If you've thought the government's dance around the issue of same-sex marriage had gotten ludicrously elaborateĀ in recent times, be advised those gestures have just become a little more frenzied.
Short version is that the plebiscite plan is still seemingly live - only now it will be voluntary and conducted via post.
More National News Videos
A postal plebiscite?
A postal vote on same-sex marriage could circumvent parliament as it wouldn't require legislation, according to Peter Dutton.
And you can understand why the government is determined to hold a plebiscite rather than, you know, have free vote on the matter and get it over with.Ā
After all, it's one of the few concrete promises the government took to the election. And they need something since they're not exactly nailing the "jobs" bitĀ of their election campaign (5.9 per cent unemployed with 6400 jobs vanishing last monthĀ andĀ 1.1 million underemployed), while the "growth" bit so far means "narrowly escaped a technical recession".Ā
![Immigration Minister Peter Dutton is pushing for a postal vote plebiscite.](/web/20170331093758im_/http://www.theage.com.au/content/dam/images/g/v/2/2/7/k/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gv4l4v.png/1490240213952.jpg)
And since the issue hasn't completely vanished the way the government hoped it would,Ā it appears the conservative wing of the Coalition has settled on theĀ positionĀ that same sex marriage is inevitableĀ and therefore the question is now how best to make getting there as unnecessarily difficult as possible.
So, what are the advantages to deciding Australia's civil rights by using the same method TV Week now considersĀ inadequate to the task of collecting data for the Logies?
1. It will favour elderly peopleĀ
If you want to skew aĀ poll to get a particular result, then it's incredibly easy to do. Just carefully select your choice of medium.
Want to make some progressive issue look popular? Do a poll on social media, which is overwhelmingly inhabited by younger people with more forward-looking attitudes. Want to bolster some conservative position? Conduct a phone survey using only landline numbers from the phone book, since barely anyone under 50 still has one.Ā
So if you have a social change that you really don't want to see happen but has clear majority support among every demographic of working age down, you'd be wise to choose a voting method that strongly favours Telegraph readers over, say, Crikey digital subscribers.Ā
2. It creates a very useful scapegoatĀ
The Australian Electoral Commission is anĀ independent body with a statutory obligation to transparency. Australian Post is... well, not. So if you want to limit transparency for, say, a large scale national vote on civil rights, AusPost is a great choice.
And let's be honest, our national mail carrier have not been in the news lately with headlines like 'Courier businesses collapse as Australia Post's efficient service renders them irrelevant'.Ā
As scapegoats go, they're a wonderfully obvious one for when backbenchers like Andrew Hastie angrily insist that obviously all those anti-change ballots must have gone missing somehow and he can't possibly think of voting until there's an investigation. Ā
3. It's designed to be a goddamn hassle
Voting for a plebiscite at the same time as an election seems like the obvious way to hold such a vote. People are legally obliged to turn up, the AEC have trained staff collecting ballots, there are sausages being sizzled nearby. Everything is convenientlyĀ in place.
So if you want to avoid a situation where people take part, you set the bar for participation as high as you can.
Make the thingĀ voluntary, so people have to actively choose to opt in. Force them to do something that involves multiple steps - print off ballot, write in answers, put in envelope, seal it, post to government - so there are many points where someone can go "eh, I can't be arsedĀ doing this right now".
Your day is probably not punctuated with popping off to the post office as a matter of course, so an envelopeĀ is another thing to very easily forget until you find it scrunched up in your bag at the end of yet another already-full day.Ā
While this very publication's editorial correctly points out that postal voting has been used to determine other national matters, it's worth noting those were heldĀ back in times when the main alternative forms of long distance communication were screaming at the top of your lungs or burying a note under a tree before dying of dehydration.Ā
4. The result will be easy to dispute
Any optionalĀ vote will have less of a turnout than a compulsory one, so only the most motivated will actually bother. And since the result will be used as a justification for the free vote in parliament which has to happen regardless, it provides plenty of cover for MPs and senators to go "well, only 38 per cent of Australians voted at all so clearly this isn't a matter the nation considers important" before voting against it.
Also, it's certain progressive groups like GetUpĀ and Australian Marriage Equality will be involved in rocking the vote, so opponents will claim intimidation and harassment and ballot-stuffing (which, obviously, won't be an accusation levelled at groups opposed to marriage equality, who'll be rallying their supporters in the exact same manner).
At the very least the final result will be closer than the 75 per cent-plus landslide that current polling suggests, giving fuel to the idea that Australians are bitterly divided on the matter.
Still, if you're in a government where fighting unwinnable culture wars is more important than passing smart, necessary legislation to run the country, you take your advantages where you can get them.
0 comments
New User? Sign up