tag:theconversation.com,2011:/africa/topics/same-sex-marriage-postal-survey-42073/articlessame-sex marriage postal survey – The Conversation2021-01-19T19:07:32Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1531002021-01-19T19:07:32Z2021-01-19T19:07:32ZSydney Festival review: The Rise and Fall of Saint George shows the transformative power of music<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379377/original/file-20210118-18-1vlw80b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1087%2C1384%2C5734%2C3534&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Bianca De Marchi/Sydney Festival</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Rise and Fall of Saint George is a story about place, belonging and community that taps into universal tensions of identity and faith in multicultural societies. </p>
<p>Playing for one night only at the Sydney Festival, the breezy and open space of the Headland at Barangaroo Reserve with Sydney Harbour as backdrop provided an additional dose of catharsis to this haunting and humorous tribute to freedom exemplifying the transformative power of music. </p>
<p>Electronica composer and musician Paul Mac and playwright Lachlan Philpott collaborated to create a personal and poignant reflection on the divisive national same-sex marriage debate in Australia and one of its local consequences: the destruction of a giant mural of George Michael in Newtown by several young men in separate incidences, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/19/vandalised-george-michael-mural-sydney-makeover">one of whom claimed </a> it violated his Christian faith. </p>
<h2>Reflection and healing</h2>
<p>Scott Marsh’s mural was commissioned by Mac and Johnny Seymour for the side of their home in Newtown following the death of George Michael in 2016. The singer is depicted as a saint in priestly robes with a cross dangling from one ear, his head surrounded by a rainbow-coloured halo and smoking marijuana. </p>
<p>For 11 months, the mural was a site of commemoration, celebration, pilgrimage and reassurance for the residents of Newtown — and further afield, given the made-for-Instagram quality of Marsh’s work. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379418/original/file-20210119-15-2y757t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="George Michael in priestly robes with a cross dangling from one ear, his head surrounded by a rainbow-coloured halo and smoking marijuana" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379418/original/file-20210119-15-2y757t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379418/original/file-20210119-15-2y757t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=803&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379418/original/file-20210119-15-2y757t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=803&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379418/original/file-20210119-15-2y757t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=803&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379418/original/file-20210119-15-2y757t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1009&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379418/original/file-20210119-15-2y757t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1009&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379418/original/file-20210119-15-2y757t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1009&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The original mural in Newtown.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sydney Festival</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The mural’s life was cut short by vandals and has become a site of contest over freedom of expression and faith. But this one-hour performance directed by Kate Champion with a huge choir, excellent music and a great lineup of singers is a celebration of life, love and resilience in unpredictable times. </p>
<p>The battle for George’s visibility played out in the performance is both reflection and healing, and a reminder freedoms cannot be taken for granted.</p>
<p>The mood during the marriage equality debate was intense given the divisiveness of the campaign. The result of the postal survey was a resounding yes, but roughly one-in-four of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/same-sex-marriage-survey-by-the-stats-a-resounding-yes-but-western-sydney-leads-no-vote-87258">votes were for no</a>. This is still a lot of people.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/same-sex-marriage-survey-by-the-stats-a-resounding-yes-but-western-sydney-leads-no-vote-87258">Same-sex marriage survey by the stats: a resounding 'yes' but western Sydney leads 'no' vote</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>News audio broadcast from the same-sex marriage debate takes you back to the heightened emotion of that time. Video of Newtown streetscapes evoke the neighbourhood’s narrow and close knit rows of houses, and the lyrics reflect the importance of tolerance and acceptance: “with open minds there’s room for you here”, the choir sings.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379380/original/file-20210118-23-1cwjj8x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Singers stand on stage." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379380/original/file-20210118-23-1cwjj8x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379380/original/file-20210118-23-1cwjj8x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379380/original/file-20210118-23-1cwjj8x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379380/original/file-20210118-23-1cwjj8x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379380/original/file-20210118-23-1cwjj8x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379380/original/file-20210118-23-1cwjj8x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379380/original/file-20210118-23-1cwjj8x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Rise and Fall of Saint George is a celebration of life.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Bianca De Marchi/Sydney Festival</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Juxtaposed with audio from Penny Wong and Tony Abbott are cheeky and ribald lyrics balancing the gravity of the destruction of the mural with a humour that might ameliorate those violent acts: “Now we have a plebiscite that’s more dinky di than vegemite!”</p>
<h2>Listening without prejudice</h2>
<p>Rather than drawing on George Michael’s music, the show perpetuates his legacy as a freedom fighter for not only gay rights, but the right to be who you are and live your own truth without judgement. </p>
<p>In this, it embodies his call to listen without prejudice. </p>
<p>Mac speaks candidly about his personal experience of prejudice with the defacement of the mural; the fear the waves of vandalism to the mural caused him, his partner and the local community, and the vigils held to protect the mural. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379379/original/file-20210118-23-12sgcje.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man at a piano." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379379/original/file-20210118-23-12sgcje.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379379/original/file-20210118-23-12sgcje.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379379/original/file-20210118-23-12sgcje.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379379/original/file-20210118-23-12sgcje.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379379/original/file-20210118-23-12sgcje.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379379/original/file-20210118-23-12sgcje.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379379/original/file-20210118-23-12sgcje.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Paul Mac candidly shares his story.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Bianca De Marchi/Sydney Festival</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Threats they received during this time were a reminder of the suspicion and fear divisiveness can generate. </p>
<p>Incidents of defacement were followed by the chalking up of affirmative messages by the local community. The final act of vandalism hid George with black paint reflecting that the ownership of sites of commemoration can be unpredictable.</p>
<p>But out of acts of violence — and resistance to violence — is born a transformative musical experience of community courage and determination.</p>
<p>Both George Michael’s “sainthood” and the push for LGBTQ rights will go on, and will take unpredictable twists and turns that emphasise the need to remain vigilant. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379378/original/file-20210118-17-2zpj46.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="The original mural, covered in black paint." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379378/original/file-20210118-17-2zpj46.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379378/original/file-20210118-17-2zpj46.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379378/original/file-20210118-17-2zpj46.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379378/original/file-20210118-17-2zpj46.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379378/original/file-20210118-17-2zpj46.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379378/original/file-20210118-17-2zpj46.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379378/original/file-20210118-17-2zpj46.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The mural became a site of contention, eventually being covered with black paint.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Bianca De Marchi/Sydney Festival</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And as the lyrics noted, despite black paint hiding George Michael in the mural, “his soul is aflame”. He remains a beacon for freedom across the globe.</p>
<p>As we stood to leave Barangaroo, and the bright lights of Luna Park twinkled across the harbour, I felt a sense of gratitude. I was thankful to the community who conceived and brought this show to life: a performance that gave us space to reflect and celebrate, that moved the debate on the mural forward, and offered engagement as a solution to prejudice.</p>
<p><em>The Rise and Fall of Saint George was at Sydney Festival, January 15.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/153100/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Justin Ellis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A celebration of life, love and resilience, The Rise and Fall of Saint George is a restorative experience.Justin Ellis, Lecturer in Criminology at the University of Newcastle, University of NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1049302018-11-15T00:06:53Z2018-11-15T00:06:53ZRainbow pride flag’s still flying, taking on new forms and meanings in our cities<p>A year ago, on November 15, the Australian Bureau of Statistics <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/1800.0">announced</a> the result of the postal survey on same-sex marriage equality, a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/15/australia-says-yes-to-same-sex-marriage-in-historic-postal-survey">resounding Yes</a> with 61.6% of the vote. Leading up to the announcement, the LBGTQIA+ community endured agonised tension. They had to argue fiercely for the legitimacy of their relationships as well as their identities.</p>
<p>During that debate a new visual landscape of signs and interventions became part of many urban environments. The rainbow pride flag began to appear at both public and private sites as a very visible sign of pride and affirmation.</p>
<p>In the past year the flag has clearly escaped the pole or the street bunting of pride festival times to become ever present. Post-plebiscite, we are reminded of the same-sex marriage vote, and that issues for queer people continue. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-year-since-the-marriage-equality-vote-much-has-been-gained-and-there-is-still-much-to-be-done-106326">A year since the marriage equality vote, much has been gained – and there is still much to be done</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://www.biography.com/people/gilbert-baker-112517">Gilbert Baker</a> originally designed the rainbow flag in 1978 for the San Francisco Pride Parade. Its purpose was to express the visibility and values of the gay and lesbian community. The flag’s colours represent healing, serenity, sex and nature. </p>
<p>Since then, the flag has undergone many remixes by different parts of the queer community to create further visibility for the diversity inherent in it. </p>
<p>Transgender woman and activist Monica Helms designed the transgender pride flag in 1999, retaining the stripe motif, but focusing on blue, pink and white to illustrate a spectrum of gender. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UJ-Rq3Bl_UY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Monica Helms talks about designing the trans pride flag.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A more recent design is the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansexual_pride_flag">pansexual pride flag</a>, designed by a Tumblr user known as Jasper in 2010. First disseminated on the site, it has become the most widely seen specific flag of the community, reused across the internet. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-does-it-mean-to-be-cisgender-103159">Explainer: what does it mean to be 'cisgender'?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What’s in a flag?</h2>
<p>Cloth flags are significant cultural spatial markers. Affected by air, wind and light, static cloth is transformed in the slightest breeze, becoming alive and suggesting change as well as permanence. </p>
<p>The rainbow pride flag’s emphatic stripes activate a sense of colour and change, evoking new narratives and possibilities. The flag took on new cultural, social and political meaning as it moved from the air and onto homes and commercial premises.</p>
<p>Some flags, like one hung in the window of The Bank pub in Newtown, were emblazoned with YES in the centre. This left no questions about what the flag was supposed to represent – it was very specific about its contemporary political motivation. </p>
<p>An example of the flag leaving the fixed place of the pole is at 73 Liberty Street in Stanmore in Sydney’s inner west. Originally painted a shade of yellow beige, the house was transformed into a radiant spectrum of rainbow pride colours, with a black and white flag emblazoned with “Yes!” hung on the front. Visit it today and the colours remain as vibrant as ever.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">73 Liberty Street in Stanmore.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tom Stoddard</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The boldness of the flag’s colours radically alters the experience of moving past the generally bland facades of inner-city Sydney. We are now confronted by an eye-catching spectrum, the aesthetic energy of colour and space. </p>
<p>Bold colour, often spurned and even banned in some heritage suburbs such as <a href="https://www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/150530/Chapter_C1_Paddington_HCA.pdf">Paddington</a>, takes on a new uplifting vision. At stake is visibility. LGBTQIA+ communities do not appear and disappear at moments of political debates, but continue to actualise and make visible pride in their existence. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/coming-out-at-work-is-not-a-one-off-event-101118">Coming out at work is not a one-off event</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A politicised existence necessitates this, as the fight for equality is ongoing. The painted house is a visible urban marker that the queer community is here to stay.</p>
<p>So what is the significance of these persistent visual markers? On the one hand, their visual presence indicates the importance of a political debate undertaken more than one year ago. </p>
<p>More subtly it marks a cultural shift, where expression, be it personal or as a collective, affirms a community. Design and activism in these forms can become expressions of civic values, as space and place become the mouthpiece for cultural and social sentiments and statements.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=237&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=237&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=237&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=298&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=298&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=298&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The flag leaves the pole: stickers around Marrickville, Sydney.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tom Stoddard</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>That isn’t to say that the static flag does not possess power in its own right. Various activist-designers have transformed it into other forms that create direct dialogues with the public. The rainbow flag stripes become a framing device for statements and declarations that are intrinsically tied to the language of the debate. </p>
<p>Stickers have long been used as spatially flexible political objects, free from flagpoles or other prerequisite structures. From letterboxes to window frames, remixed versions of the flag take a message or sentiment to any place, public or private. </p>
<p>This rethinking of the hierarchy of designated spaces for communication is an exciting evolution for the form and intention of the rainbow pride flag. As it evolves from one icon into a variety of others, it populates the city with queer statements and traces. </p>
<p>Last year the pride flag was used as an effective rallying call to express outwardly, publicly and explicitly that same-sex relationships (marriage or otherwise) are as valid as any heterosexual relationship. It will be interesting to see where the pride flag takes the Australian queer community next and, in turn, where the community takes the flag.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/104930/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Stoddard works for the University of Technology Sydney and receives funding and support for his research and writing.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Lee works for the University of Technology Sydney and at times receives funding and support for his research and writing. </span></em></p>In the year since the resounding Yes vote in the same-sex marriage survey, the flag has clearly escaped the pole or the street bunting of pride festival times to become ever present in our cities.Thomas Stoddard, PhD Candidate, School of Design, University of Technology SydneyTom Lee, Senior Lecturer, School of Design, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/875992017-11-23T19:10:29Z2017-11-23T19:10:29ZWe learn from our mistakes: how to make better predictions from tweets<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195992/original/file-20171123-6072-hcjpri.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">How do we know that what people tweet is what they really think?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock/AlesiaKan</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Social media is viewed as a potential goldmine of information. The key is to work out how to mine this abundant source of public sentiment. </p>
<p>Linking social media sentiment with human behaviour is a relatively new and evolving field of study. It has a lot of potential – we successfully used it to <a href="https://app.secure.griffith.edu.au/news/2016/11/30/big-data-analytics-nostradamus-of-the-21st-century/">predict the result of the 2016 US election</a>. </p>
