ALP gags marriage comments
The Labor Party is gagging its politicians from talking about same-sex marriage in the lead-up to the federal election.
Neither WA Senator Louise Pratt nor Kingsford-Smith MP Peter Garrett could talk about their past support on the issue on record when contacted by Sydney Star Observer, while Melbourne Ports MP Michael Danby backed away from comments he made last week.
Danby had told a community forum in St Kilda, which was being taped by SBS Radio, “I’m not saying that at this election that I support changing the legislation for gay marriage.
“But it’s coming, and in the next government I will expect there will be serious movement within the Labor Party on that issue, and I know a number of other people apart from myself will be running with it.”
However, Danby later denied that this was a reference to the next Labor Government.
“I did suggest that gay marriage was an issue which future governments would need to deal with and conceded that there were within the Labor Party, as within the Liberal Party proponents of change to the current policy,” he said when contacted later.
Senator Pratt was unable to comment formally over the phone and could only direct us to comments she had made in support of marriage equality in 2008 and 2009, with a spokesperson saying the Senator “[stood] by her comments”.
Garrett, who answered, “I don’t have a problem with it,” to a question about same-sex marriage on Channel 10 in 2006, went backwards when contacted by Sydney Star Observer, communicating his support for the ALP’s policy against same-sex marriage in a statement.
“The Minister supports the Government’s position,” the statement read.
Garrett did not respond to a question about why his views had changed.
Kingsford-Smith Greens candidate Lindsay Shurey said she was not surprised by Garrett’s conflicting statements on the issue.
“It’s not only same-sex marriage that he’s flip-flopped on, so it doesn’t surprise me,” Shurey said.
“I don’t know if they gag their members, but they do seem to have to toe the party line.”
Sources told Sydney Star Observer that non-incumbent candidates who had spoken out on the issue were feeling the pressure too.
Australian Marriage Equality national secretary Peter Furness said he was disappointed politicians could still not voice personal opinions on the issue.
“Its 2010 and, given all the things happening overseas, what sort of state are we in where parties are coming down so hard on members who are speaking their mind on this kind of issue?” he said.
I’d love to see gay marriage, but….
I’d be happy, as a gay man, just to have the right to refuse to date a woman and keep my job.
And not be told that sexuality is just something that comes and goes.
And then see the ALP richly reward their ALP minions who carry out this nastiness.
I’m voting Labor in House of Reps and Greens in Senate.
Labor may be scared of consequences at the moment, but they are the only party who have reformed gay laws over the past 50 years, and I have faith that the party will change the last thing on the gay rights radar, because they have changed almost everything else for us.
Ben, when the ALP promises anti-discrimination laws, you need to ask them whether there will be any exemptions. How it works in NSW is that religious organisations are exempt from the laws, and the ALP and Libs/Nats refuse to remove those exemptions. Not exactly my idea of protection. More like a broken condom.
Dave you are wrong…as the Sydney Star Observer reported, the ALP promised to:
“introduce federal anti-discrimination legislation protecting people on the grounds of sexuality and gender identity as part of a new unified anti-discrimination act if they are returned to Government.”
https://starobserver.com.au/news/2010/08/10/dual-anti-discrimination-promises-ahead-of-poll/29255
What great news. People attacking the only Party that openly supports them, the Greens.
The ALP conference in 2012, well Gillard is on record for saying it is her personal views on Same-Sex Marriage that is not something we should think about. She has not offered to do any more for our community for the next 4 long years of her government. Not even fix the Federal Equal Opportunity Act. How dare we expect not to be discriminated against! Maybe some want discrimination, but when I am old I might want a nursing home, oh and I do want to adopt children at the moment. If I had Federal Equal Opportunity Protection I can challenge the State Government when they discriminate. And all those 85 bits of legislation the Labor Party says in justification for their continued discrimination does not mean older people will not be discriminated against when trying to get a Nursing Home. They expect you to back into the closet.
In reality the Greens are the only Party that is raising legislation for true equality. The Greens are in the media openly supporting full equality for all in the GLBTQI community.
