PRIME Minister Malcolm Turnbull has presented the legislation to parliament which would allow a public vote to go ahead on February 11 next year asking the Australian public if they approve of the legalisation of same-sex marriage.

When introducing the bill to parliament today he said it was “parliament committed to marriage”.

“And that is why I support same-sex marriage… that is where I stand and that is where Lucy (Turnbull) stands and when the plebiscite is held we will be voting yes.”

Turnbull said the main argument against a plebiscite was that people were worried about the hurtful debate that might arise from the campaigning in the lead-up to the vote.

“That insults the Australian people, that disrespects the Australian people. If ever there is an issue to be put forward to a plebiscite, it’s this one and should be because it’s a very straight forward question,” he said.

“I ask the leader of the opposition to support this plebiscite… I ask Labor to respect the people they represent… to respect their ability to have a discussion about this important matter and resolve it and resolve it in a manner that is fair, that is democratic and will at the end of the day whoever wins be regarded as a just determination of this important issue.”

However, Opposition Leader Bill Shorten is expected to recommend to the Labor shadow cabinet and caucus that it block the plebiscite-enabling legislation.

“The fact the Liberals announced public funding to give a platform to bigotry shows no interest from the government to work with Labor on this,” he said.

“He is deliberately sabotaging the process to make it difficult for even the most ardent supporters of marriage equality to back it.

“History will record Malcolm Turnbull as a fraud on marriage equality, the man who had the opportunity to make it happen but cowered in the face of Tony Abbott, Kevin Andrews and Eric Abetz, the Prime Minister who broke the nation’s heart.

“I am gravely concerned about the plebiscite and over the coming days and weeks, we will be sitting down with people affected, families and mental health experts about the harm a plebiscite will cause. He has no idea of the harm this could inflict on so many people and their families.”

The PM also confirmed $170 million dollars in funding for the plebiscite, $160 million which will go to holding the vote and $7.5 million each for the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ campaigners.

The ballot for the vote was revealed and confirmed the question will be with people having to write yes or no beside the question. </s> CANBERRA, Australia — Australia’s prime minister introduced legislation to Parliament on Wednesday that would allow a public but nonbinding vote on gay marriage early next year.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, a marriage equality advocate who is the only serving prime minister to attend Sydney’s Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras, introduced the bill on the first anniversary of his ascension to the top government job.

He replaced Prime Minister Tony Abbott, a gay-marriage opponent who proposed that the public decide the issue with a popular vote and avoid a bitter debate in Parliament.

But the Feb. 11 plebiscite — a compulsory vote for all adult Australians — would have no legal weight. Parliament would ultimately decide whether the law would be changed.

Although such a vote appears to be a move toward changing the law, most gayrights activists are against a plebiscite, saying it should be decided in Parliament without the potential divisive public debate.

They fear that government plans to spend $11 million on publicizing the cases for and against marriage equality would give legitimacy to anti-gay views.

Turnbull said the real reason marriage equality advocates opposed the plebiscite was because they thought enough lawmakers already supported the overhaul for it to become law.

“They don’t want to run the risk of the Australian people giving them the wrong answer,” Turnbull told Parliament. </s> Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull made a spirited defence of his doomed same-sex marriage plebiscite as he introduced the bill to Parliament on Wednesday, saying "society would be stronger if more people were married".

At his most animated when berating Labor for its opposition to the public vote, Mr Turnbull argued a plebiscite was the best way to decide a matter on which Australians had such deeply-held personal convictions.

"We have to respect that it is a very big moral issue. It is an issue of conscience for millions of Australians," he said. "If ever there is an issue to be put to a plebiscite, this is one that can and should be, because it is a very straightforward question."

A year to the day since he toppled Tony Abbott, the Prime Minister argued that social attitudes to same-sex couples had changed rapidly in recent years and reiterated his personal support for gay marriage. </s> The fate of the Turnbull government’s postal survey on same-sex marriage hangs in the balance as the high court hears two challenges to its validity in Melbourne on Tuesday and Wednesday.

The high court has expedited hearings before the Australian Bureau of Statistics mails out survey forms on 12 September asking Australian electors if the law should be changed to allow couples of the same sex to marry.

The decision will either give the green light to the ABS survey which will deliver Australians’ judgment on marriage equality by 15 November or reject the voluntary postal vote that the Coalition adopted as a Plan B when the compulsory plebiscite was blocked by the Senate.