<p>But <a href="https://theconversation.com/social-media-study-points-to-a-close-result-in-the-same-sex-marriage-vote-84436">we got it wrong</a> with Australia’s same-sex marriage survey, and here’s why.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-numbers-say-and-dont-say-in-the-same-sex-marriage-survey-87096">What the numbers say (and don't say) in the same-sex marriage survey</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>We crunched the numbers</h2>
<p>We carefully <a href="https://theconversation.com/social-media-study-points-to-a-close-result-in-the-same-sex-marriage-vote-84436">sampled the sentiment</a> of 458,565 anonymised Australian tweets that made reference to same-sex marriage. We found 72% overall support for Yes. This was averaged out from the whole month of October. </p>
<p>But we noticed that some Twitter accounts had sent more than 1,000 tweets related to same-sex marriage. The number of unique users was down to just 207,287. </p>
<p>It seemed wise to minimise the influence of these bulk tweets because by the time they were sent, many of the votes had already been cast. Discounting the influence of the bulk tweets brought Yes support down to 57%.</p>
<p>Once we adjusted another 8% for the under-representation of the over-55 demographic in the Twitter sample, we concluded that the overall support for Yes was down to 49%. </p>
<h2>With the benefit of hindsight</h2>
<p>In previous successful trials we had assumed that all tweets are equal. If we had made the same assumption in this trial and did everything else the same, then – re-crunching the numbers – our prediction for Yes would have been 59.08%, which is close to the <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/results/">official result of 61.6%</a>.</p>
<p>We made the incorrect assumption that the bulk tweeting would not be influential because the voting was spread across several weeks. </p>
<p>In our previous <a href="https://theconversation.com/social-media-study-points-to-a-close-result-in-the-same-sex-marriage-vote-84436">article</a> we acknowledged the influence of bulk tweeting. We said that campaign tweets would have influenced public opinion to some degree, but we anticipated it to a much lower extent.</p>
<p>So there are lessons to be learned from this for any future analysis.</p>
<h2>Success stories</h2>
<p>So far we’ve talked mainly about when we were wrong and why. But what about those times when the Big Data and Smart Analytics Lab got it right? </p>
<p>The Lab correctly <a href="https://app.secure.griffith.edu.au/news/2016/11/30/big-data-analytics-nostradamus-of-the-21st-century/">predicted</a> no less than 48 out of 50 US State elections held at the same time as the 2016 presidential election, which we also correctly called. </p>
<p>We called the Coalition’s win in the 2016 Australian federal election. And our method gave a clear indication that “Brexit” would prevail over “Bremain”, contrary to the polling before Britain’s referendum on European Union membership.</p>
<p>In all of these cases, we were sampling the social media sentiment leading up to a specific election day when all would be decided. The election result is a snapshot of how the voters feel on that day. </p>
<p>With the same-sex marriage survey, the voting was spread across several weeks, making it difficult to know what proportion of the vote took place on a particular day or even week. </p>
<p>Even with this uncertainty, it was possible to make reasonably accurate predictions provided that the underlying assumptions are correct, such as all tweets being equally influential.</p>
<h2>Twitter isn’t the only source</h2>
<p>With <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/282087/number-of-monthly-active-twitter-users/">328 million</a> active users worldwide, and many more inactive users who nonetheless read the tweets of others, Twitter is an excellent source of information on people’s views and intentions. </p>
<p>But it is good to have multiple sources of data when doing big data analytics. </p>
<p>In diverse projects, ranging from tourist satisfaction to environmental changes, the Big Data and Smart Analytics Lab uses combinations of Twitter, Flickr, Instagram, public Facebook pages, and even the Chinese social media platform Weibo. It is all grist to the mill. </p>
<p>Facebook is by far the dominant social media channel in the world. Only public pages are accessed by our analytics. But with <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly-active-facebook-users-worldwide/">two billion</a> users and growing, we still have plenty of data to work with. </p>
<p>Twitter has evolved into a more news- and opinion-oriented channel, with people sharing newsworthy items with like-minded others. Celebrities and politicians use it as a direct channel to their audience, bypassing the established media channels altogether. </p>
<p>Brevity of tweets was enforced by a 140-character limit until recently, when the length restriction was <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/26/technology/twitter-280-characters.html">doubled</a> to 280 characters. The extra characters make tweets an even richer source of information for data mining.</p>
<h2>The power of social media</h2>
<p>The fact remains that people say things on social media that they would not say out loud. Many trolls and hecklers in the online world turn out to be mild-mannered individuals in the real world. It can be surprising.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-same-sex-marriage-survey-got-us-talking-about-and-trusting-data-87508">How the same-sex marriage survey got us talking about – and trusting – data</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Whose opinion is more interesting to the analyst? Is it the social persona who has responsibilities to the community and is generally polite? Or is it the private persona who only vents their true feelings to their closest confidants and on social media. </p>
<p>Both are interesting, but arguably it is the latter whose opinion determine the outcome of social issues.</p>
<p>The lesson to be learned from our error with same-sex marriage survey is that every social media post counts. Social media is indeed a powerfully democratising force.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87599/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bela Stantic receives funding from: The National Environmental Science Programme (NESP), Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service Private Practice Trust Fund, Sustainable Built Environment - National Research Centre, Queensland Cancer Fund, Australian Institute of Sport, City of Gold Coast and Association of Marine Park Tourism Operators (AMPTO).</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Tuffley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Twitter can be a useful tool in trying to predict what people think on an issue. So why did a study of almost half a million tweets on the same-sex marriage survey get it wrong?David Tuffley, Senior Lecturer in Applied Ethics and SocioTechnical Studies, School of ICT., Griffith UniversityBela Stantic, Professor, Director of Big data and smart analytics lab, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/876232017-11-20T19:14:44Z2017-11-20T19:14:44ZNew Zealand experience shows same-sex marriage could provide huge economic boost for Australia<p>Even though <a href="https://theconversation.com/as-australians-say-yes-to-marriage-equality-the-legal-stoush-over-human-rights-takes-centre-stage-87337">it’s still uncertain</a> as to when Australian same-sex couples will be able legally to wed, New Zealand’s example shows how much this could be worth to our economy.</p>
<p>New Zealand has long been a destination for international wedding tourism. This was boosted from August 2013, when New Zealand same-sex couples could also marry. The majority of same-sex weddings between overseas couples conducted in New Zealand have been between Australian couples unable to marry at home.</p>
<p>In 2016, <a href="http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/people_and_communities/marriages-civil-unions-and-divorces/MarriagesCivilUnionsandDivorces_MRYeDec16.aspx">2,490 heterosexual couples from other countries</a> celebrated marriages or civil unions in New Zealand, comprising 11% of all heterosexual couples’ ceremonies. The proportion of same-sex couples from other countries entering into marriage or civil union in New Zealand has been even higher.</p>
<p>In 2016, 49% of same-sex marriages or civil unions in New Zealand were between overseas couples, and <a href="http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/people_and_communities/marriages-civil-unions-and-divorces/MarriagesCivilUnionsandDivorces_MRYeDec16.aspx">Australians accounted for 58% of these couples</a>. Altogether, Australian couples comprised 29% of same-sex marriages or civil unions celebrated in New Zealand in 2016. </p>
<p>The figures for 2016 are not an outlier: since 2013, Australian couples have made up 25% or more of same-sex weddings celebrated per annum. </p>
<h2>All the business of marriage</h2>
<p>This phenomenon has both social and economic implications. Trans-Tasman same-sex wedding tourism underlines a real desire for marriage by Australian same-sex couples. </p>
<p>New Zealand wedding operators have been willing and able to absorb this demand. While of course the significance of marriage lies in the couple’s enduring commitment and love, supported by family, friends and community, there is also tangible economic value from the wedding celebration.</p>
<p>The wedding industry is a complex network of small and medium businesses. It includes everything from planners, celebrants to florists, photographers and entertainers. Beyond the ceremony itself, the industry also includes operators of honeymoon destinations.</p>
<p>In 2015, <a href="https://bluenotes.anz.com/posts/2015/10/five-ways-to-count-the-marriage-equality-boom">ANZ economists Cherelle Murphy and Mandeep Kaura crunched some numbers</a> on the economic benefits of same-sex marriage in Australia. They used <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features10July+2013">2011 Census data</a> on the number of same-sex couples in Australia, and we might update their estimate using the more recent 2016 Census figures.</p>
<p>Murphy and Kaura estimated the average spend on a wedding ceremony and reception at A$51,000. The <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/2071.0">2016 Census</a> counted 46,800 same-sex couples. </p>
<p>They applied <a href="http://www.notsoprivatelives.com">other survey findings</a> from 2010, and further assumed that out of the half of all same-sex couples who will want to marry, half will do so in the year after same-sex marriage is legalised. </p>
<p>The sentiments expressed in the 2010 survey findings may have shifted since then, especially in light of the marriage equality postal survey. But let’s use that proportion for consistency.</p>
<p>We might suppose 11,700 same-sex couples will marry within one year of the legalisation of same-sex marriage, spending on average A$51,000, totalling almost A$597 million dollars in wedding and reception costs.</p>
<p>This does not include honeymoon spending. For those couples choosing to honeymoon within Australia, we can add spending on travel and accommodation. </p>
<p>A 2015 survey by Bride To Be magazine found <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/here-are-3-billion-more-reasons-to-vote-yes-to-same-sex-marriage-20170811-gxujni.html">the average spend on wedding and honeymoon at A$65,482</a>. This figure is clearly biased towards dedicated bridal magazine readers – those who might be willing to save up and fork out more for their perfect wedding and honeymoon. </p>
<p>Arguably many would not be able or willing to spend this amount. Nevertheless, A$65,482 would be equivalent to an annual salary for many, so this is suggestive of how lucrative some segments of the wedding and honeymoon market are.</p>
<p>Apart from what the couple (and their families) spend on the wedding and honeymoon, we might also consider guest spending. Obviously, purchasing wedding gifts contributes to the retail sector. </p>
<p>Out-of-town guests also have to pay for travel, accommodation, food and beverage, and other expenses. Some couples opt for destination weddings, with benefits for tourism operators. </p>
<p>Some operators hope that Australia, like New Zealand, might become a destination for international same-sex wedding tourism, and so provide a boost to the tourism industry.</p>
<p>In addition to this, Murphy and Kaura found other economic benefits of same-sex marriage, such as increased state government revenue from marriage licence fees and ceremonies in state-run births, deaths and marriages registries.</p>
<p>With the debate on same-sex marriage now turning to whether or not businesses will be able to refuse couples based on moral objections, it seems at least the economic case incentive is there for these businesses to say “yes”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87623/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Gorman-Murray does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The majority of same-sex weddings between overseas couples conducted in New Zealand have been between Australian couples unable to marry at home.Andrew Gorman-Murray, Professor of Geography, Western Sydney UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/877412017-11-19T10:39:34Z2017-11-19T10:39:34ZGoing overboard on religious protections could come back to bite in multicultural Australia<p>Be careful what you wish for. Have those pushing for more protections in the same-sex marriage bill, in the name of religious freedom, thought through the consequences of what they are advocating?</p>
<p>At a political level, the calls are coming in particular from Liberal conservatives, Nationals cabinet minister Matt Canavan, and former prime minister John Howard.</p>
<p>Treasurer Scott Morrison is putting himself, via the media, at the forefront of seeking protections beyond those in the Dean Smith bill that is being debated – which already includes substantial safeguards for those of faith who object to same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>News Corp columnist Miranda Devine, characterising the Morrison intervention as resuscitating his leadership credentials among the conservatives, <a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/yes-vote-means-a-new-minority-needs-protection/news-story/3ae65b7f6e1093222c5dcfea18b58bbe">set out</a> in the Sunday Telegraph what amendments Morrison is seeking. </p>
<p>“They include provisions allowing parents to withdraw their children from Safe Schools-type classes that do not accord with their values, and offering protections for people, schools or charitable organisations that maintain a traditional view of marriage, so that they are not sacked or refused funding for their beliefs,” she wrote.</p>
<p>A few days before, an <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/samesex-marriage-scott-morrison-leads-mps-fight-to-preserve-parent-rights-in-bill/news-story/c3b5d1d7981ec7d4b29bb45dfe71857a">Australian article</a> had Morrison as “the most vocal cabinet voice on stronger freedom of speech and religious protection amendments”.</p>
<p>Fellow conservative Peter Dutton, who’s anxious to get the same-sex marriage issue off the agenda, also wants more protections in the current bill but has proposed a discussion in the new year for a bill covering “a general religious protection”. This would reduce the breadth of the immediate debate.</p>
<p>“I don’t support a bill of rights, but … I want people to be able to practice their own faith, regardless of whether it’s Christianity or any other religion or no religion at all and I want them to do that without fear or favour,” Dutton said last week.</p>
<p>The segue into an attack on the Safe Schools program is a common conservative mantra. “I do think this Safe Schools movement will use this debate as a launching pad for their next wave,” Dutton said. “That is a genuine concern that I think a lot of parents have.”</p>
<p>Tim Wilson, one of the five Liberal backbenchers who forced marriage back onto the government’s agenda, counters by pointing out that the Safe Schools part might run into constitutional problems because the states run the government schools.</p>
<p>Wilson on Sunday also highlighted a contradiction in the conservatives’ push for extending religious rights. “Where this discussion around having an extra protection around religious freedom takes us is towards a charter or a bill or rights,” he <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-19/tim-wilson-joins-insiders/9165886">told the ABC</a>.</p>
<p>“It’s an oddity to see many people who identify as conservative or socially conservative who have traditionally opposed a bill of rights or charter of rights now prosecuting this cause,” Wilson said.</p>
<p>It might be said that the advocates of extra protections are really wanting a mini bill of rights for those of faith.</p>
<p>Another and potentially serious concern about the push is that it could be counterproductive for our successful multicultural society, where harmony depends on keeping a fine balance between integration on the one hand and the right to maintain separate traditions and values on the other.</p>
<p>The strong pockets of “no” voters in the postal ballot were concentrated heavily in <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-social-conservatism-among-ethnic-communities-drove-a-strong-no-vote-in-western-sydney-87509">western Sydney</a>, driven by the social attitudes of various ethnic communities there.</p>
<p>It’s one thing for these voters to register their opposition to same-sex marriage. But wouldn’t there be a danger to bestowing a set of rights that could, if taken to the limit by some minorities, balkanise our community?</p>
<p>Isn’t there a risk that these “protections” could be used by those preaching extreme social stands to press parents into what could become educational ghettoes for their children? That would turn the notion of “protections” on its head.</p>
<p>What’s still missing in this debate is any clarity around what people think they won’t be able to do, or where the existing laws are likely to fail to protect them. They will certainly be able to maintain their advocacy of traditional marriage – and remember, the Constitution provides protection for freedom of religion.</p>
<p>It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the “protections” argument is driven by a combination of three factors – frustration at losing the vote, jumping at shadows, and using the opportunity to advance another agenda.</p>
<p>Smith, interviewed on Sky on Sunday, tagged the tactic as “deny, deflect, and delay” – trying to deny the outcome, deflect from the actual issue, and delay a parliamentary resolution.</p>
<p>But it seems clear that what Howard would call the iron law of arithmetic is against these advocates being able to get their way on the bill. While there will be some fine-tuning, on what we know of the numbers these conservatives won’t have the support in a free vote to change the bill fundamentally.</p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/nqtdd-7bf599?from=site&skin=1&share=1&fonts=Helvetica&auto=0&download=0" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87741/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>What’s still missing in the religious freedoms debate is any clarity around what people think they won’t be able to do, or where the existing laws are likely to fail to protect them.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/876812017-11-17T05:18:32Z2017-11-17T05:18:32ZVIDEO: Michelle Grattan on the same-sex marriage ballot result<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZECffgkXiK0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Michelle Grattan speaks to the University of Canberra’s Nick Klomp about the week in Australian politics.</p>
