|
Good question. To avoid excessive descent from Cory Bernardi, Eric Abetz and Kevin Andrews and other troglodyte religious social conservative members of the federal Liberal parliamentary caucus, he's had to agree to the proposition that there is to be a referendum on marriage equality at the same time as the Australian federal election in 2016, although one would expect him to campaign for the yes vote in that particular campaign. LGBT lobby organisations are unhappy at this development, as are liberal Australian media, noting that such a referendum would cost $A148 million to stage and are dismayed about the fact that most Australian constitutional and social reform federal referenda seem to be invariably defeated. Speaking of which, Turnbull has become a gradualist republican, suggesting that any debate be deferred until Elizabeth II passes away. There may also be a gradualist approach to uprooting the anti-science orthodoxy that prevailed under Tony Abbott when it comes to climate change engagement.
These issues should
be disaggregated. It may be the case that there is a Yes marriage equality
referendum vote victory in Australia, as there was in Ireland and several US
states over the issue of marriage equality. Full Aboriginal citizenship was only
granted in 1967 after a similar referendum victory, although the republic issue,
a federal Australian Bill of Rights and other proposed constitutional reforms
were subject to federal referenda and failed to pass electoral muster. Most
Australian or New Zealand republicans accept that the issue is one in suspension
and will not progress until Elizabeth II becomes incapacitated or passes away.
She has already passed Queen Victoria as Britain's longest reigning monarch and
its most long-lived and the much-missed Queen Mother lasted until she was 101.
By then, Prince Charles would be 79. It appears the issue should be labelled
"Schrodingers Republic" and parked for the interim period. Still, at least full
Aboriginal citizenship did pass as an issue. One suspects that the misgivings
that LGBT Australian groups probably have about the proposed marriage equality
referendum is what would probably happen then. The Australian Christian Right is
just as cravenly dependent on US Christian Right propaganda, strategy and
tactics as our own Family First. Unlike the New Zealand Christian Right,
however, John Howard's federal marriage equality ban bill (2004) gave them what
they wanted and they will fight to protect it. In the New Zealand context,
abortion decriminalisation legislation would be the closest parallel in terms of
arousing conservative Christian political activism.
So, what else is
likely to happen? Turnbull may actively campaign for marriage equality approval
within that referendum, unless he has a change of heart and decides that
governmental fiscal conservatism restrains any excessive expenditure on such a
gambit. At the same time, I suspect there may be a quiet internal move toward
centralisation of federal candidate selection procedures within the Liberal
Party to get rid of potential extremist religious social conservative candidates
within federal constituencies, although whether that will be met with backlash
from the targeted individuals is a moot point. Given its backwardness,
Queensland's Liberal National Party is likely to be a particular thorn in the
side of this administration if that is carried out there, although there may be
similar although smaller scale problems in Western Australia and New South
Wales.
I don't think
religious social conservatives realise how unpopular they really are within
Australia. The Howard era was an aberration, similar to New Zealand's Kirk and
Muldoon eras, a backlash against progressive social values. One warning sign was
the backlash that occurred against Tony Abbott's attempt to obstruct
RU486/mifepristone access within Australia when he was Howard's federal Health
Minister. Indeed, obstruction of abortion rights has been met with co-ordinated
and disciplined response from the pro-choice movement within Australia.
Howard's marriage equality ban has provided nothing but a headache for his
successors. Abbott's obstructionism has led to potential political fallout for
his colleagues and bequeathed Turnbull a poisoned chalice. If he wants to
emulate John Key, he will have to learn how to triangulate properly and
emphasise his social liberal credentials on these issues, as Key did with
marriage equality and attendant inclusive adoption law reform, and as he is now
doing with his procedural, select committee solution to the demands established
by Lecretia Seales' abortive assisted suicide case for decriminalisation of
medically assisted suicide/voluntary euthanasia. Otherwise, he risks the
outbursts and extremism of the likes of Cory Bernardi or Kevin Andrews tainting
his party with the colours of unelectable extremism and his already divided
party risks only a single term in federal office.
Recommended:
Paddy Manning: Born to Rule: An Unauthorised Biography of
Malcolm Turnbull: Melbourne University Press: 2015