Independent MP and plaintiff Andrew Wilkie has said a decision could come as early as mid-week and he hopes if the challenge is successful the Turnbull government will accept that parliament should deal with marriage equality.

On Thursday Malcolm Turnbull refused to say what the government would do if the high court struck down the postal plebiscite because he was “confident the challenge to the postal vote on marriage … will not be successful”.

In August Turnbull said that the Coalition’s policy was not to change the marriage law unless Australians have had their say.

One challenge is brought by Australian Marriage Equality and Greens senator Janet Rice. The second is brought by Wilkie, lesbian mother Felicity Marlowe, and Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (Pflag) Brisbane.

Both challenges argue that the government has no power to appropriate $122m from the finance minister’s special advance to pay for the postal survey because the expenditure was not urgent and unforeseen.

The compulsory plebiscite was voted down by the Senate in November. In March the immigration minister, Peter Dutton, backed a voluntary postal plebiscite as an alternative but it did not become Coalition policy until it was adopted by the cabinet and party room on 7 and 8 August.

Section 1(b) of the Appropriations Act allows the finance minister to make a special advance if he or she “is satisfied that there is an urgent need for expenditure, in the current year, that is not provided for … because the expenditure was unforeseen” before the budget in early May.

The plaintiffs note the Department of Finance then sought advice from the Attorney General’s Department for a postal plebiscite to be conducted by the Australian Electoral Commission and that the finance minister, Mathias Cormann, was aware of this alternative “from about March 2017 onwards”.

AME and Rice submit that expenditure for a postal survey was not unforeseen because it was “specifically contemplated” before the budget.

The government says that although it could foresee the need for “some facility” for Australians to express a view on same-sex marriage, Cormann was “unaware of any proposal for the ABS to conduct a survey on the issue” when the budget bill was introduced on 9 May.

The Wilkie challenge submits the expenditure was not “urgent” because marriage equality had been controversial for many years and “there was no reason provided as to why the postal plebiscite had to be conducted from 12 September 2017”.

The government submissions argue that the allocation of $122m was urgent because it was necessary to achieve government policy within the time frame the government judges necessary.

The Wilkie challenge also argues the ABS is not authorised to conduct the postal survey because it is a collection of opinions on same-sex marriage, not “statistical information”.

The government submits that “statistical information” extends to “data of any kind”, and there is nothing to prevent the ABS counting how many people have a particular opinion.

Constitutional law expert and dean of the University of NSW law school, George Williams, has said the government has an “uphill battle” in the case.

On Wednesday he told the National Press Club that it was “hard … to make out” that spending on the postal survey was urgent and unforeseen. “Urgency, perhaps, but urgency because of the government’s own political priorities but not for other reasons. Unforeseen? We have been debating this for some time.”

Williams said it was “unlikely the court will permit the government a back door” to the clear line of authority in the chaplains program cases – that the federal government requires parliamentary approval to spend taxpayer money in almost all circumstances.

On Monday, Wilkie told Sky News he was “hopeful the court will see merit in our argument; I’m hopeful we’ll win in court”.

“I’m hopeful then there’ll be enough people in the government to see the sense in just quickly bringing [same-sex marriage] on for debate and decision in the parliament.”

Wilkie said the case will be an important precedent on the power of the executive, and whether the government can spend $122m of taxpayers funds without specific parliamentary approval.

Wilkie said the high court “clearly understands the urgency of this matter … they know the mailout happens next week … so I’m hopeful that they will decide on the matter very, very quickly, perhaps as early as the middle of this week”. </s> (CNN) The chances of Australians having their say on same-sex marriage are fading rapidly after strong hints from the main opposition party that it'll block the vote.

The country's conservative Liberal government had planned to hold a national plebiscite, similar to a referendum, on whether or not to allow gay couples to marry in February 2017.

But the opposition Labor Party said the government should simply make same sex marriage legal without a national vote, avoiding a vicious debate over LGBT rights and savings millions of dollars in election funding.

Australia is one of the last Western countries without legal same sex marriage, which has already been introduced in the United States, New Zealand, France, Canada and the United Kingdom.

About 57% of Australians support same sex marriage, according to a recent Essential polling survey

"This will be the 22nd marriage equality bill in Australia and we still haven't got (LGBT) marriage and at a certain point we have to think, what are we doing wrong here?" Australian Marriage Equality director Tiernan Brady told CNN.

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull brought the legislation before Parliament for the first time on Wednesday after months of negotiation.

Australian National University School of Politics professor John Warhurst said it was now very likely the national vote would not happen, and no other moves on gay marriage may be made for years.

