnerships with companies complicit in human rights violations, and publicly support cultural boycotts of Israel.

MOTION FAILED

557 for
563 against
57 abstentions

Discussion on Resolution 7 opened with an attempted amendment from the mover of the motion, who sought to add language commending the SGLMG Board for their position to not work with Fuzzy because of “Fuzzy’s complicity in regards to the Gaza genocide.”

Questions were immediately raised about the wording, and a grammatical issue caused confusion about the exact amendment being proposed, which was difficult for this masthead to clearly follow via livestream. It was eventually advised that the motion would either need to be withdrawn or proceed in its original form, and it was agreed to continue with the motion as originally submitted.

The mover referenced findings from the United Nations, Amnesty International, and genocide scholars, and emphasised that the LGBTQIA+ community includes queer Palestinians and queer Arabs affected by the ongoing conflict. They noted that Mardi Gras had previously called for a ceasefire and argued that a consistent position should be taken “from the beginning.” They also referenced recent international incidents during Pride Month, and urged Mardi Gras to commit to supporting broader boycott movements as a statement against violence and oppression.

One speaker, who identified themselves as a First Nations performer, spoke against the resolution. They said that the details around the proposed boycott — particularly regarding Fuzzy — required careful consideration because they and other First Nations artists were booked to perform at the associated festival, and these opportunities were essential not only for income but also for artistic development and cultural visibility. He told members that he had consulted Traditional Custodians of the land where the event will take place, who had no issues with them taking part in the festival.

Another speaker, aligned with Pride in Protest, spoke for the resolution, describing it as a continuation of the legacy of the 78ers. 

Resolution 8 – Australian Border Force (ABF) and Australian Defence Force (ADF)

A proposal urging that ABF and ADF should not be approved to march in the Parade, and formally condemning the ABF for systemic racism, homophobia and transphobia.

MOTION FAILED

525 for
618 against
40 abstentions

The mover opened discussion on Resolution 8 by outlining concerns regarding the conduct of the ABF and the ADF. They described instances of homophobia, transphobia and systemic racism within border enforcement, including a case involving a trans sex worker who was detained for three days in Villawood and denied medical care while travelling to Sydney for Mardi Gras. 

It was argued that such incidents “go silent while Border Force are allowed to march,” and said the resolution sought to prevent both ABF and ADF from taking part in future parades. 

One speaker, who identified themselves as a 78er, spoke against the motion, arguing that many individuals within these institutions are part of the LGBTQIA+ community. They said Mardi Gras should not exclude community members, emphasising that “it’s not Mardi Gras’ role to save the world.” The speaker expressed concern about setting a precedent for exclusion, saying, “If this motion passes and the police one passes, who’s next? It might be women with short hair.” 

Another member speaking against identified themselves as a “military child” and said they believed Defence personnel should be able to celebrate Pride without being excluded. They expressed concern that the motion would “open Pandora’s box”.

Resolution 9 – Police

A motion condemning NSW Police violence, calling for the permanent removal of the NSW Police float from the Parade, and expressing support for investigations into all recorded Blak deaths in custody.

MOTION FAILED

534 for
611 against
40 abstentions

Resolution 9 was introduced with a focus on ongoing concerns about police violence and its impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, LGBTQIA+ people, and other marginalised groups.

A speaker highlighted that “609 Blak deaths in custody” have been recorded nationally, noting that NSW has reported more such deaths this year than in any previous year on record. They told members any conversation about improving relationships with police must consider the experiences of families who have lost loved ones in custody, as well as drug users, trans people and other groups disproportionately affected by police violence. They argued the organisation should prioritise “protecting our communities over a violent institution like the NSW Police.”

Speaking against the motion, one member said they supported some clauses, but opposed permanently disinviting the NSW Police float. They told the meeting that “the movers of this motion and other motions today are using guilt and blame to bully us into acquiescence,” and argued that the proposal would exclude LGBTQIA+ police officers who have marched for decades and “who, as much as anybody, understand our history.”