<p>They discuss the same-sex marriage postal ballot result, the continuing dual citizenship issues, the Bennelong byelection, and retired major-general Jim Molan’s potential entry into the Senate.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87681/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Michelle Grattan and Nick Klomp discuss the week in politics.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraNicholas Klomp, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Academic, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/876222017-11-17T01:14:42Z2017-11-17T01:14:42ZIt’s unrealistic to expect MPs to follow the view of the people who elected them every time<p>The same-sex marriage survey results showed up which members of parliament voted in a starkly opposite fashion to those in their electorates. The electorate of Blaxland had a strong “no” vote, while their MP Jason Clare voted yes, and in prominent “no” campaigner Tony Abbott’s seat of Warringah there was a strong “yes” vote.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1311&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1311&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1311&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1647&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1647&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1647&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Marcella Cheng for The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Some people may think it’s the duty of their MP to vote in the way they did. Of course, this could mean that as every state voted “yes” then the Senate as a whole should support the same-sex marriage legislation. But generally, this connection between popular sentiment and how a MP votes is usually made in terms of single member constituencies.</p>
<p>It’s based on a very old idea of the role of MPs as <a href="http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1017/S0022381609990260">“delegates”</a> or “agents” of their constituents and therefore liable to be issued instructions on how they should vote on any issue. This idea relates back to a time when parliament, especially in England, could be understood, as bringing together the interests of its various boroughs and counties.</p>
<p>This model of representation is difficult to sustain once a country is understood as constituting a national entity with a unified political culture. It’s also difficult to sustain once parliament begins to deal with a range of complex policy matters. </p>
<p>The idea of a newly elected member being issued with a list of instructions and then needing to go back to their constituents every time a new issue arises may sound very democratic, but it’s also quite impractical.</p>
<p>In the eighteenth century a new model of representation arose which is known as the trustee model. It was given its most <a href="http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/%7Eras2777/amgov/burke.html">famous expression by the English politician Edmund Burke</a>, who argued that representatives were elected not just to represent their local constituency but also the nation as a whole. They were not agents but trustees. They could not be instructed by their constituents but instead would use their personal judgement and conscience as the basis of their decision on any particular policy matter.</p>
<p>The idea of the member as a trustee <a href="http://ro.uow.edu.au/lhapapers/1730/">was very popular in colonial Australia</a>, at least in theory, but it did not prevent colonial parliaments being full of what are termed “roads and bridges” members who worked hard to win benefits for their local areas. A lack of instructions does not mean that a member will cease to work for the material improvement of their constituencies.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, the delegate model of representation had strong support in Australia, particularly from radicals. David Syme, owner of The Age newspaper, was a big supporter. The early Labor Party equally was structured around the model such that Labor MPs were ultimately responsible to the party conference. </p>
<p>Vere Gordon Childe in <a href="http://purl.library.usyd.edu.au/setis/id/p00052">How Labour Governs</a> has chronicled how this system worked and, I believe, how it created all sorts of problems for the party. Childe demonstrated that those who seek to control MPs are also often those who are seeking to replace them.</p>
<p>The idea of the member as delegate is generally advocated because it’s seen as being an expression of true democracy. The problem is that it posits an idea that the average citizen takes a very active interest in politics and wants to have a say.</p>
<p>The opposite view is that most people have little interest in politics and having elected a member it’s the role of the member to “do politics”. This means that they also expect their member to intervene on their behalf when assistance is required.</p>
<p>In his wonderful 1970 movie <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066302/">The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer</a>, the late and great Peter Cook provided a picture of how a combination of marketing techniques and a desire to make a country more “democratic” could lead to the opposite effect. </p>
<p>In the movie the citizens of Britain, bombarded with referenda on every trivial policy issue, are finally asked to turn all power over to Rimmer to which, in a state of exhaustion, they vote “yes”.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195124/original/file-20171117-18368-12pyzvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195124/original/file-20171117-18368-12pyzvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195124/original/file-20171117-18368-12pyzvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195124/original/file-20171117-18368-12pyzvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195124/original/file-20171117-18368-12pyzvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195124/original/file-20171117-18368-12pyzvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=429&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195124/original/file-20171117-18368-12pyzvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=429&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195124/original/file-20171117-18368-12pyzvd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=429&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer showed how marketing techniques and a desire to make a country more ‘democratic’ could have the opposite effect.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/jgarrattley/3754711202/in/photolist-6HMSQ3">Jason Garrattley/flickr/cropped</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There is a very real danger in the ideal of the member as delegate, and in the notion that the member is there to do the bidding of their constituents. Imagine if every time an issue was to be determined every electorate was polled as to their views on the matter, as happens in Cook’s movie.</p>
<p>It would not last. In the same-sex marriage case it has been a novelty but the novelty would soon wear off.</p>
<p>Moreover, the major people to benefit from such a situation would be those political activists who believe their voices are not being heard and, following Childe, who wish to replace those who are currently MPs.</p>
<p>In reality, we have a mixed model of representation which does bind not members to the instructions of their constituents, but which also recognises that a local member should work hard on behalf of those whom they have been elected to represent.</p>
<p>Reality is always messy and escapes attempts to boil it down into models. Members represent both the nation and their local electorate and must find a way to balance the two.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87622/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gregory Melleuish receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is a member of the Academic Advisory Board of the Menzies Research Centre.</span></em></p>Some people may think it’s the duty of their MP to vote in the way they do. But political theory shows this doesn’t work.Gregory Melleuish, Professor, School of Humanities and Social Inquiry, University of WollongongLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/876332017-11-16T12:01:03Z2017-11-16T12:01:03ZGrattan on Friday: In 2017, Australia has delivered to the LGBTI community but failed its First Peoples<p>Important detail is being debated but for all intents and purposes the same-sex marriage issue is over. The Coalition conservatives don’t have the numbers to insert egregious amendments into the bill that’s now before parliament.</p>
<p>Malcolm Turnbull had a glass of champagne and, along with millions of Australians, gloried in the moment this week when the nation delivered its <a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-vote-overwhelmingly-to-legalise-same-sex-marriage-87507">historic decision</a>.</p>
<p>Senator Dean Smith, one of the five Liberals who forced the issue back on the government’s agenda, told the Senate this had been “a vote about who we are as a people”.</p>
<p>It has been a strange tale, when you look back on it.</p>
<p>Remember that the plan for a popular vote (though not one by post) originated in a desperate “save me” ploy from embattled then-prime minister Tony Abbott in 2015. Turnbull condemned the idea of a plebiscite, but had to embrace it as part of realising his own leadership ambitions. Labor was committed to marriage equality but refused to back a February plebiscite that would by now have seen many gays married.</p>
<p>Despite its dubious ancestry, the popular vote has done its job, delivering an overall majority and majorities in all states and territories.</p>
<p>That’s more than you can say for most referendums (which of course this was not). And it brings to mind the contrast between the effectiveness of this vote and the exhaustive consultative process over years that was supposed to culminate in a referendum to recognise our First Australians in the Constitution.</p>
<p>That process stretched through governments of different hues and tapped into Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. Abbott hoped for a May 2017 referendum, timing always optimistic and then overtaken by events.</p>
<p>Paradoxically, the longer the consultative process went, the smaller became the prospect of a plan emerging that would be acceptable to Indigenous people, the government and the broad community.</p>
<p>Finally it culminated in the Reconciliation Council’s proposal for a national Indigenous representative assembly, predictably unacceptable to the Turnbull government.</p>
<p>In whatever way blame is distributed, my point is that for a variety of reasons a copybook consultative process failed miserably – there will be no referendum in the foreseeable future – while the widely criticised popular vote on marriage delivered the goods, albeit with some downsides posed by such a campaign.</p>
<p>So Australia this year has done the right thing by the nation’s LGBTI community but, despite earlier aspirations, has again failed its First Peoples. An opportunity that once seemed to be there was missed and now probably the time has passed.</p>
<p>When parliament resumes the week after next for its final fortnight of the year, much of its time will be taken with the marriage bill, but it will be the <a href="https://theconversation.com/cormann-and-shorten-reach-deal-on-citizenship-disclosure-87342">citizenship declarations</a> MPs must submit by December 1 that will be jangling the political nerves.</p>
<p>Those will be followed in the subsequent week by referrals to the High Court. Several are expected already. The government has flagged it intends to refer at least two Labor MPs who moved to renounce their citizenship before they nominated but didn’t receive confirmation until afterwards. <a href="https://theconversation.com/sharkie-told-by-turnbull-she-may-have-to-go-to-high-court-87211">Turnbull has told</a> the Nick Xenophon Team’s Rebekha Sharkie that her eligibility may have to be determined by the High Court.</p>
<p>This week the High Court gave another literalist ruling, when it decided that Liberal Hollie Hughes was <a href="https://theconversation.com/high-court-strikes-again-knocking-out-hollie-hughes-as-replacement-senator-87526">ineligible to replace</a> former senator Fiona Nash because Hughes had held an office of profit under the Crown (she was appointed this year to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, from which she quickly resigned when the court ruled against Nash).</p>
<p>The message seems that anyone sent to the High Court shouldn’t be expecting any mercy.</p>
<p>Much as Turnbull wants to go into the new year in an orderly way, the parliament will start 2018 in disorder if the High Court judgments produce byelections. By the time these were out of the way, the government would be only about a year from an election, assuming it runs full term.</p>
<p>If any 2018 byelections were confined to non-Coalition seats – there are two in Coalition seats currently – the government wouldn’t be worried about its parliamentary numbers but it would be anxious about the size of swings.</p>
<p>The citizenship crisis and the marriage ballot have crowded out everything else, but in the background the government’s energy plan has yet to be bedded down, with the key meeting delayed by the Queensland election. While the win on marriage is a morale-boosting fillip for Turnbull, what he can or can’t deliver on energy is much closer to the electoral bone.</p>
<p>Turnbull in late December or early in the new year will undertake a reshuffle, which is becoming more pressing with the elevation of Scott Ryan to the Senate presidency and the loss of Nash producing a now-depleted ministry. By then, Barnaby Joyce will be back.</p>
<p>Some repair will be needed in relations within the Coalition. These became fractured after the blame Liberals hurled at the Nationals over their citizenship carelessness – before the <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-citizenship-bombshell-senate-president-stephen-parry-may-be-british-86627">Liberals’ own was exposed</a>.</p>
<p>But the tensions run deeper. The Nationals are frustrated at the government’s parlous situation. All but one of their electorates came in with a “yes” result but the Nationals believe the marriage issue won’t bring them any votes and has been a distraction from what matters to their grassroots.</p>
<p>They see it as a Liberal Party preoccupation. Even many Liberals regard it, in electoral terms, primarily as removing an irritant rather than being a vote magnet at the election.</p>
<p>The Nationals don’t want the Liberals to change their leader. But they do want Turnbull’s attention firmly on bread and butter issues. And they despair that he can’t get a better line and length on Bill Shorten.</p>
<p>For all his troubles Turnbull will go into the summer seemingly safe in his job, not least for lack of a better alternative. Anyway, who’d want it just now?</p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/nqtdd-7bf599?from=site&skin=1&share=1&fonts=Helvetica&auto=0&download=0" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87633/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Despite its dubious ancestry, the popular vote on same-sex marriage has done its job, delivering an overall majority and majorities in all states and territories.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/875082017-11-16T05:34:41Z2017-11-16T05:34:41ZHow the same-sex marriage survey got us talking about – and trusting – data<p>Internet speed and download potential is what commonly comes to mind when we think of data. But Australia has recently been talking a different kind of data: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com.au/australia-marriage-equality-yes-vote-2017-11">statistics</a>. </p>
<p>Australia has never seen the likes of the same-sex marriage survey. And the process gave us a crash course in using data to inform change. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-numbers-say-and-dont-say-in-the-same-sex-marriage-survey-87096">What the numbers say (and don't say) in the same-sex marriage survey</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>From conception, mail out and mail back, to results (and the mishaps and misadventures of mailing paper forms to more than 16 million eligible Australians), this speedy application and immediacy of change informed by survey data is unprecedented on this scale in Australia. </p>
<p>And it is Australians’ unfamiliarity with a survey directly affecting legislation which might help us understand some of the results observed in socially conservative <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-social-conservatism-among-ethnic-communities-drove-a-strong-no-vote-in-western-sydney-87509">areas</a>. </p>
<h2>Data for change</h2>
<p>Australians are no strangers to handing over data about ourselves. From brands of shampoo we use, television programs we watch, store loyalty benefits, to personal income, we do not seem to mind sharing our <a href="http://politicsir.cass.anu.edu.au/research/projects/electoral-surveys/anupoll">opinions</a> and <a href="http://www.nielsen.com/au/en.html">information</a>. </p>
<p>The 2016 census saw a departure from this, as we collectively grappled with the idea of what it is to live in an increasingly digital environment. Fears over <a href="https://theconversation.com/census-2016-should-you-be-concerned-about-your-privacy-63206">privacy</a> and security of personal information collected in the census resulted in debates about the <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-a-world-awash-with-data-is-the-census-still-relevant-70642">collection</a> and holding of data.</p>
<p>Data is all around us. We make decisions drawing on data in our everyday lives based on our experiences. Knowing the best time to commute to work to avoid traffic, the softest or strongest toilet paper, reliable car brands; these are just a few examples. </p>
<p>But rarely do we see the real impact of surveys on our lives (to the disappointment of many researchers). When it comes to applying data derived by researchers, some people are wary, distrustful, afraid of data. Even when collected by experts. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-attitudes-to-vaccination-are-more-complex-than-a-simple-pro-or-anti-label-74245">Australians' attitudes to vaccination are more complex than a simple 'pro' or 'anti' label</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/consensus-confirmed-over-90-of-climate-scientists-believe-were-causing-global-warming-57654">Climate change</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-attitudes-to-vaccination-are-more-complex-than-a-simple-pro-or-anti-label-74245">vaccination</a> debates offer examples of how scepticism of experts and data collection lead to people drawing on their own anecdotal experiences for evidence. Our lived experiences form much of our opinions and attitudes.</p>
<h2>An optional, non-binding survey</h2>
<p>Most Australians (<a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/results/">80%</a>) took on the responsibility of creating social change through data when asked to respond to the single question about marriage law reform.</p>
<p>Participating in a survey, unlike a plebiscite or referendum, is <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/Elections/referendums/types.htm">optional</a>. And, the result is non-binding (as is also the case in a plebiscite). </p>
