Greens marriage sell-out

Greens marriage sell-out

Questions have been raised about the Greens’ commitment to the Marriage Equality Bill after it emerged the party brokered a deal with the major parties that limited debate and forced the bill to a quick vote.
The bill was defeated in the Senate after only 30 minutes of debate last Thursday. Originally, debate was to begin at 4pm and run for 90 minutes.
However, in what appears to have been a deal between the Greens and the major parties to have the bill put to a vote, debate began at 3.30pm and finished 30 minutes later with limited debate.
On Friday morning, Greens leader Senator Bob Brown told media, “I’ve tried really hard to get the Government to ensure that we get a second reading vote, but I’ve got no response out of them … It’s really important that they do, it is a deprivation of rights, that gay and lesbian couples can’t marry.”
But when Family First Senator Steve Fielding got up to speak at 3.55pm, he was warned of time constraints by the deputy president of the Senate, Alan Ferguson.
“I omitted to say earlier … that an agreement had been reached between parties concerned on speaking times and I had asked the clerks to set the clocks accordingly,” Ferguson told Fielding.
The Greens did not raise objections to the limiting of debate on the bill.
Following debate, the bill was put to a vote where it was defeated 45 to five along party lines.
Twenty-six senators, including Louise Pratt, Labor’s only vocal supporter of same-sex marriage, were absent from the vote, leading to speculation that they were avoiding having to vote against a bill they agreed with.
During debate, only four Senators spoke — Sarah Hanson-Young for the Greens, Fielding, and Nick Sherry and George Brandis for the Government and Opposition respectively.
Sherry spoke for eight minutes, reiterating the Government’s position without explaining it.
Brandis claimed that barring same-sex couples from marriage was not a form of discrimination as same-sex couples had “never, ever in any society, in the whole of human history” been allowed to marry.
“Senate procedures are always difficult, when you’re a minor party, to be able to decide how long a debate should occur,” Corey Irlam, of the Australian Coalition for Equality, told Sydney Star Observer.
“But the purpose of these sorts of debates, where it’s likely to go down in the vote, is not about a vote. It’s about having a frank and open discussion and in half an hour, we didn’t see that.”
Sydney Star Observer sought confirmation of a deal from Brown, but was directed to Hanson-Young’s office.
Hanson-Young replied with a statement saying that time for debating private members bills in the Senate was limited and the Greens would like to extend that, but would not comment directly on whether a deal had been done.

You May Also Like

52 responses to “Greens marriage sell-out”

  1. Such a tabloid, rubbish headline.

    You can do better than this, Andrew.

    If you’re in the mood to attack someone, why not a Senator from the ALP, Liberal or Family First parties, all of whom voted against the bill?

    The Greens sponsored the bill. They deserve your and our electoral support. How you can come to a conclusion that the Greens are the bad guys in this debate is beyond me.

  2. The banal utterances of Nationals Senator Ron Boswell and Family First Senator Steve Fielding in this Marriage Equality “debate” were predictably lightweight in both the intellectual and cogency departments. But these pale in comparison to the unctuous sophistry peddled by lawyer and Shadow Attorney-General Liberal Senator George Brandis when he rose to speak on behalf of the Opposition.

    The absolute doublespeak of this cruel miser in brazenly claiming a platform of non-discrimination while asserting that excluding same-sex couples from marriage is “not discrimination” was surely the pick of the day for smug, sneering, self-justifying effrontery. He misled the Senate with his contemporaneously and historically false claim that “never” in human history have same-sex couples ever married. Every word was a flimsy excuse for preserving an anti-gay law of ultimate discrimination against same-sex couples. Welcome to Tony Abbott’s Liberal Party.

  3. To doubt the Greens commitment to this bill extremely irresponsible.
    It is their Bill and they introduced it. Debate is being stifled by the larger parties and irresponsible journalists that don’t get their fact strait.
    The Greens have been pushing this bill for years and BTW Senator Brandis is wrong same sex marriages has only recently be outlawed. If you give a creep like that a voice I have to ask what side are you on?