They added that passing the motion could embolden “reactionary and homophobic elements” within the police and broader community.

Another member, a 78er, passionately spoke for the motion, and about the importance of ensuring all community members feel safe reporting crime or seeking assistance.

A second speaker against the motion urged members to consider Resolution 1, which called for unity and belonging of all LGBTQIA+ people, describing Resolution 9 as “the opposite” and encouraging people to be consistent with their voting. They told members that while institutions may cause harm, LGBTQIA+ people within those institutions often work internally to create change and should not be excluded from community spaces. 

Other bits and bobs from the 2025 Mardi Gras AGM

Before formal resolution discussions began, members raised a wide range of operational, governance and community concerns. Questions included topics like the treatment of trans women in detention — with the Board confirming that Mardi Gras, alongside community partners, is meeting with the Minister’s office after the AGM and will report back to members.

Another member brought up concerns about new political expression rules stating floats are banned from criticising or satirising politicians, and that this practice been part of Mardi Gras from its very beginning — to which a co-Chair confirmed that they were not aware of such a ban at Mardi Gras. [EDITOR NOTE: these rules are being implemented at Pride events in Western Australia, not Mardi Gras].

The Co-Chairs also addressed behaviour observed during this year’s period of election campaigning, noting that “this year’s election cycle has been challenging”. Newly appointed CEO Jesse Matheson, even confirmed that Mardi Gras staff had been subjected to abuse, and urged members to abide by the Code of Conduct. They also confirmed a formal review of election communications, procedures and membership handling.

Matheson’s CEO report outlined various operational pressures and changes of the last year, particularly how cost-saving measures of around $3 million have been implemented, with Mardi Gras returning a net profit of $401,750 in 2025. This has resulted in a leaner team (with the point being made that workload remains a “challenge”), and all signature events (other than Parade, Fair Day and Laneway) now being produced in collaboration with promoters, cultural institutions or community creatives. Members were told that new digital initiatives are generating additional revenue streams.

2025 Mardi Gras AGM — The final word

After more than four hours of debate, procedural questions, amendments and close votes, the 2025 AGM drew to a close with thanks from the Board to members for their engagement throughout.

One co-Chair acknowledged the temperament of the day, and thanked members for their passionate participation.

Following the AGM, the Board delivered a statement to Star Observer saying, “At Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras (SGLMG) AGM this week, members were given the opportunity to vote on motions put forward by other members.

“Resolutions 1 – Reaffirmation of Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Commitments; Resolution 2 – Embrace Trans Rights, Not Trump; Resolution 4 – Bi Visibility 2025; Resolution 5 – Equality Bill and Religious Exceptions; Resolution 6 – Pursuing Public Funding for Mardi Gras; were supported by members; however, the final decision as to whether the organisation adopts these motions sits with the Board. Any indication that the decision by the members is the official position of the organisation is false.

“Any motions supported by the members that request the Board to take an action will be considered recommendations only and will be addressed at a later date. In making their decision, the Board will be guided by the objectives expressed in Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras’ Constitution and the organisation’s ICARE values.

“The final outcome will be presented to members in due course and will continue to reaffirm SGLMG’s core values of inclusion, commitment to collaboration, and priority to ensure SGLMG remains a sustainable, well-governed organisation.”

2025 candidates elected to the Mardi Gras Board 

Finally, in an email sent to members several hours after the AGM had concluded, which has been sighted by Star Observer, announced which candidates have been elected to the Board of Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras and Mardi Gras Arts.

These candidates are Luna Choo, who ran on the Pride in Protest ticket, and Kathy Pavlich, Savanna Peake, and Jarrod Lomas, who ran on the Protect Mardi Gras ticket.

They will join continuing directors Mits Delisle, Damien Nguyen and Diana McManus.

The total number of votes came to 1627.

“Thank you to outgoing directors Louis Hudson, Kyriakos Gold and Luc Velezfor their important contribution to Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras,” reads the email.

---

All reporting by Lydia Jupp & Chloe Sargeant