<p>Participation in voluntary surveys is influenced by complex factors including personal motivation and attitudes. The marriage survey sought opinions on change, a change for some which meant internal grappling with social norms, traditional beliefs and religion. </p>
<p>This is in stark contrast to the comparatively mundane procedural changes stemming from Australian <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/Elections/referendums/Referendum_Dates_and_Results.htm">referendums</a> (with the exception of the social impacts of the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-26/larissa-behrendt-mythbusting-the-1967-referendum/8349858">1967 referendum</a>). </p>
<p>For many, marriage and family is a vital aspect of community, and change may have been perceived as threatening to a way of being. This may have been burdensome for some Australians as they made decisions about how to respond to the same-sex marriage survey.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/same-sex-marriage-survey-by-the-stats-a-resounding-yes-but-western-sydney-leads-no-vote-87258">Same-sex marriage survey by the stats: a resounding 'yes' but western Sydney leads 'no' vote</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Unlike our experiences with voting procedures (for example, small incremental change rather than major reform to avoid electorate backlash), we have received strong indication the marriage survey will likely lead to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-16/same-sex-marriage-path-cleared-for-legalisation-by-christmas/9155300">legislative change</a> in a matter of weeks. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/">Australian Bureau of Statistics</a> — commonly tasked with counting people, sheep and cars (among other things) — redeemed itself after the <a href="https://theconversation.com/did-the-census-really-suffer-a-denial-of-service-attack-63755">Census mishaps of 2016</a> to show the impact of quality statistics and research processes to inform and make change.</p>
<h2>What Australians want</h2>
<p>We can feel a sense of ownership over the marriage law survey results, but actually they told us something we already knew.</p>
<p>Published in August 2017, representative sample <a href="https://theconversation.com/revealed-who-supports-marriage-equality-in-australia-and-who-doesnt-82988">survey data</a> from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (<a href="http://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/hilda">HILDA</a>) survey pointed to the outcome Australians wanted: marriage equality.</p>
<p>The postal ballot put the LGBTIQ community and their families through difficult times, with <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-25/same-sex-marriage-swastika-southern-brisbane/8984768">homophobic</a> and <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/kevin-rudds-godson-attacked-for-defending-yes-posters-for-samesex-marriage-at-brisbane-bus-stop-20170913-gygtd1.html">violent</a> actions reported. The results have also lead to some towns being been called out for their <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/after-postal-vote-we-will-never-think-of-western-sydney-the-same-way-again-20171115-gzm79c.html">opposing views</a> and assumptions made about the people that live there. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/science-is-important-but-moves-too-fast-five-charts-on-how-australians-view-science-and-scientists-82752">Science is important but moves too fast: five charts on how Australians view science and scientists</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The same-sex marriage process has certainly shown that in a climate of fake news, it pays to know data. Participative democracy has reflected what Australians want, but there are important lessons to learn from the same-sex marriage survey. Whole-of-nation polling is best left to matters not as emotionally and socially charged as marriage equality. </p>
<p>In the end, the data shows we did not need a million-dollar nationwide survey of all Australians to confirm what social researchers knew. </p>
<p>The same-sex marriage postal vote results show us that sample surveys are powerful in telling us much about who we are and what we want as a nation.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87508/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dr Liz Allen worked at the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) between 2006 and 2007. Liz has no ongoing employment or financial links with the ABS. Liz is a user of ABS data for research purposes.</span></em></p>The same-sex marriage postal survey gave Australians a chance to create data for social change. And that’s rare.Liz Allen, Demographer, ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/873162017-11-15T19:21:18Z2017-11-15T19:21:18ZSame-sex marriage results crush the idea that Australian voters crave conservatism<p>Australians have overwhelmingly <a href="https://theconversation.com/same-sex-marriage-survey-by-the-stats-a-resounding-yes-but-western-sydney-leads-no-vote-87258">voted “yes”</a> for same-sex marriage. This means politicians will have to give up relying on the myth that a cultural backlash against the progressive agenda is driving voters to minor parties.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/same-sex-marriage-result-delivers-much-needed-good-news-for-embattled-turnbull-87510">Same-sex marriage result delivers much-needed good news for embattled Turnbull</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The minor party vote is on the rise in Australia. In the 2016 federal election, first-preference Senate votes for minor parties (including the Greens) reached over 35% – <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-03/election-results-historical-comparison/7560888">the highest level since 1949</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/feb/23/tony-abbott-takes-aim-at-turnbull-and-lays-out-conservative-manifesto">Conservative politicians</a> and <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/pynes-samesex-marriage-treachery-consists-of-giving-people-what-they-want-20170626-gwyhky.html">commentators</a> in Australia push the “outsider politics” theory, arguing that the Liberal Party should embrace conservative social values to bring disenchanted voters back into the tent. </p>
<p>These same voters are supposed to have been pivotal players in the shock election of Donald Trump in the US, the Brexit vote in the UK, and the upsurge of populist right-wing parties in Europe. </p>
<p><a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2818659">Some research argues</a> these voters are those who are fearful of losing their established status by the expansion of rights to minority groups. They tend to be <a href="https://www.vox.com/2016/9/19/12933072/far-right-white-riot-trump-brexit">white</a>, <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2818659">older, and less educated</a>.</p>
<p>But the same-sex marriage ballot suggests that appealing to these voters would not be an election-winning strategy here. The clear majority of Australians – including Australians from a broad spread of electorates – have rejected the conservative position on marriage.</p>
<h2>How Australia voted</h2>
<p>More than <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/results/">61% of voters who participated in the survey</a> were in favour of changing the Marriage Act so same-sex couples can marry. The strongest support came from electorates in the inner-cities of Victoria and Sydney. The outer suburbs of Sydney, and regional Queensland were the least in favour. </p>
<hr>
<iframe width="100%" height="520" frameborder="0" src="https://grattan.carto.com/builder/5f96fc8a-0b29-4725-8562-f4ae9380df2f/embed" allowfullscreen="" webkitallowfullscreen="" mozallowfullscreen="" oallowfullscreen="" msallowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<hr>
<p>In general, the electorates with the highest levels of support for marriage equality are those with a high percentage of tertiary educated people, and more people working in services rather than agriculture and manufacturing. But there was no discernible difference in the vote by average age of the electorate, and support was not higher in areas with <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/890-Regional-patterns.pdf">a large Australian-born population</a>.</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-125" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/125/4fbb5b33f24aadc92b8f8a1de6eabbeec03089af/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>While most inner-city electorates said yes to same sex marriage, plenty of the regional electorates did too. It is notable that once you get more than 40kms from the CBD, the average “yes” vote doesn’t vary much by location. In other words, Australia’s regions are no more or less conservative than the outer suburbs of our cities on the question of marriage equality.</p>
<p><iframe id="5XM6M" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/5XM6M/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>But there are important differences between states. Queensland electorates – whether in the city or the regions – were much less likely to support same-sex marriage, as were electorates in western Sydney. Victorian electorates had the highest level of support. </p>
<p>The difference in voting between regional areas in Queensland compared to regional areas in Victoria is particularly striking. Most electorates in regional Victoria delivered a yes vote in excess of 60%. </p>
<p>In contrast, many regional electorates in Queensland were below 50%. These differences can’t be explained by education levels or age profiles, which are not notably different between these parts of the country. </p>
<p>The explanation for this state-based “cultural divide” remains an open question. </p>
<h2>If not “outsider politics” then what?</h2>
<p>The result of the same-sex marriage survey is not surprising to people familiar with the survey data on Australian attitudes: support for marriage equality and for LGBT rights more generally has been <a href="https://theconversation.com/revealed-who-supports-marriage-equality-in-australia-and-who-doesnt-82988">increasing over the past decade</a>. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.australianelectionstudy.org/about.html">Other surveys reveal</a> rising support for a whole range of socially progressive issues, including access to abortion, decriminalisation of marijuana, and support for women in business.</p>
<p>It’s very unlikely that a “yes” vote for marriage equality would have passed in Australia ten years ago. Those arguing for a closer embrace of more socially conservative positions are moving in the <em>opposite</em> direction to the electorate. </p>
<p>Politicians seeking to explain rising voter dissatisfaction will need to look elsewhere. An upcoming Grattan Institute report will show that falling trust in government is the most important explanation for the rising minor party vote. </p>
<p>This means the government’s response to the same-sex marriage ballot will be vital. An overwhelming 79.5 % Australian voters participated in the ballot – higher than for <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/politics/eu_referendum/results">the Brexit vote in England</a> (72%) and well above the <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-voter-turnout-wasnt-way-down-from-2012/">2016 US election</a> (58%). They did so because they hoped their time and effort would count.</p>
<p>They expect their political representatives to now follow through. If the government descends into ugly political infighting, or if the parliament fails to deliver the legislation as promised before Christmas, that would only compound the corrosive view that <a href="http://www.australianelectionstudy.org/publications.html">our politicians are out-of-touch and can’t be trusted</a>. </p>
<p>If the government wants to win back voter trust, then a good place to start would be to keep faith with the admirably clear wording of the survey and change the law to allow same-sex couples to marry.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87316/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The ‘yes’ vote disproves that the rise of the minor party vote is the result of a cultural backlash from people who reject the progressive agenda, including the expansion of rights for minorities.Danielle Wood, Program Director, Budget Policy and Institutions, Grattan InstituteCarmela Chivers, Associate, Grattan Institute, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/875092017-11-15T05:47:42Z2017-11-15T05:47:42ZHow social conservatism among ethnic communities drove a strong ‘no’ vote in western Sydney<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194754/original/file-20171115-19782-a1dh6k.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">In the seat of Blaxland, held by Labor's Jason Clare, 73.9% of respondents said 'no' to making same-sex marriage legal in Australia.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/results/response-map.html">ABS</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The “yes” vote on same-sex marriage carried the day in every state in Australia, but the “no” vote was <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/results/response-map.html">strongest in New South Wales</a> – particularly around western Sydney. </p>
<p>The results suggest that, as <a href="https://theconversation.com/ethnic-religious-communities-may-be-the-no-campaigns-secret-weapon-in-same-sex-marriage-fight-82429">predicted</a>, social conservatism among many ethnic communities loomed large as a factor.</p>
<p>In NSW, the “yes” vote came in at 57.8% and the “no” at 42.2%, with a participation rate of 79.5% – but in some western Sydney electorates the “yes” vote was as low as 26.1%.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/same-sex-marriage-survey-by-the-stats-a-resounding-yes-but-western-sydney-leads-no-vote-87258">Same-sex marriage survey by the stats: a resounding 'yes' but western Sydney leads 'no' vote</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In the seat of Blaxland, held by Labor’s Jason Clare, 73.9% of respondents said “no” to making same-sex marriage legal in Australia. This electorate takes in suburbs such as Berala, Regents Park, Sefton, and Villawood, as well as parts of Auburn, Bankstown, Lidcombe, Merrylands, South Granville, Villawood, and Yennora.</p>
<p>The seat of Watson, held by Labor’s Tony Burke, was also a firm “no”: 69.6% of respondents said they did not support same-sex marriage, while just 30.4% did. This seat takes in Burwood Heights, Greenacre, Lakemba Punchbowl, Roselands, Strathfield South, as well as parts of Bankstown, Belmore, Beverly Hills, Burwood, Campsie and Canterbury.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194731/original/file-20171115-11263-1gu5wx5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194731/original/file-20171115-11263-1gu5wx5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194731/original/file-20171115-11263-1gu5wx5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194731/original/file-20171115-11263-1gu5wx5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194731/original/file-20171115-11263-1gu5wx5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194731/original/file-20171115-11263-1gu5wx5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194731/original/file-20171115-11263-1gu5wx5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194731/original/file-20171115-11263-1gu5wx5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">The Conversation / ABS data</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What’s driving this?</h2>
<p>The opposition to same-sex marriage – and to the related issues that the “no” campaign raised such as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/factcheck-will-safe-schools-be-mandatory-if-same-sex-marriage-is-legalised-84437">Safe Schools Coalition</a> – was particularly resonant in communities where people have fairly poor educational backgrounds, somewhat limited English language skills and their information is mediated primarily through religious institutions.</p>
<p>So, in localities where there are strong communities built around Eastern Orthodoxy, Islam, Eastern Catholicism, African Christianities, Asian Christianities (ranging from Catholic to Evangelical), and even in other areas with pockets of Orthodox Judaism, there were singular funnels of information presented in cultural and moral terms. </p>
<p>There’s little information available to those people from any other source that they would trust, or to which they have easy access.</p>
<p>These are electorates with high proportions of people born overseas. But being overseas-born is not, in itself, an indicator. Electorates such as the seats of Sydney and Melbourne also had a high “yes” vote and high proportions of overseas-born people. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-numbers-say-and-dont-say-in-the-same-sex-marriage-survey-87096">What the numbers say (and don't say) in the same-sex marriage survey</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The electorates in western Sydney where the “no” vote was strongest have high rates of unemployment. For instance, Blaxland, which has more than 50% of its population born overseas, has a <a href="http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/CED105">10.2% unemployment rate</a> (compared to a national unemployment rate of 5.6%).</p>
<p>The “no” vote was also strong in places where there is a high concentration of people from Chinese backgrounds. This was true even in electorates where there’s a higher socioeconomic profile, but significant numbers of people from China and Korea, such as the seats of Bennelong (where the “yes” vote came in at 49.8% and the “no” vote was 50.2%) and Banks (where the “yes” vote was 44.9% and the “no” vote garnered 55.1%).</p>
<p>In short, the electorates most likely to vote in favour of same-sex marriage have many highly educated non-believers, while the electorates most likely to vote against it would be more working-class, non-European overseas-born, religious communities. </p>
<h2>It’s complicated</h2>
<p>It is important not to allow stereotypes to overwhelm analysis: within many ethnic faith communities, groups of often very courageous marriage equality activists have been bringing their message to families and networks. </p>
<p>Moreover, there are many currents of political and social views within communities. The 2011 and 2015 NSW state elections revealed <a href="https://theconversation.com/multicultural-mayhem-lurks-in-the-shadows-of-the-nsw-election-38533">much about the reorientation of western Sydney’s communities</a>, especially those associated with Islam. </p>
<p>There are more than 60 nationalities in a variety of sects among followers of Islam in western Sydney, besides dozens of other religions and ethno-national backgrounds. </p>
<p>The strong coalitions that have emerged across groups over local political issues, and social media strategies of organisation among all ethnic communities, suggests a legacy from this campaign that will continue. The consequences are unpredictable.</p>
<p>My own research has tracked these developments for nearly 40 years. The <a href="https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/10453/1442/3/2003001165.pdf">evolution of a new multicultural politics</a> from the interactions between <a href="https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/10453/27005/4/2012006937OK.pdf">newcomers and older political forms</a> has been well documented.</p>
<p>This is not simply about religion; it’s about culture in a more complex sense. The electorate of Grayndler (where nearly 80% of respondents voted “yes”) takes in areas like Marrickville and Dulwich Hill and has a culture that is broadly cosmopolitan. Yet it borders with Watson (where the “yes” vote was as low as 30%), an electorate that can be thought of as almost a cluster of traditional villages. </p>
