Extract from The Guardian
Unless Malcolm Turnbull
was going to have a sudden change of heart and really take on the
conservative faction, unless he was prepared to call on a moment of
genuine decision for his internal opponents – “I think this, so, are you
with me, or are you against me” – the plebiscite game of chicken was
always going to end up at this point.
We’ve reached the inevitable tipping point. The various concessions conservatives have demanded of Turnbull to hold the plebiscite now look to be sufficiently burdensome to kill the whole exercise, which is, of course, precisely the point of seeking them.
Public funding has become a mutual rubicon. The conservatives don’t want a plebiscite without public funding of the “yes” and “no” cases and, increasingly, it looks like Labor can’t support one if that’s the price of entry. Moderates inside the government know that, which is partly why they argued against public funding during a lengthy cabinet discussion on Monday night.
Public funding is the point at which political support cracks. So here we are, at the point of fracture. The question is where this point of fracture leads.
Already, it’s led to one Coalition parliamentarian, Dean Smith, saying he can’t vote with his party on the issue. Some of Smith’s colleagues suspect he’s the only person who would stand up the leadership on the plebiscite but who knows, and it’s an emphatic gesture nonetheless. It reminds us that everyone has their tipping points.
The Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young, who has been wavering semi-publicly about which way to go, has been pushed over into blocking the plebiscite by the events of the past 48 hours. “I could never accept spending taxpayers money on a campaign that attacks members of the Australian community,” she said Tuesday.
The prime minister and the attorney-general – two people who didn’t want the plebiscite and weren’t arguing in favour of public funding – are now using the collective resolution of the plebiscite mechanism to ramp up pressure on the Labor leader, Bill Shorten, to support the process.
Shorten is being presented by Turnbull and George Brandis as the politician prepared to break the LGBTI nation’s heart (as Turnbull once characterised John Howard caustically during the republican debate).
Obviously that’s what you do at this point, one last turning of the political screws because opinion polls suggest people actually do want the opportunity of the plebiscite and Labor is not yet fully locked in behind blocking it. The final decision hasn’t yet been taken.
But Shorten has rowed the boat so far out it’s very difficult to see how he would turn round and head back for shore. On Monday, Shorten fretted about same-sex attracted teenagers self-harming during the plebiscite. On Tuesday he said this: “Let me be unequivocal. I think the plebiscite is a bad idea.”
Turnbull has also made it abundantly clear he intends to offer Shorten no political cover to support this process. Asked whether there was anything constructive he could offer the Labor leader to turn the ALP around, Turnbull used his answer as opportunity to deliver the inevitable political attack line. “There will be a plebiscite on 11 February unless Bill Shorten decides to block it,” he said.
A cynical person would say Turnbull doesn’t care what Labor does, that he is prepared to sink the plebiscite to get rid of a dangerous, persistent fault line inside the government. Chalk it up as another sop to the conservatives, who will be delighted if the issue sinks without trace.
Perhaps another grand gesture in the culture wars will buttress his position internally.
But all the field evidence to date tells us every time Turnbull sues for peace, the conservatives double down and come back to take another chunk out of him. The concessions he’s made to date have bought him nothing, and they’ve disconcerted the voting public.
And there’s now another brutal calculation for supporters of same sex marriage and it’s this: will the prime minister last?
If Turnbull can turn on the head of a pin on this issue, turn another long, slow, capitulation into fresh political capital, then tap dance through the next, inevitable conflagration, and the one after that – perhaps his fortunes will improve over the term of this parliament.
But if they don’t, if Tony Abbott’s obvious circling and posturing and strategising leads to yet another episode in Australia’s most soul-destroying soap opera, Canberra’s revolving door of leadership, then the calculation changes again.
If you look at the cluttered landscape with clear eyes, perhaps you could reach this conclusion. Only Turnbull remaining in the Liberal party leadership would prevent a full break out of Coalition moderates on marriage equality. Moderates are unlikely en masse to stand up a leader who is nominally at least, one of them.
