Now in minority government, with his cabinet leaking against him, a citizenship question mark over some of his MPs, disastrous opinion polling, byelections looming, a reshuffle required to replace Scott Ryan and a palpable shift in sentiment regarding his leadership, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull could at least take some pleasure from the likely marriage equality result on Wednesday.
A win for Yes will pave the way for legislation bringing Australia into the early 21st century in the remaining parliamentary weeks of the year. It will have been an extraordinarily ugly way to achieve it, with significant hurt inflicted on LGBTI Australians, but Turnbull will be able to claim it as his own achievement.
That, of course, is what his enemies, and the diehard anti-equality MPs within his own ranks, are keen to deny him. The fallback position of the marriage equality deadenders is now to stretch out the legislative process as long as possible by inflicting a blizzard of amendments on Liberal senator Dean Smith’s marriage equality bill — which already contains ample protections for religious groups that are consistent with existing anti-discrimination laws — and to offer their own bill. The right’s James Paterson this morning unveiled his own, extraordinary bill which would legalise discrimination by anyone merely on the basis of what they claimed to believe.
No campaigners and the Abbott forces believe they can turn what would be the one significant achievement of the Turnbull prime ministership into yet another means to inflict damage on him — at a point when he is already badly weakened from months of citizenship chaos.
A strong Coalition performance in New England and Bennelong with a minimal swing against the government will, unfortunately, only hold the line for Turnbull, not boost his fortunes. Both should stay in Coalition hands, but expect to start seeing finely-calibrated talk of what size anti-government swing will be enough to put Turnbull under pressure — 2% good, 4% tolerable, 6% bad, 8+% disaster, etc.
With things looking so grim for Turnbull, the marriage equality legislation might be a good opportunity for him to strike back at the right and make clear that the Smith bill is the way forward and the government will not tolerate attempts to delay its passage, or use it to strip longstanding anti-discrimination protections under the guise of “religious freedom”. If that prompts a backlash from the right, all the better: Turnbull will have the backing of voters and be able to argue he has bent over backwards to support the party’s position on marriage equality. And having a fight always brings out the best in Turnbull — like Julia Gillard, he drops the prime ministerial waffling and sounds authentic and impassioned when someone has thrown a grenade at him. It might even remind voters of the man they were so delighted to see take the prime ministership in 2015.
Then again it might precipitate a move against his leadership. But that looks increasingly likely now anyway.
Unless one is a complete cretin, and I know you are not Bernard, each and every one of us knows it is well past time. How far past? When did he assume the Prime Ministership?
His pretext for rolling the onion-muncher was “thirty consecutive bad Newspolls”. Truffles has only had 23 – not that I’ve been counting…
The snag is, if they take it off him, they have to give it to someone. Cormann hasn’t shit the bed yet, and it’s not too late to retire him for a Canning preselection (puts his hat in the ring, and gets the moyle onto the useless flap of skin that’s in Canning now; win-win) – but if anyone can f*ck that up, it’s this lot.
The Right’s fantasy candidate for PM is Obergruppenführer Dutton, but he’s so odious that the only public support he gets is in the pages of The Australian.
I don’t see why there needs to be any exemptions in marriage laws, since religious organisations have already got exemptions under the anti-discrimination laws.
On a side note, is granting religions exemptions for discrimination laws, tax, etc., unconstitutional as it promotes religion, in general, over non-religion?
I’d like to see less exemptions eg taxes and rates. The churches want us to pay for the victims of their paedophile priests, so let them pay some bills to us.
Wayne, the anti-discrimination thing is a fig leaf for destabilization. Funny thing that, a political party hell bent on destroying itself….?
I realise that is the case for the latest proposed legislation, but the earlier legislation had “protections for religious freedom” too.
I would prefer that there were no exemptions for religious reasons. They have enough protections as it is, more than they probably deserve.
Bernard, its not clear to me why you (and the government) consider Bennelong will be held by the Liberals.
My understanding is that John Alexander is yet to renounce his British citizenship, and even if he does so today it would, on past performance, not be processed by British authorities until well past the date nominations for the bi-election close.
Would that not put him in the same position as Lamb and Keays, who the AG is presently arguing are not entitled to be in parliament? On that basis Alexander would not be eligible to stand for his seat, which may well open the result up.
Your opinion on this issue would be appreciated.
I think he has too. He is stuffed one way or the other eh? Might as well try and kill the right wing crazy serpent, if that isn’t an insult to serpents.
Urrk Has to!
The right love capitalism until they figure out it is the greatest force for tearing up traditions in the written history of humanity. There will be no exemptions for christian merchants because there is no exemption for anyone. Do they think they can simply opt out of capitalist social relations? Can I start a church of NEET where I can refuse to sell my labour power to capitalist enterprise due to strict adherence to the The Montenegrin 10 Commandments?
Could you start a church and claim an exemption from income tax?