<p>So, too, in other communities we see <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-15/same-sex-marriage-how-my-dad-changed-his-mind/9152518">deep differences</a> between the older generations and their Australian-educated children. </p>
<p>Interestingly, most of the local MPs in these “no”-voting western Sydney seats are Labor MPs who are publicly supporting same-sex marriage. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194736/original/file-20171115-11275-1r22627.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194736/original/file-20171115-11275-1r22627.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194736/original/file-20171115-11275-1r22627.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1373&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194736/original/file-20171115-11275-1r22627.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1373&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194736/original/file-20171115-11275-1r22627.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1373&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194736/original/file-20171115-11275-1r22627.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1726&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194736/original/file-20171115-11275-1r22627.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1726&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194736/original/file-20171115-11275-1r22627.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1726&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Marcella Cheng for The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>An electoral cycle ago, some of these MPs would have said they would abstain or vote against same-sex marriage if their electorate did not support it. They have moved on. They will take a deep breath and keep their fingers crossed when next they are up for election.</p>
<p>There are already alliances between conservative Christians, conservative Jews and conservative Muslims over some of these social issues. </p>
<p>My sense is we are going to see, over the coming years, some more religious, morally driven political movements around these regions, particularly in Muslim communities – the Muslim equivalent of the Australian Christian Lobby, if you will. We may see similar in Hindu and Sikh communities as well.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87509/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Jakubowicz is on the advisory board of MulticulturalNSW.</span></em></p>In the same-sex marriage survey, the ‘yes’ vote came in at 57.8% in NSW – but in some western Sydney electorates, the ‘yes’ vote was as low as 26%.Andrew Jakubowicz, Professor of Sociology, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/870962017-11-15T04:49:42Z2017-11-15T04:49:42ZWhat the numbers say (and don’t say) in the same-sex marriage survey<p>More than 12 million people took part in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/same-sex-marriage-postal-survey-42073">same-sex marriage postal survey</a> with <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/results">the results</a> showing that 61.6% voted Yes and 38.4% voted No. But not everyone voted, so what can we draw from the results?</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/sOwVH/5/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="245"></iframe>
<p>Based on the figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), which conducted the voluntary survey, the result is <a href="https://theconversation.com/same-sex-marriage-survey-by-the-stats-a-resounding-yes-but-western-sydney-leads-no-vote-87258">seen as a win</a> for the Yes vote. </p>
<p>But right now we can’t make any broader interpretation of our nation’s overall view of same-sex marriage. That would require linking these data with follow-up surveys and more detailed analysis.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/same-sex-marriage-survey-by-the-stats-a-resounding-yes-but-western-sydney-leads-no-vote-87258">Same-sex marriage survey by the stats: a resounding 'yes' but western Sydney leads 'no' vote</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>The numbers straight up</h2>
<p>The ABS reports that more than 79.5% of voters enrolled with the Australian Electoral Commission submitted their form with a clear vote cast for either side of the debate.</p>
<p>Simply put, this means that slightly fewer than half of all eligible voters (49.0%) voted Yes and a little less than a third (30.5%) voted No. The rest did not vote or their preference was unclear.</p>
<p>If the survey was a two-party election, it would be a landslide result for the Yes vote. <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/results/">According to the ABS</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>All states and territories recorded a majority Yes response. 133 of the 150 Federal Electoral Divisions recorded a majority Yes response, and 17 of the 150 Federal Electoral Divisions recorded a majority No response.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So does this mean that we now know what all Australian eligible voters think about this issue? Can we conclude that a majority of eligible voters are in favour of same-sex marriage?</p>
<h2>What the numbers can’t tell us</h2>
<p>The number one point to understand about these results is not what they are telling us, but what they are not telling us. It is tempting to believe that the survey outcome means that 61.6% of Australians are in favour of same-sex marriage, and 38.4% against. This is not true.</p>
<p>While the response rate was high, we know that 20.5% of eligible voters didn’t take part.</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ecN5w/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="187"></iframe>
<p>Given Australians’ attitudes to voting in elections, such a high response is to be expected. The latest figures from the <a href="http://www.australianelectionstudy.org">Australian Election Study Update</a> report that 70% of Australian voters favour compulsory voting, and 80% would vote even if it was voluntary. This seems to accurately reflect the response rate of the current marriage equality vote.</p>
<p>But all we are really able to say is that these figures (61.6% Yes and 38.4% No) are representative of those eligible voters who chose to vote, rather than being representative of all eligible Australians. These two populations may be very different.</p>
<p>This may seem a subtle point, but it is an important one when trying to understand the survey results in the context of informing government policy, which is the intent in this case. </p>
<p>It is also important to get the right interpretation when reporting the results in the media, as marriage equality is a sensitive issue for many people. This point was <a href="http://www.statsoc.org.au/publications/media-releases/">recently raised</a> by the Statistical Society of Australia, which was particularly concerned that the survey results could be misinterpreted.</p>
<p>When running surveys it is common to use statistical techniques that would allow the survey results to be extended to the wider population. But the government decided this was not needed in this case.</p>
<h2>A look at the non-voters</h2>
<p>If all eligible voters who did not vote, or who did not provide a clear vote, responded No to the survey question, then the Yes vote would be 49.0% and the No vote 51.0%. If all non-voters voted Yes, then the Yes vote would be 69.5% and the No vote 30.5%. </p>
<p>These extreme cases are unlikely, and the true opinions of the non-voters will be somewhere in between. For the Yes vote to reach 50.0%, only 185,843 non-voters (or 5.7% of non-voters) would need to cast a Yes vote. Intuitively it may seem reasonable that this could be the case, and it might seem highly unusual for this not to occur.</p>
<p>But is there any principled way to determine how the non-voters could have voted?</p>
<p>This is a standard question that could have been answered well if the same-sex marriage postal survey had been conducted as a proper statistical survey. But the government direction made it clear that this was not required.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/national-poll-vs-sample-survey-how-to-know-what-we-really-think-on-marriage-equality-82450">Louise Ryan’s recent article</a> described the issues involved in conducting a good statistical survey in the context of the marriage equality vote. </p>
<p>One such statistical survey was conducted last week by The Guardian as the marriage equality survey closed. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/07/yes-vote-on-top-as-marriage-survey-closes-guardian-essential-poll">It estimated</a> a 64% Yes vote and a 31% No vote for all eligible voters.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-marriage-equality-survey-is-won-but-the-battle-against-discrimination-continues-85828">The marriage equality survey is won, but the battle against discrimination continues</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Follow-up surveys such as these, which incorporate demographic information such as the age distribution of voters, can be combined with the ABS figures to provide a more in-depth analysis than presented here. </p>
<p>This would allow the attitudes of the non-voters to be known in more detail, and would then allow us to be more certain about the outcome of the marriage survey.</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/HWobD/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="415"></iframe>
<p>From the ABS figures, we can see that more older voters returned surveys than younger voters. Of the younger voters, more females than males voted.</p>
<p>One concern is that voters of different ages may have voted differently. Follow-up statistical surveys may help clarify this issue.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87096/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Scott Sisson is currently President of the Statistical Society of Australia, whose membership includes employees of the Australian Bureau of Statistics. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Baker is currently Chair of the Media and Communications Committee of the Statistical Society of Australia. Members of the Society include employees of the Australian Bureau of Statistics.</span></em></p>Not everyone who could vote did vote in the voluntary postal vote on same-sex marriage. So what can we draw from the result if only four out of five eligible Australians took part?Scott Sisson, Professor in the School of Mathematics and Statistics, UNSW SydneyPeter Baker, Senior Lecturer, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/875102017-11-15T01:58:50Z2017-11-15T01:58:50ZSame-sex marriage result delivers much-needed good news for embattled Turnbull<p>Australians have paved the way for the <a href="https://theconversation.com/same-sex-marriage-survey-by-the-stats-a-resounding-yes-but-western-sydney-leads-no-vote-87258">country’s biggest legislative social change</a> in decades.</p>
<p>But before we congratulate ourselves excessively, let’s remember that legalising marriage equality just catches us up with many comparable countries. It is extraordinary that this country has lagged behind New Zealand and Britain, where reform came years ago under conservative governments.</p>
<p>Politically, this is a win for Malcolm Turnbull, giving him some good news in the generally bleak scene that surrounds his government.</p>
<p>But the real victory belongs to the five Liberals (four of them gay) who forced the issue back onto the political agenda – Dean Smith, Trent Zimmerman, Trevor Evans, Warren Entsch, and Tim Wilson.</p>
<p>Without them, working with the marriage equality lobby, it would not have been brought back on the agenda this year. Their boldness was a risky exercise, not least for Turnbull, but it has paid off.</p>
<p>Labor, Greens, and the LGBTI community opposed the popular vote, wanting the issue settled by parliament alone. But the voluntary postal ballot has delivered a decisive result, giving the reform maximum moral legitimacy.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1311&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1311&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1311&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1647&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1647&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194732/original/file-20171115-11252-1j6rra5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1647&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Marcella Cheng for The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/results/results.html">high participation rate</a> – nearly 80% – showed that the public – generally disillusioned with politicians – liked having their say.</p>
<p>It was an exercise in direct democracy – a theoretically attractive system that nevertheless carries dangers. Politicians would not want to use it on more than rare occasions.</p>
<p>The campaign undoubtedly caused some pain and angst to LGBTI people, and was marked by a few bad incidents that highlighted the nastier, more intolerant side of our politics.</p>
<p>But the negatives can be exaggerated. The result affirmed the tolerant, inclusive nature of Australia.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194733/original/file-20171115-11275-2n2jr6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194733/original/file-20171115-11275-2n2jr6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194733/original/file-20171115-11275-2n2jr6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1373&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194733/original/file-20171115-11275-2n2jr6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1373&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194733/original/file-20171115-11275-2n2jr6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1373&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194733/original/file-20171115-11275-2n2jr6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1726&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194733/original/file-20171115-11275-2n2jr6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1726&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194733/original/file-20171115-11275-2n2jr6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1726&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Marcella Cheng for The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This was emphasised by the uniformity of the “yes” vote across the country. Only 17 out of 150 electorates voted “no”; in three states – Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania – all electorates voted “yes”.</p>
<p>One significant feature, however, was the strength of the “no” vote in western Sydney, reflecting the ethnic composition of that area.</p>
<p>Nine of the dozen NSW seats voting no are held by Labor, meaning a number of ALP MPs will be voting against the views of their constituents.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the seat of Bennelong, where there’s now a byelection underway, turned in a lineball “no” – the area saw a big “no” campaign in the large Chinese community.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194734/original/file-20171115-11246-1bv7o62.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194734/original/file-20171115-11246-1bv7o62.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194734/original/file-20171115-11246-1bv7o62.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194734/original/file-20171115-11246-1bv7o62.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194734/original/file-20171115-11246-1bv7o62.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194734/original/file-20171115-11246-1bv7o62.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194734/original/file-20171115-11246-1bv7o62.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194734/original/file-20171115-11246-1bv7o62.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">The Conversation / ABS data</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The battle in the coming few weeks will be over the nature of the private member’s bill to implement the change.</p>
<p>This comes down to a fight between those who want to enshrine reasonable religious protections, and the conservatives who are demanding sweeping exemptions on conscientious as well as religious grounds for cake makers, florists, venues and the like, providing services for weddings.</p>
<p>The conservatives also want parents to be allowed to pull their children out of classes if they object to teachings around marriage and gender.</p>
<p>Turnbull has thrown his weight behind the moderate cross-party private member’s bill that originated with Smith, on which debate is due to start in the Senate on Thursday.</p>
<p>Conservatives on Wednesday were trying to delay the timetable – although <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeednews/australia-same-sex-marriage-survey?utm_term=.lc5QMPnzA#.skR4xRqno">BuzzFeed reported</a> that Tony Abbott has told his sister, prominent “yes” campaigner Christine Forster, he agreed with her that legislation should be moved through parliament pretty quickly.</p>
<p>The Law Council of Australia <a href="https://www.lawcouncil.asn.au/media/media-releases/it-s-a-yes-for-marriage-equality-now-for-legislation-that-does-not-discriminate">warned against the conservative push</a>, which has been embodied in a bill promoted by Victorian Liberal senator James Paterson.</p>
<p>The council said: “Australians have voted for marriage equality, they have not voted to erode anti-discrimination protections”, adding the Smith bill offered a reasonable compromise and fair balance of rights.</p>
<p>Those conservatives who are digging in over the form of the legislation are driven by two motives – their beliefs but also their hostility to Turnbull.</p>
<p>Turnbull – as he appears set to do – needs to continue to stare them down because what they are demanding is prejudiced and discriminatory. In this he would surely have the support of most Australians, who would want religious protections but not new discrimination, and would take a commonsense view.</p>
<p>Given the support of a majority in Labor, the cross-party bill almost certainly has the parliamentary numbers to pass, although there may be amendments at the edges.</p>
<p>Turnbull’s comments after the result indicate he is also determined to deliver the legislation on time – that is, before Christmas.</p>
<p>Whether the conservatives will visit some sort of retribution on Turnbull later remains to be seen. They are a politically hard-eyed, unforgiving lot.</p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/k3zus-7afe23?from=site&skin=1&share=1&fonts=Helvetica&auto=0&download=0" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87510/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Malcolm Turnbull needs to continue to stare down the conservative forces in his government, because what they are demanding is prejudiced and discriminatory.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/872582017-11-15T01:45:33Z2017-11-15T01:45:33ZSame-sex marriage survey by the stats: a resounding ‘yes’ but western Sydney leads ‘no’ vote<p>More than 7.8 million people voted “yes” to <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/results/">same-sex marriage</a> (61.6% of clear responses) beating the 4.9 million “no” voters (38.4% of responses). But New South Wales had the lowest “yes” vote as a result of western Sydney electorates with high immigrant populations voting against.</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/sOwVH/5/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="255"></iframe>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-124" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/124/e90e1c06c23f0bec0005966464f42b39c9badd2a/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>A total of just over 12.7 million (79.5% of the electorate) participated in the survey overall.</p>