  4. Having met with the Senator on several occasions and interviewed her on Joy, there is no question that she and her party are 100% committed to equal marriage. I find this article very strange, more for what it does not say that what it does say. It does not say, for example, that any ‘deal’ would have been distinctly one-sided, since both major parties were determined to enforce the guillotine, and it was possibly better to accept defeat gracefully on this one minor matter than to fight, especially as the bill was going down anyway? I don’t see a sellout in that. And Labor supporters can’t have it both ways: on the one hand they castigate the Greens for holding out for principles rather than playing politics, then when they play the parliamentary game over one trivial matter, they crow ‘sellout’. Very shabby imho. Perhaps something got lost in the editing?

  5. Ahead of the next election, the Greens must commit to use the balance of power to only support Government legislation in return for same-sex marriage.

    That will achieve change.

    Repeatedly putting up Marriage Bills – well it gets supporter’s attention. Doesn’t change anything.

  6. Tracy Batram, Serena Ryan and I spoke to Senator Hanson Young on JOY 94.9 when she exited the chamber last Thursday, to hear results. These opinions I am about to express are mine and I am not rubbishing anyone, however, they are opinion.

    Senator Hanson Young was keen to speak to Joy to note the absence of some 36 members in the senate. This would have, had they all voted for the bill, still only taken the result to 45-41 and it would have been defeated. Debate for the bill from either side does not change the way Senators are encouraged to vote by their party. Sadly, toeing the party line is still in existence.

    Until a conscience vote is put, and until all elected representatives feel that they can vote from their consience and not as the party directs, this will never change. Until the continued blurring of Church and State in the Australian political system is unmuddied, we will continue to see those from all sides of politics voting from their religious principles, rather than their social ideals.

    The Marriage Amendment Bill, 2004 was a nasty piece of legislation voted in at midnight on Friday 13th August 2004 under the weight of a very christian coalition government. Until we see a broader mix of members in both houses, we will keep running into walls.

    Whichever way you vote at the 2010 election, be reminded that 64% of Australians support the right of same sex couples to marry. The more this is raised in the houses of government, the more we can live in hope that we can be as progressive as Spain, Canada, South Africa, The UK, The Netherlands, Denmark and some states of the US. Make your voice heard on the streets as another Equal Love Rally looms, as action, for time immemorial, has always spoken louder than words.

  7. How very tabloid.

    “Greens the only party to support marriage equality” – no big news story there.

    “Greens sell-out” – now THAT’S news!

    Why?

    The Greens have an incomparable record of championing equity issues, like no other mainstream political party in this nation’s history. We are also proud of the level of conscientious debate within the Party which informs our policies and gives guidance to our elected representatives.

    So to suggest that we’ve “sold out” (on any matter) is a very serious allegation, and the sort of sub-editorial style usually associated with other publications with far lower standards than the SSO.

    There may well be an interesting story there, but it’s being hidden by the hype.

  8. um, not entirely sure what kind of “debate” the writer and a number of commenters are dreaming of. one where members of each party come to their own conclusions after reflecting on the facts as presented by other MPs? or one where everyone eventually toes the party line, but gets to chuck in some comments – which are somewhere along a spectrum from “i love gay people but i just can’t vote for marriage because the community is torn oh noes” to outright homophobia.

    the real debate is being had around kitchen tables etc etc – and the outcome of *this* debate is that Australians *do* support gay marriage. Labor and Liberal aren’t ready for this yet.

    in this context it is completely bizarre and even a little suspicious to claim that it is the Greens who are “selling out” on gay marriage.

    i’m happy to add that i am a member of the Greens, but I’m not writing this *because* i’m a member – the other way around. I’m a member because the other parties let us down again and again, while the Greens continue to speak out for our community.

  9. The Greens have consistently supported the GLBTI community for years but are not miracle workers. I hope the article stemmed only from the author’s disappointment that the Marriage Equality Bill did not get up rather than other more political motives.