"I think there's a high likelihood that the issue will not be proceeded with for at least two and a half years, and it's not clear even beyond the next election (2019) exactly what the dynamic will be," he said.

Warhurst said the plebiscite had originally been the policy of former Prime Minister Tony Abbott, as a way to defer the introduction of same sex marriage, and when he became leader Turnbull had been forced to keep it by his party's conservatives.

Both Turnbull and Shorten are publicly in favor of marriage equality.

A major criticism of the Australian government's plebiscite plan has been it would inflict several months of aggressively negative campaigning on LGBT people.

"No matter how positive or inclusive (our campaign) is there are still the voices on the 'no' side who will inflict terrible damage with their words," Brady said.

"The idea that any group of people would have their relationships measured and discussed and have people talk about whether they have a value at all to society -- there's no way anyone could conceive that wouldn't be a difficult journey."

Brady said even if the plebiscite failed, LGBT rights group would not be content to wait years for marriage equality and would attempt to pass it in this parliament. </s> Australians could vote next year on whether the country should allow gay marriage – but politicians will have the final say.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull introduced legislation on Parliament yesterday on the first anniversary of him getting the job.

He replaced Tony Abbott, who proposed that the public decide the issue with a popular vote and avoid a bitter debate in Parliament.

Mr Turnbull wants the compulsory vote to be on 11 February, but it will be non-binding and Parliament would ultimately decide whether the law would be changed.

He told Parliament that the reason marriage equality advocates opposed the vote was because they thought enough politicians already supported the reform for it to become law.

“They don’t want to run the risk of the Australian people giving them the wrong answer,” Mr Turnbull said.

“For our part, we put our faith in the Australian people and we know that their answer, whether it is ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ will be the right answer.”

Most gay rights activists are against a vote, saying it should be decided in Parliament without the potential divisive public debate.

They fear that government plans to spend 15 million Australian dollars (£8.3 million) on publicising the cases for and against marriage equality would give legitimacy to bigoted and homophobic views.

Mr Turnbull is a marriage equality advocate who is the only serving prime minister to attend Sydney’s Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras.

His government does not have a majority in the Senate, and two minor parties that back same-sex marriage have said they will not support the public vote. The government’s only chance of a plebiscite is now the opposition Labor Party.

Labor leader Bill Shorten has argued that a public vote would “give the haters a chance to come out from underneath the rock and make life harder for” lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people.

But Mr Shorten, who backs marriage equality, has not ruled out supporting the plebiscite to avoid a stalemate in Parliament over the issue that could last until the next election in 2019.

Attorney-general George Brandis, who supports same-sex marriage, accused Mr Shorten of jeopardising the reform to score political points against Mr Turnbull. “I’m sorry to say, so far Mr Shorten has been putting political game playing ahead of the merits of the issue,” he said. </s> It has been one year since Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull took over as the leader of the nation and Labor MP Ed Husic decided to cheekily acknowledge his achievement by giving 'back'.

The Labor frontbencher arrived at Parliament on Wednesday with a replica model of a human backbone, suggesting that to mark the PM's first year anniversary he needs to grow a spine and confront ministers in his own ranks.

'I was just trying to be helpful. For the man who thinks he has everything, we gave him the thing he needs most,' Mr Husic told Sky News this morning.

Liberal MP Andrew Laming who witnessed the prank joked, 'you've got a nerve mate'.

Mr Husic even referred to Mr Turnbull as a PM spokesman, calling him the C.J Cregg of Australian politics who was the president's spokeswoman in the US TV series West Wing.

The pre-meditated stunt was aimed at Mr Turnbull's perceived lack of hardline decisions lately with the tactic of shining the spotlight on the same-sex marriage plebiscite or imposing a carbon price.

Mr Husic has openly spoken about making same-sex marriage legal with a conscience vote within parliament rather than a $160m plebiscite.

"I think there are a number of us, and I certainly am of the view that we should get on with the vote, make the decision, do what the Parliament is supposed to and provide for marriage equality," Mr Husic told the ABC.

PM Malcolm Turnbull will be looking to introduce the same-sex marriage plebiscite to mark his first year anniversary as Prime Minster, but opposition leader Bill Shorten is expected to block the legislation. </s> Malcolm Turnbull is no longer Prime Minister, but as anyone familiar with the ongoing cravenness of Australian politics would expect, he tried to take credit for marriage equality as his political career went up in flames.