<p>The ACT led the “yes” vote with 74%, followed by Victoria (64.9%), Western Australia (63.7%), Tasmania (63.6%), South Australia (62.5%), Queensland (60.7%), the NT (60.6%) and lastly New South Wales (57.8%).</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/0qYTP/3/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="445"></iframe>
<p>The <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-15/same-sex-marriage-results-ssm/914563">seven highest “no” votes</a> by electorate were all in western Sydney, with “no” winning at least 59% in all seven of these electorates. “No” won 74% in Blaxland, 70% in Watson, 65% in McMahon, 64% in Werriwa, 64% in Fowler, 62% in Parramatta and 59% in Chifley. However, “yes” won 75% in major “no” supporter Tony Abbott’s Warringah.</p>
<p>These seven strongest “no” electorates in Western Sydney also all voted Labor by large margins <a href="http://results.aec.gov.au/20499/Website/HouseDivisionMenu-20499-NSW.htm">in the 2016 federal election</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194735/original/file-20171115-11284-1jo95h2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194735/original/file-20171115-11284-1jo95h2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194735/original/file-20171115-11284-1jo95h2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194735/original/file-20171115-11284-1jo95h2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194735/original/file-20171115-11284-1jo95h2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194735/original/file-20171115-11284-1jo95h2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194735/original/file-20171115-11284-1jo95h2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194735/original/file-20171115-11284-1jo95h2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">The Conversation / ABS data</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Overall, 133 of the 150 federal electorates voted “yes”, and 17 “no”, with Blaxland the highest “no” electorate (74%). 12 NSW electorates, three Queensland electorates and two Victorian electorates voted “no”. </p>
<p>The closest result was in Bennelong, the seat where a byelection will be held on December 16, where “no” had the most votes by 50.2% to 49.8%. The highest “yes” votes were in the electorates of Melbourne and Sydney (both 84%).</p>
<p>Turnout was slightly higher among women (81.6%) than men (77.3%). The youngest eligible voters (18-19-year-olds) participated strongly with a 78.2% turnout, more than for any other age group below 45.</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/HWobD/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="415"></iframe>
<p>If we divide the number of “yes” and “no” responses by the total electorate (just over 16 million), then 48.8% of the overall electorate voted “yes” and 30.5% “no”. While “yes” did not quite win a majority of the overall electorate, this is a very strong result considering the voluntary voting in this survey.</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ecN5w/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="187"></iframe>
<p>Polling in the lead up to the survey results always suggested an easy “yes” victory, and this has been shown to be accurate. Yesterday, Newspoll gave “yes” a 63-to-37 lead, so “no” performed a little better than expected, but there was no major error. </p>
<p>A tweet from pollster ReachTEL mocked a <a href="https://theconversation.com/social-media-study-points-to-a-close-result-in-the-same-sex-marriage-vote-84436">Griffith University study</a> that expected “no” to win narrowly.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"930572946698936320"}"></div></p>
<p>While “yes” won the plebiscite easily, parliament still has to legislate same-sex marriage. Hard-right MPs want protections for religious freedoms, and so the debate over the bill that will be passed could be divisive. </p>
<p>However, given the large “yes” victory, I expect a bill to be passed in the final two weeks before parliament adjourns for the Christmas break.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87258/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The results of the same-sex marriage survey confirm what previous polling had shown, but western Sydney surprised with a strong ‘no’ vote.Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/869282017-11-15T00:29:24Z2017-11-15T00:29:24ZTurnbull is on the winning side on marriage equality, but his troubles are far from over<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194710/original/file-20171115-30000-cjl3t8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The postal vote hasn’t really resolved the marriage equality issue for Turnbull.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Dean Lewins</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>At last this interminable, expensive, unnecessary, discriminatory, divisive and demeaning postal “vote” survey on marriage equality is over, with 61.6% voting in favour. </p>
<p><em>Unnecessary</em> because, unlike in the case of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/ireland-same-sex-marriage-referendum-17098">Irish referendum</a>, there was no constitutional need for a popular vote on the issue.</p>
<p>Furthermore, it has merely confirmed what <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/most-australians-back-same-sex-marriage/news-story/64b39e8a35ff9907394a0c8d1467fd0b">ten years</a> of opinion polls have already told us – that the majority of Australians support same-sex marriage. </p>
<p><em>Discriminatory</em>, because why were same-sex couples singled out for a political decision-making process that no other equivalent group in this country has had to endure? </p>
<p><em>Divisive</em> because the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-11/ssm-same-sex-marriage-respectful-debate-ugly-side/8996500">public passions</a> it aroused caused some bad behaviour on both sides and split families, friends, religious congregations and workplaces. </p>
<p><em>Demeaning</em> because the whole country was given a say on whether gays and lesbians could ask their partners the most intimate and intensely personal question of all: “Will you marry me”? </p>
<p>Above all, it was a deeply <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-18/same-sex-marriage-survey-lgbtqi-mental-health-support/8955956">hurtful</a> process. Respectful “no” voters were hurt by accusations of bigotry that were sometimes made too indiscriminately. Nonetheless, gays and lesbians, who have long been discriminated against in Australian society, were subjected to particularly <a href="http://www.starobserver.com.au/news/national-news/hundreds-anti-lgbti-incidents-reported-marriage-survey/163687">nasty homophobic abuse</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/17APS-PI-ME-LGBTQI-C-IS-P1.pdf">Vulnerable children</a> in same-sex families encountered “no” campaign <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/no-campaigns-homophobic-samesex-marriage-debate-harmful-to-kids/news-story/b95bad756e04a905602d9fcb63059e">messages</a> suggesting there was something inherently wrong with their own families; while transgender children were implicitly constructed as the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-30/why-the-first-no-campaign-ad-will-work/8856722">bogeys</a> that all parents should be worried their kids would turn into if same-sex marriage laws passed.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-same-sex-marriage-ballot-captures-attention-of-a-public-alienated-from-politicians-84456">Grattan on Friday: Same-sex marriage ballot captures attention of a public alienated from politicians</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Predictably, this was not the <a href="https://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/speech-at-the-liberals-and-nationals-for-yes-campaign-launch-sydney">respectful debate</a> that Malcolm Turnbull promised. So, Labor, the Greens and crossbench opponents will be able to claim vindication for their opposition to the original plebiscite proposal. </p>
<p>They will continue to depict Turnbull as a weak leader who originally <a href="https://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/transcript-doorstop-on-the-nbn-and-mobile-blackspots-program-marriage-equal">opposed</a> an unnecessary popular vote himself then buckled to the social conservatives in the Coalition. </p>
<p>Furthermore, the postal vote hasn’t really resolved the issue for Turnbull. It has merely allowed him to proceed to a conscience vote that Liberal Party members would once have expected automatically on issues such as marriage and gay law reform, albeit with even greater reason for voting “yes”. </p>
<p>Indeed, moderate Liberals, exercising their conscience votes, played a proud role historically in supporting issues such as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/ideas-for-australia-consensus-versus-the-culture-wars-getting-the-balance-right-56665">decriminalisation</a> of homosexuality. </p>
<p>So why didn’t that happen automatically in this case? A conscience vote was ruled out when the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-australia-is-so-far-behind-the-times-on-same-sex-marriage-42327">Howard government decided</a> to use the same-sex marriage issue to try to wedge off socially conservative voters from Labor. The wedge didn’t really work because a fearful Labor initially voted with Howard to ban same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, in the process, opposing same-sex marriage became a major Liberal policy and was used <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10304312.2013.766308">symbolically to signal</a> support for a range of other socially conservative positions, including more traditional gender roles. </p>
<p>Subsequently, then-prime minister Tony Abbott hoped that proposing a plebiscite on same-sex marriage would electorally wedge Labor and that same-sex marriage could be either defeated, in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/talk-of-same-sex-marriage-impinging-on-religious-freedom-is-misconceived-heres-why-82435">1999 republic-like</a> turnaround or at least substantially delayed. </p>
<p>Only the delay has been achieved, with Australia <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2016.36">lagging far behind</a> other equivalent countries. However, the postal vote has allowed social conservatives to mount a <a href="https://theconversation.com/talk-of-same-sex-marriage-impinging-on-religious-freedom-is-misconceived-heres-why-82435">highly contentious</a> “religious freedom” case for allowing forms of discrimination against same-sex couples who marry.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/10/almost-half-of-australians-back-right-to-refuse-same-sex-weddings-poll">Polls suggest</a> their message may have cut through to many voters, even though other polls still show a majority <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/lanesainty/four-in-five-australians-dont-want-an-unequal-ssm-law?utm_term=.foGpKBWXb#.yhwvpB3kR">disagreeing</a>.</p>
<p>So what now? Moderate Liberals such as Simon Birmingham have suggested that the obvious starting point for same-sex marriage legislation would be the <a href="https://theaustralianatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/marriage-dean-smith-bill-2017-05-08-2-1.pdf">Dean Smith bill</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194686/original/file-20171114-30046-1u41pxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194686/original/file-20171114-30046-1u41pxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194686/original/file-20171114-30046-1u41pxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194686/original/file-20171114-30046-1u41pxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194686/original/file-20171114-30046-1u41pxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194686/original/file-20171114-30046-1u41pxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194686/original/file-20171114-30046-1u41pxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A Sydney crowd reacts to the news of a victory for the ‘yes’ side in the same-sex marriage postal survey.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/David Moir</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>That bill, like previous bills put forward by “yes” supporters, supports civil same-sex marriage but protects the right of religious organisations to decide whom they will marry. </p>
<p>However, it goes further in terms of protections for existing marriage celebrants and armed forces clerics. It also reaffirms the existing right of religious organisations and schools to teach their religious beliefs regarding marriage.</p>
<p>Labor has said it will support the Smith bill as a feasible cross-party compromise (though dissenting Labor members will still have a conscience vote). </p>
<p>While the Greens are concerned that the religious exemptions the Smith private member’s bill gives may go too far, they have also said that, if it came to the crunch they would <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/11/greens-ready-to-back-dean-smith-marriage-equality-bill-as-consensus-option">support it</a> rather than see same-sex marriage defeated.</p>
<p>By contrast, many social conservatives in the Coalition will be supporting the type of measures in James Paterson’s proposed bill – though leading conservative Mathias Cormann has <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/turnbull-picks-sides-in-samesex-marriage-bill-divide/news-story/d36a0c8641fab3080d43b3e0dfc3f81a">reportedly</a> helped facilitate the Smith bill.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-marriage-on-the-rocks-in-divided-liberal-party-82033">Grattan on Friday: Marriage on the rocks in divided Liberal Party</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://senatorpaterson.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Marriage-Amendment-Definition-and-Protection-of-Freedoms-Bill-2017.pdf">Paterson’s bill</a> extends far beyond protection of religious organisations. It not only <a href="https://senatorpaterson.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Explanatory-Memorandum-and-Statement-of-Compatibility-Summary.121117.pdf">provides protections</a> for private businesses to refuse services to same-sex weddings, but also <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/pm/new-ssm-bill-winding-back-anti-discrimination-laws/9146214">undermines</a> existing anti-discrimination laws in other ways. For example, it protects broader positions about issues such as gender which Paterson says is necessary in order for opponents to be able to make their case against same-sex marriage. </p>
<p>Even if Paterson’s bill is not put to the vote, supporters could still move amendments to the Smith bill based on Paterson’s principles. </p>
<p>However, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/marriage-vote-malcolm-turnbull-slaps-down-conservative-bid-to-wind-back-antidiscrimination-laws-20171114-gzkxrg.html">Turnbull, George Brandis</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-14/religious-protections-in-same-sex-marriage-bill-brandis-says/9146658">Birmingham</a> have all argued strongly against undermining existing anti-discrimination laws and giving businesses the right to deny services to same-sex couples getting married. This will be a major relief to same-sex couples as well as to Labor, which potentially risked being wedged on the issue. </p>
<p>Whether Liberal supporters of the “yes” case make further concessions on issues of protecting religious organisations remains to be seen. However, many social conservatives will be far from happy that Turnbull has opposed them on anti-discrimination exemptions for business services. </p>
<p>Some Liberal supporters may even threaten to defect to <a href="https://www.conservatives.org.au/">Cory Bernardi’s party</a>. Turnbull hopes to have the matter settled by Christmas but his troubles on this issue are far from over. </p>
<p>Consequently, the cause that was intended to wedge Labor has now ended up turning back upon the Liberals themselves. A socially conservative symbol that was meant to mobilise support from voters has instead mobilised warring factions within the government itself.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/86928/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carol Johnson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After an ugly and unnecessary postal survey, Malcolm Turnbull has had a win – but the conservatives in his government will still be pitching for a fight.Carol Johnson, Professor of Politics, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/873572017-11-15T00:15:42Z2017-11-15T00:15:42ZHow to talk to your kids about today’s same-sex marriage postal survey result<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194690/original/file-20171114-30000-k67r8m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">It's important to speak to your kids about the same-sex marriage debate, but how much and what will depend on their age and level of interest.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>After three months of sometimes acrimonious debate, the results of the same-sex marriage postal survey are in: 61.6% (a majority), voted yes to legalising same-sex marriage. <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/news-alerts">Nearly 13 million</a> of us (a response rate of 79.5%) returned the survey form. </p>
<p>The postal survey exposed significant differences of opinion, and has left many feeling bruised. So much so that there has been an <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-18/same-sex-marriage-survey-lgbtqi-mental-health-support/8955956">increase in numbers accessing mental health services</a>.</p>
<p>Many parents might now be experiencing a dilemma as to whether they need to discuss this result with their children. Although the public vote has ended, the conversation will no doubt continue. Now more than ever, it is important to talk about the issues with your children and provide honest information. In the long term, it will be the youngest members of our society who will be most affected by the outcomes of this voting process.</p>
<p>Children will continue to receive messages from other sources. They may overhear adult conversations, other children may talk about it, and they are unlikely to have missed the topic in the media. While it’s important to be honest with your child, try not to be pessimistic or worry them about the consequences of the result or what happens next.</p>
<p>Here are some things that can help make these conversations easier.</p>
<h2>Language matters</h2>
<p>Start by having open communication and letting your child know that you are willing to answer their questions. <a href="https://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/17APS-PI-ME-LGBTQI-C-IS-P1.pdf">Conversations</a> should be brief and factual, and the level of detail you provide will depend on your child’s age and level of interest in the topic.</p>
<p>Whichever side you’re on, try to use <a href="http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/toolkit_LGBTglossary.pdf">correct and respectful terminology</a> and be nonjudgmental of the opposing view. </p>
<p>Discourage your child from colloquial use of terms such as “gay” or “homo” to represent things that are negative or bad. Although often not purposely used to be hateful, these expressions can be quite commonplace in schools and carry negative connotations for LGBTQI+ people. </p>