  10. Perhaps if Andrew Potts had been at the debate he wouldn’t be relying on third hand sources for information, and might have a slightly better informed article.

    Jon, Jason, and Peter; just which Labor MP do you work for? You should co-ordinate the timing of your comments better next time…

  11. I’ve been bouyed by all the comments that have been coming in to support the Greens effort to date and their recognitiion of all the hard work that their South Australian senator,Sarah Hanson-Young, has put into a fight for LGBTI equality.

    Can I suggest that Andrew Potts strongly consider an apology to the Greens for his over-the-top rant in the next issue of SSO and put it on the first page?

  12. The Greens are the only party to whole heartedly support equuality and the gay and lesbian community since their formation. This artice is a rather cynical attempt to damage the reputation of a party that should have the support of the GLBTI community.

    The greens will have my vote later this year.

  13. Instead of rubbishing the Greens they should be congratulated on their commitment to marriage equality, and Sarah Hanson-Young in particular for her introduction of the Marriage Equality Bill

  14. This article raises serious questions and undermines SSO’s credibility. Is SSO in bed with the ALP and the NSWGLRL?! Thank-you to the Australian Greens for standing up on Marriage Equality.

  15. Very harsh treatment of the only party that did anything! Greens only party that voted for it! What is SSO on a about? Did Labor pay for advertising for comment?

    Greens MPs campaigned for Same Sex Marriage for weeks prior to the actual vote!

    Get a grip Scott! Then you run that cheesy story by the GLRL Gay & Lesbian Rights lobby, with the words Marriage is ultimate goal. Lobby have been skirting around marriage for years, support then not support.

  16. I agree with Alex. Its unfair to suggest a party who has a) introduced a private members bill, b) secured a public inquiry into the bill and c) created the first debate in the senate chamber since the ban was put into place is not fully behind the LGBTI community and the issue of marriage equality.

    In particular I would note that Sarah Hanson-Young has been at every national day of action for marriage equality since elected to the Parliament. She has taken each and every opportunity to raise the issue.

    Its disappointing we only had 30mins of half-hearted debate from the major parties, however an important part missing to this conversation is that the Greens do not have the power on the Senate floor to override the motion by the major parties that limited the debate to 30mins.

    Im heartened to hear that while this particular Private Members bill has been voted down, Sarah Hanson-Young has committed to reintroducing it in the next parliamentary term.

    Its disappointing that this article did not also include the role of the ALP and the Coalition in disallowing a more lengthy debate. Perhaps they were too afraid of allowing their Senators to state their views, for fear they would upset either side of the debate.

    Its great to hear from Alex that the while the debate was on it was friendly faces in the gallery, rather than the 49 member “Marriage Delegation” who are reported to have been stalking the halls of Parliament on Thursday – http://snipurl.com/ulufm [au_christiantoday_com]

    As I said last week in the other LGBT news source, Sarah Hanson-Young should be congratulated for her ongoing advocacy of LGBTI issues in Parliament.

  17. For a start why is Xenophon anti-TLBG?

    Brandis should be publicly corrected and informed that even Deities of religions practiced in Australia have participated in same-sex marriages. This needs to be done formally in such a way that he must acquiesce to the historical truth of it and he should be be questioned if he is anti-religious-liberty and has a clear religious bias towards some religions over others as well as simple incompetance for failing to fact-check such a remark especially on a human-rights vote.

    We need to find ways to shame the big media in the country into properly reporting such scandalous behaviour from both Labour and Liberals and Independants as well as to try and help the pro-equality parts of labour and to make accountable the anti.

    This kind of attrocious behaviour especially by Labor must not be allowed to stand.

  18. This article has a very odd slant to it and I am wondering why. It wasn’t the Greens who defeated this bill, it was the ALP, the Liberals, Xenophon and Family First aka Senator Fielding. It was doomed from the start. As someone who actually made the effort to watch the live streaming of the debate, I was incredibly touched by the eloquent, articulate and touching speech made by the Greens Senator, Sarah Hanson-Young. She put this bill up in the first place and was trying to get a conscience vote, but was fighting a battle she couldn’t win. Sarah stood up in parliament and fought for the rights of our community and I applaud her for doing so. Blaming the Greens for silencing the debate is bizarre to say the least, because it is the major parties who do not want to touch this issue.