And the Greens policies are crazy right? I meaning supporting all the GLBTQI community must be a bad thing right? Holding a blow torch to Labor and the Liberal party must be a terrible thing to do? How dare the Greens stand up for us. I mean that is what some are suggesting here.
If I watch Q and A I am bloody happy to see at least one politician stand up for all in our community. Having a Green member on the show actually has an impact. It makes the Liberal and Labor Party look nasty.
Chilli:-
Your assertions on the kind conservatives ending the White Australia Policy don’t stack up.
The reason Asians arrived under Malcolm Fraser was his Government coincided with the end of the Vietnam war. Vietnamese were admitted as refugees, in the same way Whitlam allowed in refugees from wars in Chile and Cyprus.
Similarly, civil wars in Sudan and Somalia coincided with Howard Government, hence the appearance of African people.
The largest single intake of refugees occurred under Bob Hawke, when 42,000 chinese students were allowed to apply for permanent residence.
Now to the point about Gay and Lesbian rights…the Howard years did not produce a single reform. No superannuation entitlements, no legal recognition, no financial recognition.
They all occurred under a Labor Government.
For those people waiting for the Labor Party to change its policy, please consider this;
All political parties in Australia used to support and defend the ‘White Australia Policy’.
People were led to believe, because they were taught in schools, that the ‘White Australia Policy’ was abolished in a referendum in 1967, (coinciding with the Civil Rights Movement in the United States – the great Australian Cringe).
I, as a young man, noticed that Prime Minister Frazer let the boat people in after the end of the Vietnam War and I realised that the ‘White Australia Policy’ had been maintained until then for Asians.
As a young man I then noticed that there were not many black faces on our streets.
The black people started coming in under the Howard Government.
It was two Liberal Governments that actually put an end to the ‘White Australia Policy’.
I expect that the Labor Party while not be the Party that legalises same sex marriage.
I expect that the change in legisalation will occur under a Liberal Government – when?
Who knows?
The Greens will never get that much power as other policies of theirs are plain crazy.
A vote for the Greens is essentially a vote for ALP who won’t change on their view.
Do you think the Greens will somehow magically change the ALP from a very determined view against gay rights? Keep dreaming people.
I have to agree with John – Secular Party is the best bet – get the churches out of politics, they are behind this
I am happy to vote Green all the way! They do not hide like cowards on our rights. The ALP conference may yet again not pass Same-Sex Marriage or amend the Equal Opportunity Act.
I am voting Green as they have shown support for our community, not just on Same-Sex Marriage but so many other areas.
Peter is quite right – there are many supporters of same-sex marriage in the ALP – but they are bound by Party policy decided at the 2009 National Conference, which is for state based registers.
The next National Conference is in 2012.
The debate on same-sex marriage will not go away – indeed it is heating up, with the question being repeatedly asked of both Abbott and Gillard.
Let’s build that heat in the various parties gays and lesbians support. It’s far more productive than clubbing one another for not switching party allegiances.
Finally, from the people and party’s that do support same-sex marriage – what are you willing to do to help us? Will you use the balance of power to force change?
Peter, if you’re really going to put the ALP ahead of the Greens because Anthony Albanese has offered you privately (Don’t tell the ALP bosses.) his personal support for same-sex marriage, then you’re selling your vote at a very cheap price. Albanese preys on gullible voters. Don’t be one of them.
Do you reckon Alabanese tells ALL his potential voters how fervently he supports marriage equality? Or does he just tell people what they want to hear and hope that they fall for it?
The Greens may not be able to achieve marriage equality without support from the other parties, but at least they can support it in parliament, not just in hushed conversations with targeted voters.
What about Cath Bowtell?
I spoke with Anthony Albanese (seat of Grayndler) before the last election (a long time ago, I know) outside Marrickville Shopping Centre and I grilled him pretty hard about gay rights. I can say (from my opinion) he is a genuine supporter of gay rights including gay marriage.
I felt that Anthony was honest in his support of gay marriage and that he felt sorry and dissapointed that we had not already introduced this.
I know that openly that Labor is not supporting gay marriage before the election and I know that the Greens are a strong force for gay marriage, but I would suggest that Grayndler isn’t the seat to outvote the Labor Party member to make this happen.