“I have been a reforming Prime Minister,” he said after being narrowly ousted in favour of now-former Treasurer Scott Morrison.

No, you didn’t. Sorry Malcolm, but that historic milestone was the product of years upon years of glittery blood, sweat, and predominantly tears.

It doesn’t belong to you. No matter how significant and shocking it was that you were the first Prime Minister to openly support marriage equality.

Yes, we all still hold bitterness towards the Labor Party for so insipidly hamstringing themselves during their own factional in-fighting and leadership carry-on by refusing to make legalising same-sex marriage a priority while in office, ignoring the long-held desire of the electorate to see it become reality.

But their failure in that regard is also your failure. Because, Malcolm Turnbull, you failed to prevent us from enduring the deeply harmful postal survey.

You failed to stop your anti-LGBTI colleagues – one of whom is now Prime Minister – from publicly, and no doubt privately, dehumanising us at every possible opportunity.

We narrowly avoided the Prime Ministership of a man so paranoid about a changing world that he wants to cease immigration entirely for the man whose Church’s founder insists on the Biblical wrongness of our sexualities and gender identities.

It’s impossible to be pleased we are instead saddled with a man who oversaw the initiation of Operation Sovereign Borders and a similar immigration platform through which he did everything in his power to delay asylum seekers – including the gay and bisexual refugees Australia presently imprisons – from access to safe and humane living conditions.

It’s impossible to be comfortable being led by yet another man whose disdain for LGBTI people shone through when he moved an amendment to marriage equality legislation which would have allowed parents to take their kids out of classrooms if same-sex marriage were discussed.

The postal survey – which gave license to homophobic vandalism of our property, attacks on young people, abuse that made us feel even more unsafe that we usually do, and a tidal wave of hate speech against us – is your achievement.

The outcome, the relief on that joyous Yes Day and all the same-sex marriages that have taken place since? They’re ours.

All that activism, that heartache, the years we spent – and some still spend, by choice or by fear – in closets were a toll on us, not you.

We have paid for marriage equality and the great symbolic milestone it represents. And there is still so much more to do.

Though you will soon find yourself out of a job, Malcolm Turnbull – despite the fact that you remain exorbitantly wealthy and will still be afforded a deeply undeserved governmental pension – marriage equality cost you nothing.

And that is why it is not yours. That is why it belongs to us. </s> The son of two mothers, Eddie Blewett has turned to Malcolm Turnbull and demanded the Prime Minister 'do his job' ahead of a possible same-sex marriage plebiscite.

The 13-year-old faced relentless teasing over his parent's same-sex relationship, until he was moved to a new high school, but his mums Neroli Dickson and Claire Blewett fear a plebiscite campaign will ignite further bullying for even more children.

'It has given people permission to say things in the playground - to pass on what they've heard at the dinner table,' Ms Dickson told the Sydney Morning Herald.

The family traveled to Canberra on Tuesday with LGBTQI support group Rainbow Families, where Eddie's story was represented in Question Time by Deputy Labor leader Tanya Plibersek.

Eddie and his mums watched from the public gallery as Ms Plibersek questioned Malcolm Turnbull why a 13-year-old boy should 'have to put up with a $7.5 million campaign by people who have never met him, telling him that there is something wrong with his family'?

She quoted Eddie who said: 'Why should people who barely know us make an assumption on our families and vote on how we can live?'

In response, Mr Turnbull said that while he welcomed Eddie to Question Time at the House of Representatives, he accused his presence as a political point being made by Ms Plibersek, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

'Eddie will understand that everything we do here in this Parliament is designed to ensure that Australia becomes an even better place for him to grow up in and realise his dreams,' Turnbull said.

'What [Plibersek] has said is that people who do not know Eddie are not entitled to express a view on the Marriage Act. That's what she is saying.'

The Australian Prime Minister added that the country has nothing to fear from the plebiscite, because the debate will be 'respectful' and 'civil'.

'He has no idea how uncivil a playground can be.'

Eddie was also unhappy with Mr Turnbull's response and wrote him a letter after Question Time.

'That really upset me,' he wrote.

'Please do your job.

'We want same-sex marriage without hearing in the playground that I am not normal.'

A date for the same-sex marriage plebiscite has been proposed for February 11, 2017.

The Coalition has to convince nine senators to support legislation in order for the plebiscite to go through.

But Labor leader Bill Shorten has threatened to block the bill, cautioning the impact the vote could have on vulnerable children.
Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull plans to introduce a plebiscite on the legality of same-sex marriage in the country.