  19. That you can deride the Greens at all is gobsmacking. Shame on you.

    Your anger should be reserved for Labor in being too frightened to lose votes from the right wing within its own party. The Greens have done more than any party has done for our community in defending our rights vigorously and if you rubbish them as you have in this article, one can understand if they were to lose the will to do anything more for our community.

    Grow up Andrew and stop pandering to rusted on Labor. Your article sound more like a volley at the Greens to take the heat off Labor for not supporting our community.

    Treat your readership with more respect.

  20. Bob Brown and other fellow Greens Senators have consistently fought to for a bill on marriage equality in Parliament – many Labor MPs have been forced to acquiesce to thier leader’s narrow views on same sex equality – at the very least Labor doesn’t have the courage to stand up to the Catholic right and the right wing lobbiests – this is worrying for a PM who portrays himself as socially democratic

  21. What a reactionary load of rubbish. Andrew Potts is trying to stir up a storm in a teacup and you have to wonder what kind of agenda he’s on, or whether he’s had such a wild Mardi Gras that he’s still spinning…

    A Greens Senator introduces the bill, all the Greens Senators are there to support it, the Greens are consistently pushing marriage equality into the public arena. Where’s the sell out?

  22. The important point here is that the Greens are attempting to make a change for our community. The fact the ALP voted against the bill just shows they are no different from the homophobic Liberal and Family First parties.

    To blame the Greens like this article does sounds like another Labor beat up.

  23. I feel that the Greens openly gay leader Bob Brown is not doing enough for us GLBT people, Sure his party seems to support gay rights including marriage equality, but Bob himself could be more vocal and demanding for our rights in parliament.

  24. The Greens have always supported our community. The fact that the bill was discussed at all is a move forward in my opinion.

    Lets not start attacking the only main party who is not afraid to stand by us and show their support.

    More power to the greens I say. I think the heading of the article is over the top. Why not state the facts – Greens all supported the bill and we got no support from any other party or person.

    Happy Mardi Gras to all x

  25. To doubt the Green’s committment to Marriage Equality in any way or form is totally irresponsible. Not only are they the one’s that introduced the bill to Parliament but they used there very limited Private Member’s bill time to focus on Marriage Equality.

    If further debate was allowed, do we really believe that the coalition, labour, or family first would have offered any value to the debate, especially when a conscience vote was not allowed?

    I was in Canberra for the debate and it was brought forward 30 minutes, the benefit of this was no one told the Australian Christian Lobby supports so the gallery was full of Marriage Equality Advocates like myself and Shelly Argent.

  26. As staged as world championship wrestling match, and all for Mardi Gras.

    Further, we already know official policy of the parties to marriage. None of the parties have hidden where they stand.

    For the Greens to get support, they have to be willing to block key government legislation until they get support for same-sex marriage.

  27. Seems all that glitters isn’t Green … where do we turn now that it is obvious the Greens have just been using us for votes?

  28. Rory, you don’t get it do you?
    Sure, they all voted for it … but rather than allow a decent debate on the topic so we could get a broader spectrum of opinion from our politicians, the Greens struck a deal that limited debate and forced a quick vote, obviously with the view of scoring a few cheap political points.

  29. So it seems the Greens don’t sit as far above the political pack as they would have us believe.
    Doing a deal to force a vote is clearly nothing more than an attempt to score a few cheap political points among the gay community.
    Thanks SSO for digging into this very important story – goes to show that sometimes the wolf is actually wearing Green clothing.

  30. Sell-out? There were five votes in favour – all Greens. All the Labor, Liberal, National, Fielding and Xenophon senators present voted against it. Why, of all the parties, are you attacking the Greens?