By all means vote Greens but probably not in the seat of Grayndler.
(I have not had the opportunity to ask Tanya Plipersek face to face about these issues, and I am not in her seat, so I can’t give my personal opinion about her reaction when asked about same-sex marriage).
Of course, what this also tells us is that despite the occasional opinion poll (Galaxy 2007 and 2009), this issue is still perceived to be a vote loser.
It also points to the need to work within the major parties to get a shift in policy.
The Greens are supportive, but cannot actually deliver change…unless they are willing to block Government legislation to force the issue. The Greens wont make that commitment.
At the local forum in Armidale the Labor candidate at first slipped by without answering my question on candidates support for a human rights act particularly one that covered our Yogyakarta Principles obligations for GLBTI Australians.
He wasn’t happy when another person given the chance to ask a question asked him to answer my earlier question particularly regarding the horrendous rural GLBTI suicide toll and marriage equality.
He tried dodging but was challenged directly. He was clearly put on the spot and didn’t want to answer the question. This seems to explain why.
The below was also a very telling & poignant moment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVdUy5gMzB8
To think the Liberals are giving vouchers of $200 dollars to those that are able to get married. Talk about discrimination!
You can read about what Labor candidate for Melbourne, Cath Bowtell has said about same-sex marriage:
http://cathbowtell.com/2010/08/standing-up-for-equal-rights/
Cheers
Alex
They should learn from all these films and filmmakers.
http://www.facebook.com/#!/formywife?ref=ts
Labor is not the only people stopping people from talking about Same-Sex Marriage.
Even though thousands marched in Melbourne, I did not see the Herald-Sun mention it in the Sunday paper.
I can only presume that climate change sceptic Rupert Murdoch, who is Papal Knight and recently donated 10 million dollars to a Catholic Cathedral has put a gag on some Editors.
I was glad to see the loving father of a gay person stair down Tony Abbott and ask for Same-Sex Marriage on Q & A. Tony Abbott rolled his tongue around and could not look the father in the eye in his justification for the policy of exclusion. What a creep he is!
I am voting Green as they are the only Party openly talking about equality. When I hear Labor and Liberal all I hear is we have made many changes, not we still discriminate in many areas. When I hear the Greens I hear equality. No policy of exclusion.
Would we ever see this add from Labor or Liberal?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_jPNxRDeOk
The mainstream media have let us down.
Same-sex marriage seems to be the only issue where the candidates don’t have to provide a reason for their stance, other than “I don’t believe in it”, or “because it’s party policy”.
What reason could there be for opposing it? Opinion polls say the vast majority of Australians are in favour of allowing same-sex marriage.
In the Howard days, he used to say that he did not want to degrade the institution of marriage. What institution is that?
The history of marriage is not a pretty one. It began as a ceremony to pass ownership of the woman from one man (father, walking the woman down the isle) to another man (husband waiting to receive ownership of her). There were dowries exchanged at the handover.
There still is the language of animal husbandry (bridal = horse). Is this the institution some politicians want to protect?
Marriage needs to be mordernised, so that it is no longer an institution of degradation, sexism or homophobia. Marriage should be modernised to become an institution of equality.
Shame on Peter Garrett and Tanya Plibersek for opposing it.
The way to get gay marriage is for the Greens to force the issue in the Senate, but the right means towards that end is to hammer home the message “Keep Religion Out of Politics” by Voting 1 for the Secular Party of Australia.
As Mark Latham said on radio this week, the major political parties are afraid of the churches. However, the other side of that coin is that the churches are afraid of losing their Government hand-outs and tax exemptions.
It is up to us to call their bluff. Secular Party preferences will flow to the Democrats, then could stop with the Greens, and then trickle to Labor before Liberal.
The Secular Party takes a whole secular approach to formulating policy, rather than picking and running with a few hot issues.
The underlying philosphy is a true constitutional separation of church and state, not the fake one we pretend exists in Australia.
Case in point exactly- this proves even more that we HAVE to vote for The Greens….. as even the progressives in Labor who do support equal rights can be gagged into complete silence when ordered to do so by the Anti-Equality Labor heirarchy.