But a conservative? Well, who knows. Perhaps if the Turnbull experiment doesn’t last, the same-sex marriage issue can be forced back into the parliament within the current term. After all, the one constant of the dispiriting Canberra soap opera is what goes around has a tendency to come around.
We’ve reached the inevitable tipping point. The various concessions conservatives have demanded of Turnbull to hold the plebiscite now look to be sufficiently burdensome to kill the whole exercise, which is, of course, precisely the point of seeking them.
Public funding has become a mutual rubicon. The conservatives don’t want a plebiscite without public funding of the “yes” and “no” cases and, increasingly, it looks like Labor can’t support one if that’s the price of entry. Moderates inside the government know that, which is partly why they argued against public funding during a lengthy cabinet discussion on Monday night.
Public funding is the point at which political support cracks. So here we are, at the point of fracture. The question is where this point of fracture leads.
Already, it’s led to one Coalition parliamentarian, Dean Smith, saying he can’t vote with his party on the issue. Some of Smith’s colleagues suspect he’s the only person who would stand up the leadership on the plebiscite but who knows, and it’s an emphatic gesture nonetheless. It reminds us that everyone has their tipping points.
The Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young, who has been wavering semi-publicly about which way to go, has been pushed over into blocking the plebiscite by the events of the past 48 hours. “I could never accept spending taxpayers money on a campaign that attacks members of the Australian community,” she said Tuesday.
The prime minister and the attorney-general – two people who didn’t want the plebiscite and weren’t arguing in favour of public funding – are now using the collective resolution of the plebiscite mechanism to ramp up pressure on the Labor leader, Bill Shorten, to support the process.
Shorten is being presented by Turnbull and George Brandis as the politician prepared to break the LGBTI nation’s heart (as Turnbull once characterised John Howard caustically during the republican debate).
Obviously that’s what you do at this point, one last turning of the political screws because opinion polls suggest people actually do want the opportunity of the plebiscite and Labor is not yet fully locked in behind blocking it. The final decision hasn’t yet been taken.
But Shorten has rowed the boat so far out it’s very difficult to see how he would turn round and head back for shore. On Monday, Shorten fretted about same-sex attracted teenagers self-harming during the plebiscite. On Tuesday he said this: “Let me be unequivocal. I think the plebiscite is a bad idea.”
Turnbull has also made it abundantly clear he intends to offer Shorten no political cover to support this process. Asked whether there was anything constructive he could offer the Labor leader to turn the ALP around, Turnbull used his answer as opportunity to deliver the inevitable political attack line. “There will be a plebiscite on 11 February unless Bill Shorten decides to block it,” he said.
A cynical person would say Turnbull doesn’t care what Labor does, that he is prepared to sink the plebiscite to get rid of a dangerous, persistent fault line inside the government. Chalk it up as another sop to the conservatives, who will be delighted if the issue sinks without trace.
Perhaps another grand gesture in the culture wars will buttress his position internally.
But all the field evidence to date tells us every time Turnbull sues for peace, the conservatives double down and come back to take another chunk out of him. The concessions he’s made to date have bought him nothing, and they’ve disconcerted the voting public.
And there’s now another brutal calculation for supporters of same sex marriage and it’s this: will the prime minister last?
If Turnbull can turn on the head of a pin on this issue, turn another long, slow, capitulation into fresh political capital, then tap dance through the next, inevitable conflagration, and the one after that – perhaps his fortunes will improve over the term of this parliament.
But if they don’t, if Tony Abbott’s obvious circling and posturing and strategising leads to yet another episode in Australia’s most soul-destroying soap opera, Canberra’s revolving door of leadership, then the calculation changes again.
If you look at the cluttered landscape with clear eyes, perhaps you could reach this conclusion. Only Turnbull remaining in the Liberal party leadership would prevent a full break out of Coalition moderates on marriage equality. Moderates are unlikely en masse to stand up a leader who is nominally at least, one of them.
But a conservative? Well, who knows. Perhaps if the Turnbull experiment doesn’t last, the same-sex marriage issue can be forced back into the parliament within the current term. After all, the one constant of the dispiriting Canberra soap opera is what goes around has a tendency to come around.
No comments:
Post a Comment