<h2>Young children</h2>
<p>Don’t shy away from discussing the same-sex marriage postal vote with young children, especially if they have questions. Keep discussions simple and honest with younger children, and focus conversations around love and caring relationships. </p>
<p>To facilitate conversations, parents can introduce their child to more basic LGBTQI+ terminology such as gay and lesbian. Explain these terms simply. For example, “a lesbian is a woman who loves another woman”. In this way, the same-sex marriage vote can be explained fundamentally as deciding whether someone should be allowed to marry a person of the same sex. </p>
<p>Young children may have limited exposure to same-sex couples and “non-traditional” family structures, so it is important that parents help normalise all family types. Explain that some families have one mummy and one daddy, while other families might have two mummies or two daddies. Emphasise to children that regardless of how many mums and dads a family might have, what is important is that children are loved and cared for. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It’s important to talk to your kids about non-traditional family structures.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Older children</h2>
<p>Watching the news with your older child can provide an opportunity to discuss the issues and help you understand what your child already thinks and knows. During conversations, encourage children to try to understand both sides of the debate. Do not lecture them or try to convince them your viewpoint is correct. They will likely form their own views over time. </p>
<p>The language used and the topics discussed with older children are more complex and diverse. For example, you may explore different perceptions of gender and sexuality (like transgender and asexual identities), and discuss issues of discrimination, diversity and inclusion. What you discuss should be framed around what your young person is curious and concerned about - let them set the agenda. </p>
<p>Respectful and accurate use of LGBTQI+ terminology will be particularly important for older children as they are more likely to have been exposed to defamatory LGBTQI+ language in media and at school. If LGBTQI+ terminologies are not familiar to you, this may be a good opportunity to learn and discuss these together with your adolescent. A good place to start, for example, may be understanding what each of the letters in the LGBTQI+ acronym stand for. This <a href="http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/toolkit_LGBTglossary.pdf">glossary</a> of terms can be useful. </p>
<p>Adolescents likely have LGBTQI+ peers and may themselves <a href="https://www.headspace.org.au/friends-and-family/a-parents-guide-to-their-childs-sexuality/">be trying to understand their sexuality</a>. </p>
<p>There are many benefits of having open, clear, factual discussions with children about relationships and sexuality from an early age. When parents talk to their children about sexuality-related issues, children are likely to feel good about themselves, their bodies and their gender. They can appreciate and accept individual differences, and understand what constitutes appropriate and inappropriate behaviour. Importantly, they can make informed and responsible sexual decisions later in life.</p>
<h2>Helping kids respond to homophobic bullying</h2>
<p>Parents who identify as LGBTQI+ may be facing stigma not only directed at themselves, but also at their children. Helping children to navigate stigma and respond effectively to bullying is important. </p>
<p>Parents may need to find ways to manage their own emotions when discussing the topic with their children. Although as a parent you will always want to put your child first, it is important during this time that you consider your own needs and look after yourself as well.</p>
<p>For school-age children and adolescents who identify as LGBTQI+ or whose families are LGBTQI+, the same-sex marriage postal vote can be <a href="https://au.reachout.com/articles/how-to-look-after-yourself-during-the-marriage-equality-debate">a vulnerable time</a>. </p>
<p>Schools can be <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-4556-2_18">challenging places</a> for LGBTQI+ young people, and more than half of LGBTQI+ students indicate they <a href="https://www.glsen.org/sites/default/files/2013%20National%20School%20Climate%20Survey%20Full%20Report_0.pdf">felt unsafe at school</a> due to their sexuality.</p>
<p>Parents should be aware that their child may be a target of homophobic bullying, especially as the same-sex marriage debate continues. Ask your child if they are OK and let them know you are always available should they need to talk. Be prepared to <a href="https://www.headspace.org.au/friends-and-family/understanding-bullying-for-family-and-friends/">help your child respond effectively</a> to bullying and to be an advocate for them at school.</p>
<p>While there is <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-should-parents-do-if-their-child-is-bullied-at-school-37152">no one way to respond</a> to bullying, <a href="https://www.headspace.org.au/young-people/understanding-bullying-for-young-people/">headspace</a> and the <a href="http://www.psychology.org.au/publications/tip_sheets/bullying#s9">Australian Psychological Society</a> both offer practical suggestions that parents can discuss with their children if they are being bullied: </p>
<ul>
<li>Remain calm and try not to react</li>
<li>Do not fight back </li>
<li>Stand up for yourself if possible (for example, “stop calling me names”)</li>
<li>Remove yourself from the bullying situation</li>
<li>Seek out friends and peers</li>
<li>Tell a teacher and parent what happened </li>
</ul>
<p>If parents are aware their child is being bullied, it is important that they do not ignore it. Schools will have anti-bullying policies in place and parents and schools should work together to protect children against bullying.</p>
<h2>It’s not over yet</h2>
<p>The debate is not over yet. Legislation will now be introduced in parliament, with Prime Minister Turnbull saying the government will pass legislation by Christmas. This issue will continue to be debated beyond today’s result, and these are not one-off conversations to have with your children. Your child’s needs and ability to understand the issues will change with time, so an ongoing personal conversation is important, especially as the public conversation will no doubt continue. </p>
<h2>Where to get help</h2>
<p>For information or support for both parents and young people, visit <a href="https://au.reachout.com/">ReachOut</a> or <a href="https://www.headspace.org.au/">headspace</a>. Crisis support is available from Kids helpline on 1800 55 1800 or Lifeline on 13 11 14.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87357/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Parenting and Family Support Centre is partly funded by royalties stemming from published resources of the Triple P – Positive Parenting Program, which is developed and owned by The University of Queensland (UQ). Royalties are also distributed to the Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences at UQ and contributory authors of published Triple P resources. Triple P International (TPI) Pty Ltd is a private company licensed by Uniquest Pty Ltd on behalf of UQ, to publish and disseminate Triple P worldwide. Ms Kirby has no share or ownership of TPI. Ms Kirby receives no royalties or consultancy fees from TPI. Ms Kirby is a student at UQ.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Parenting and Family Support Centre is partly funded by royalties stemming from published resources of the Triple P – Positive Parenting Program, which is developed and owned by The University of Queensland (UQ). Royalties are also distributed to the Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences at UQ and contributory authors of published Triple P resources. Triple P International (TPI) Pty Ltd is a private company licensed by Uniquest Pty Ltd on behalf of UQ, to publish and disseminate Triple P worldwide. Dr Morawska has no share or ownership of TPI. Dr Morawska receives royalties from TPI. Dr Morawska is an employee at UQ.
Dr Morawska has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council and Family Planning Queensland. </span></em></p>Australia voted Yes to legalising same-sex marriage today, and it’s more important than ever to talk to your children about same-sex marriage and relationships.Grace Kirby, PhD Candidate in Psychology, The University of QueenslandAlina Morawska, Deputy Director (Research), Parenting and Family Support Centre, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/873372017-11-14T23:14:01Z2017-11-14T23:14:01ZAs Australians say ‘yes’ to marriage equality, the legal stoush over human rights takes centre stage<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194674/original/file-20171114-26470-4b2ppm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">As the legal battle heats up, James Paterson's bill demonstrates an unconscionable misunderstanding about the indivisibility of human rights.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Daniel Munoz</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The results of the Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey are in. Despite the voluntary nature of the survey, 12,727,920 (79.5%) eligible Australians voted. </p>
<p>By a margin of 61.6% to 38.4%, Australians have said “yes” to the proposition: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is confident that parliament will <a href="http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/10/20/turnbull-says-same-sex-marriage-will-be-legal-christmas-if-yes-vote-succeeds">legislate to permit same-sex marriage</a> before parliament breaks in December. The route for change will be a private member’s bill, on which government members will have a conscience vote. </p>
<h2>Which law, and what change?</h2>
<p>To permit same-sex marriage, parliament must amend the Marriage Act.</p>
<p>The act currently <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/s5.html">defines marriage</a> as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This definition has only been part of the act since 2004, when it was added at the initiative of the Howard government. The 2004 amendment sought to head off efforts by same-sex couples, married overseas, to have their marriages recognised as valid within Australia. It states: </p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2004A01361">Certain unions are not marriages</a></p>
<p>A union solemnised in a foreign country between:
(a) a man and another man; or
(b) a woman and another woman;
must not be recognised as a marriage in Australia.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The definition of marriage can be simply changed by removing the words “a man and a woman” and replacing them with “two people”. </p>
<p>Such a change will have flow-on effects throughout Australian society. For example, celebrants will be free to officiate at legal wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples. State and territory authorities will be empowered to register same-sex marriages. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-legal-benefits-do-married-couples-have-that-de-facto-couples-do-not-83896">Explainer: what legal benefits do married couples have that de facto couples do not?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Most significantly, same-sex couples will have equality of choice in how they want to formalise relationships. Those who choose to marry will be entitled to the <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-legal-benefits-do-married-couples-have-that-de-facto-couples-do-not-83896">legal benefits</a> of marriage. </p>
<p>However, despite the clear <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/the-great-betrayal-coalition-hardliners-throw-democracy-overboard-to-resist-samesex-marriage-20171113-gzkb9o.html">survey outcome</a>, the form of the required legislative change is likely to be heavily contested in parliament. </p>
<h2>Changing the definition of marriage is the simple part</h2>
<p>The bill to go before parliament will still allow some degree of discrimination against same-sex marriage. Some degree of “balance” will be sought between the right to equality of same-sex couples and the freedom of religion of those opposed to same-sex marriage. </p>
<p>This effort is expressed in the bill that Liberal MP Dean Smith intends to introduce to parliament as soon as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/09/conservatives-trying-to-delay-marriage-equality-with-own-bill-entsch">today</a>. An <a href="https://theaustralianatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/marriage-dean-smith-bill-2017-05-08-2-1.pdf">object</a> of the Marriage Amendment (Definitions and Religious Freedoms) Bill is: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>… to allow equal access to marriage while protecting religious freedom in relation to marriage.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Smith bill would make the simple necessary change to the definition of marriage. It would also seek to protect religious freedom by: </p>
<ul>
<li><p>permitting ministers of religion to refuse to solemnise marriages;</p></li>
<li><p>permitting religious marriage celebrants to refuse to solemnise marriages; and</p></li>
<li><p>permitting a body established for religious purposes to “refuse to make a facility available, or refuse to provide goods and services, for the purposes of the solemnisation of a marriage”.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>These exceptions would appear in both the Marriage Act and the Sex Discrimination Act. </p>
<p>The Smith bill does not limit the grounds on which such refusals may be based. They could apply to same-sex marriages or heterosexual marriages. However, refusals must conform to the “doctrines, tenets or beliefs” of the relevant religion and be “necessary to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of that religion.”</p>
<p>The prime minister and cabinet members support the Smith bill as a <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/turnbull-ministers-reject-james-patersons-alternative-samesex-marriage-bill-20171113-gzk30z.html">starting point</a> for debate. They anticipate that parliament will <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/11/14/liberals-divided-over-religious-protections-eve-same-sex-marriage-survey-result">debate amendments</a> to the bill.</p>
<p>However, conservative government MPs have rejected the Smith bill as “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/08/eric-abetz-rejects-seriously-inadequate-marriage-equality-bill">seriously inadequate</a>”. Tony Abbott sees the debate as a site for the defence of <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/11/14/maintain-faith-abbott-tells-no-campaign">Western civilisation</a>. </p>
<h2>Rival bill exposes parliamentary division</h2>
<p>On Monday, Liberal senator James Paterson released an alternative Marriage Amendment (Definition and Protection of Freedoms) Bill. This bill is expected to attract the support of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/13/rival-same-sex-marriage-bill-to-trigger-coalition-showdown">marriage equality opponents</a>.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://senatorpaterson.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Marriage-Amendment-Definition-and-Protection-of-Freedoms-Bill-2017.pdf">Paterson bill</a> would implement the definitional change as an either/or proposition, retaining the current definition of marriage but adding the alternative definition after it. </p>
<p>This bill is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/13/hanging-on-for-dear-life-hardliners-change-tack-on-same-sex-marriage?CMP=soc_567">interesting</a> in that it asserts an explicit foundation in international human rights law to justify forms of discrimination against same-sex marriage. It claims to fulfil Australia’s international obligations to protect:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… the rights to freedom of thought, conscience, religion, expression and association in relation to the holding, expressing, or acting on, certain beliefs …</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Paterson bill also expresses the intention to ensure: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>… as far as practicable, that everyone has the same rights to equality, regardless of religious or conscientious belief, as the rest of the community.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Patterson claims an alternative was needed, as Smith’s bill does not go far enough to protect freedoms of religion, conscience or speech. </p>
<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fabcnews.au%2Fvideos%2F10155299047583983%2F&show_text=0&width=476" width="100%" height="476" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true"></iframe>
<p>The “protections” in the Paterson bill are considerably wider ranging than those in the Smith bill. For example, the Paterson bill would permit objectors to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-13/alternative-same-sex-marriage-bill-explainer/9143578">refuse to participate</a> in a same-sex wedding if participation would go against their religious or “conscientious” beliefs. </p>
<p>This provision would empower individuals and businesses to <a href="http://www.sbs.com.au/topics/sexuality/agenda/article/2016/10/04/comment-yes-you-do-have-bake-my-damn-gay-wedding-cake">refuse to participate</a> in weddings that do not conform to a “traditional” conception of marriage. These exceptions would apply, for example, to hotels, photographers, <a href="http://tonyabbott.com.au/2017/11/transcript-hon-tony-abbott-mp-address-alliance-defending-freedom-new-york/">florists</a>, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/audio/2016/nov/01/gay-cake-owen-jones-episode-token-podcast">bakers</a> and <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/conservatives-mps-samesex-marriage-bill-to-override-antidiscrimination-laws/news-story/8c5e902aa8374ddacd5b432a73e9866a">hire car drivers</a>. </p>
<p>The Paterson bill would secure public funding for religious institutions determined to preserve their <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/13/hanging-on-for-dear-life-hardliners-change-tack-on-same-sex-marriage?CMP=soc_567">existing exemptions</a> from anti-discrimination laws. The bill would also permit parents to withdraw children from classes if content is inconsistent with a “relevant marriage belief” or “relevant belief”. </p>
<p>This bill would impose significant limitations on existing <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/aa1977204/">anti-discrimination</a> <a href="http://hrc.act.gov.au/discrimination/discrimination-act/">laws</a>. These limitations aim to protect the rights of people who have certain beliefs to hold, express and act on those beliefs. </p>
<p>Protected beliefs <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/turnbull-ministers-reject-james-patersons-alternative-samesex-marriage-bill-20171113-gzk30z.html">include</a> that “the normative state of gender is binary”, that homosexual relationships are immoral or that sexual relations should be confined to marriage. </p>
<p>Another protected <a href="https://senatorpaterson.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Marriage-Amendment-Definition-and-Protection-of-Freedoms-Bill-2017.pdf">belief</a> is that: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>… the family structure of a man and a woman united in marriage with their children is a fundamental building block of human society, and this family structure has significant advantages for the nurture and raising of children.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>According to the Paterson bill, people should be free from a threat of action for vilification if they are expressing their belief about same-sex marriage or a “relevant” other matter. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/if-australia-says-yes-churches-are-still-free-to-say-no-to-marrying-same-sex-couples-84271">If Australia says 'yes', churches are still free to say 'no' to marrying same-sex couples</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The bill would create a criminal offence of “<a href="https://senatorpaterson.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Marriage-Amendment-Definition-and-Protection-of-Freedoms-Bill-2017.pdf">victimisation</a>” and provide for civil remedies of injunction and damages. These aim to deter behaviour that might penalise, disadvantage or treat unfavourably a person acting on a relevant belief. </p>
<p>Hours before the survey results were announced, Turnbull rejected the Paterson bill as having “virtually no prospect” of passing. He said the government had no intention of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/14/turnbull-flatly-rejects-same-sex-marriage-bill-that-legalises-discrimination?CMP=share_btn_link">legalising discrimination</a> that is currently unlawful.</p>
<h2>Human rights in the balance</h2>
<p>It is true that rights claims can sometimes compete. Efforts to achieve balance may require some compromise. However, the Paterson bill demonstrates an unconscionable misunderstanding about the indivisibility of human rights. </p>
<p>The Smith bill goes sufficiently far to ensure that people cannot be required to formalise marriages that conflict with their religious beliefs. It is <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-13/religious-exemptions-on-same-sex-marriage-are-a-backward-step/9145124">relatively uncontroversial</a> to ensure, for example, that a religious minister cannot be forced to marry a same-sex couple. </p>
<p>Yet there is a significant gulf between protecting the right of a person to freely practise their religion and permitting them to engage in discriminatory conduct, especially where that discrimination could have detrimental impacts well beyond the specific case of same-sex weddings. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/13/rival-same-sex-marriage-bill-to-trigger-coalition-showdown">Concerns</a> have been raised that wide-ranging scaling back of anti-discrimination laws could affect the prospective weddings of people who have been divorced or had children outside of marriage. </p>
<p>Australian Marriage Equality co-chair Alex Greenwich says Australia has moved well past the time when it was acceptable to have:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… a sign outside the shops about who you will and won’t serve.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The conservative bill is designed to elevate rights fundamental to a liberal worldview – freedoms of thought, conscience and religion – while constraining rights to equality and freedom from discrimination. The latter are essential protections for minority groups more vulnerable to prejudicial treatment in our society. </p>
<p>There is no hierarchy in which some human rights are positioned as of lesser status than others. Indeed, an attempt to establish such a hierarchy undermines the <a href="http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CCPR.aspx">essential goal</a> of <a href="http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx">human rights law</a> – to protect the “equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family”.</p>
<p>Australia was recently <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-human-rights-council-election-comes-with-a-challenge-to-improve-its-domestic-record-80953">elected</a> to the UN Human Rights Council. The government’s use of a non-binding opinion poll to drive decision-making about the rights of LGTBI people was soon after described as <a href="https://theconversation.com/un-slams-australias-human-rights-record-87169?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20November%2013%202017%20-%2087737321&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20November%2013%202017%20-%2087737321+CID_a8417b0ea8d71684782cef7b9062039b&utm_source=campaign_monitor&utm_term=UN%20slams%20Australias%20human%20rights%20record">unacceptable</a> by the UN Human Rights Committee. </p>
<p>The conduct of the federal parliament in coming weeks will be assessed by the Australian public in accordance with the <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/turnbull-ministers-reject-james-patersons-alternative-samesex-marriage-bill-20171113-gzk30z.html">survey results</a>. The international community will meanwhile judge Australia’s claim to be a <a href="https://foreignminister.gov.au/speeches/Pages/2016/jb_sp_161212.aspx">global leader</a> in human rights.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Note: After the survey results were released, Dean Smith moved quickly to introduce his co-sponsored bill into parliament. James Paterson then said that he would not introduce his competing bill, but rather work on proposing amendments to the Smith bill.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87337/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Amy Maguire is a Co-Chair of the Indigenous Rights Subcommittee of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights and a member of Amnesty International. </span></em></p>Now that the battle for marriage equality has been won, the fight over the legislation to enable it will heat up.Amy Maguire, Senior Lecturer in International Law and Human Rights, University of NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/873522017-11-14T23:12:33Z2017-11-14T23:12:33ZHow the ‘yes’ vote will impact workers and HR<p>The conclusive “yes” outcome is great news for millions of Australians and the <a href="http://www.australianmarriageequality.org/open-letter-of-support/">841 corporations</a> that support marriage equality. However, the struggle continues to build inclusive workplaces in which all staff feel valued and that they belong. </p>
<p>The marriage equality debate has also created a realisation of the importance of spreading awareness of LGBTIQ+ issues in order to gain support from others and achieve equality. <a href="https://www.dca.org.au/opinion-pieces/if-you-dont-believe-marriage-equality-its-time-change-your-stripes">Allies</a> have been integral to LGBTIQ+ people throughout this debate, and hopefully, the “yes” outcome will empower more LGBTIQ+ individuals to be out at work. </p>
<p>However, the marriage equality debate has been <a href="https://www.prideinclusionprograms.com.au/content/uploads/2017/08/Marriage_Equality_Resource_PID_A4_Final.pdf">an intensely personal and often exhausting time for LGBTIQ+ individuals and allies</a>. The “respectful debate” we were promised was instead characterised by homophobic and transphobic <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/vote-no-to-fags-outbreak-of-homophobic-violence-vandalism-in-samesex-marriage-campaign-20170925-gyo9ri.html">incidents</a> that have caused <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/samesex-survey-leaves-an-enduring-pain-for-lgbti-people-20171102-gzdeq4.html">enduring pain for LGBTIQ+ people</a>, at least in the short term. </p>
<p>What’s worse, for many LGBTIQ+ people, coming out at work still represents a <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1016/S0742-7301%2804%2923002-X">risk to their career and relationships with colleagues</a>. The fear of coming out will still persist for many LGBTIQ+ individuals and workers. </p>
<h2>Impacts of coming out still costly for some workers</h2>
<p>Legal recognition of same-sex marriage would certainly enhance the visibility of LGBTIQ+ individuals in our communities. In Canada, the number of people who <a href="http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/as-sa/97-553/p4-eng.cfm">reported being in a same-sex relationship surged by a third</a> after same-sex marriage was legalised. </p>
<p>However, the fear of coming out has shown to be costly to <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-01068-018">the quality of work-life</a> and <a href="http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.91.11.1869">well-being</a> of LGBTIQ+ workers. Moreover, their employers also suffer <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2243189">financially</a> through <a href="http://www.outnowconsulting.com/market-reports/lgbt-diversity-show-me-the-business-case-report.aspx">staff turnover</a> and <a href="https://research-doc.credit-suisse.com/docView?document_id=x695480&serialid=u0qj22TwXJAwyF%2FreBXW%2FeSFdVyYwRIZQGZP1IAumTo%3D">negative reactions from shareholders</a>.</p>
<p>LGBTIQ+ people who have spent years not disclosing <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001879117300829">their relationships</a> and/or <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001879117300817">family</a> at work may also experience psychological strains which have an effect on work, family conflict, job satisfaction, and family satisfaction. </p>
<p>For those who are empowered to come out, their workplace may not be a safe space, particularly in <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/661653?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">remote areas</a> and in <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0001839215576401">occupations</a> where discrimination towards LGBTIQ+ workers is still prevalent. </p>
<p>The “yes” outcome is not just a victory for LGBTIQ+ people; it is a victory for equality. Looking at diversity and inclusion policies through the lens of LGBTIQ-inclusion has a number of benefits to a wide range of groups in the workplace. </p>
<h2>Creating organisational change</h2>
<p>The debate about marriage equality should be catalyst for organisations to look at their internal policies and practices to make them more inclusive. Inclusion isn’t a zero-sum game, it is <a href="https://www.dca.org.au/research/project/building-inclusion-evidence-based-model-inclusive-leadership">good for business</a> and <a href="http://amj.aom.org/content/56/6/1754.abstract">all employees</a>. </p>
<p>First, organisations should focus on creating an inclusive culture is beneficial to both LGBTIQ and non-LGBTIQ workers. And one of the simplest ways for organisations to build an inclusive culture is through the language they use. </p>
<p>Inclusive language enables a diversity of people (such as those of different ages, cultures and genders) to <a href="https://www.dca.org.au/research/project/wordsatwork-building-inclusion-through-power-language">feel valued and respected and able to contribute their talents to drive organisational performance</a>. Simply thinking about the language we all use when addressing staff, customers and other stakeholders, asking about partners for example, can go a long way to making LGBTIQ+ and non-LGBTIQ+ workers feel included.</p>
<p>An appropriate use of language is also critical in respectful dialogue between workers when addressing delicate issues such as same-sex marriage. Thus, organisational policies also need to address the appropriate use of language in formal and informal dialogue at work, particularly <a href="http://www.hrmonline.com.au/section/featured/politics-work-line-free-speech-hate-speech/">drawing a fine line between free speech and hate speech</a>. </p>
<p>Second, a recognition of same-sex relationships provides an opportunity for revisiting and updating policies relating to partnerships and families such as parental leave policies. Prior to this conversation, same-sex relationships and ‘rainbow families’ may not have been commonly discussed in the workplace. And this invisibility might be reflected in workplace policies. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.fairwork.gov.au/leave/maternity-and-parental-leave/paid-parental-leave">current</a> government-funded programs only makes the birth mother the primary carer by default. This policy for example could be inclusive to LGBTIQ families by making it gender neutral. </p>
<p>Introducing gender neutrality to parental leave policies also means dads in heterosexual couples can spend precious time with their newborn babies. In fact, many <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/wgea-newsroom/moving-towards-gender-balanced-parental-leave-policies">leading Australian companies</a> already provide paid parental leave to the primary carer no matter the gender of the parent. And this has a huge benefit for workforce <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/59bfeb20-3cdf-11e5-bbd1-b37bc06f590c">gender equality</a> in terms of load sharing when it comes to child-rearing and household chores. </p>
<p>The same can be said for workplace flexibility. When <a href="https://www.liv.asn.au/PDF/LIJ/April-LIJ-LGBTI-story">Tony Wood</a> (a partner at a leading law firm) became a dad, he helped to pioneer workplace flexibility for other dads in his legal firm. The more men who access workplace flexibility, the better for <a href="https://www.dca.org.au/research/project/men-get-flexible">parents of both genders</a> in heterosexual families.</p>
<h2>The way forward</h2>
<p>As society becomes more diverse and inclusive, organisations need to ensure that their policies and practices catch up with these progressive changes. </p>
<p>The new era of marriage equality means organisations need to become more inclusive of both LGBTIQ+ workers and their issues in order to attract and retain top talent. Equally important, LGBTIQ-inclusion makes the organisation more inclusive for everyone. </p>
<hr>
<p><em><a href="https://www.dca.org.au/about-dca/our-team">Cathy Brown</a> contributed to this article. She is the Policy and Research Manager at <a href="https://www.dca.org.au/">Diversity Council Australia</a>, an Authorised Marriage Celebrant, and a member of the Australian Labour Party.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87352/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Raymond Trau has served as an expert panellist and academic/research adviser for the Diversity Council of Australia and Pride in Diversity (a national not-for-profit organisation that supports employers with their LGBTI inclusion strategies and programs). Diversity Council Australia (DCA) is the only independent, not-for-profit workplace diversity advisor to business in Australia. DCA’s income is generated from membership fees, sponsorships and services to businesses.</span></em></p>The yes vote in the marriage equality postal survey will have broad reaching implications - including into LGBTIQ+ policies in the workplace.Raymond Trau, Lecturer, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/859902017-10-19T05:27:58Z2017-10-19T05:27:58ZPolitics podcast: Tiernan Brady and Cory Bernardi reflect on the marriage postal ballot<p>There are still a few weeks left to run in the same-sex marriage postal ballot campaign, and millions of votes are yet to be returned – or not returned.</p>
<p>With 67.5% of ballots now in, Equality Campaign executive director Tiernan Brady says the high turnout shows the importance of a “yes” vote to people’s lives and dignity. </p>
<p>He says tyranny of distance in Australia has made campaigning difficult, compared to his experience during Ireland’s marriage referendum.</p>
<p>Despite criticism of what some saw as invasive tactics, Brady describes the efforts made by the “yes” campaign as largely positive and respectful. However, he admits there have been unfortunate incidents and “clowns” on both sides, but that they were largely “on the fringe”.</p>
<p>On the “no” side, Australian Conservatives senator Cory Bernardi is unwilling to concede defeat. He praises the “grassroots movement” and “rockstar” mums and dads. </p>
<p>On the Abbott factor, he says high-profile “no” voters have been “very effective”.</p>
<p>If the “yes” vote wins, Bernardi foresees a few contentious debates over protections for religious freedoms and freedom of speech. “If the government is serious … they won’t embrace the [Liberal senator Dean] Smith bill.”</p>
<p>Bernardi’s party has benefited somewhat from the same-sex marriage debate: he estimates his party now has the third-largest membership in Australia.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85990/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Equality Campaign executive director Tiernan Brady and Australian Conservatives senator Cory Bernardi reflect on the marriage postal ballot campaign.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/853322017-10-06T04:44:21Z2017-10-06T04:44:21ZVIDEO: Michelle Grattan on the toughened terrorism laws<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/svJx5mp-Mc8?wmode=transparent&start=27" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Michelle Grattan speaks to the University of Canberra’s Deep Saini about the week in Australian politics. They discuss the government’s tougher national security laws and the first update from the Australian Bureau of Statistics on the same-sex marriage postal ballot.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85332/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Michelle Grattan speaks to Deep Saini about the week in politics.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraPaddy Nixon, Vice-Chancellor and President, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/850892017-10-05T05:26:02Z2017-10-05T05:26:02ZTrust Me, I’m An Expert: a lawyer, a biblical scholar and a fact-checker walk into the same-sex marriage debate…<p>Where should the line fall between protecting people’s right to hold religious beliefs and the right to be free from discrimination? </p>
<p>It’s a question that’s emerged several times as the same-sex marriage debate has unfolded in Australia.</p>
<p>“Freedom of religion is not absolute. And neither is anti-discrimination law. Both are rights, absolutely, but both have limitations - particularly where they impinge upon the rights of others,” University of Western Australia law lecturer Renae Barker says in an interview on The Conversation’s new half-hour podcast, Trust Me I’m An Expert.</p>
<p>On Trust Me, I’m An Expert, we ask academics to share their expertise with us, unpack the issues making headlines and explain the research in a way we can all understand. </p>
<p>In a world of endless opinions and hot takes, we’re aiming to bring you informed analysis and the research evidence from the world of academia. </p>
<p>Our first episode tackles the debate underway as Australia contemplates changing the Marriage Act to allow same-sex couple to marry.</p>
<p>Dr Barker, an expert on the relationship between religion and the state, explains what the law really says on secularism, religion and discrimination in the context of same-sex marriage. And she outlines some of complex legal issues that may emerge if it is legalised in Australia.</p>
<p>Here’s a snippet of the interview:</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sn5Us1DS3Mg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Video produced by the University of Western Australia. Listen to the full interview with Renae Barker on episode one of The Conversation’s new podcast, Trust Me, I’m An Expert.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>“Should someone be permitted to refuse to provide a service where they don’t agree with the beliefs of the person they are providing the service to? That’s a conversation we have to have as a society. It’s going to need to be carefully discussed and debated and we need to be prepared for whatever the consequences of that may be,” she says in the full interview, featured on episode one of Trust Me, I’m An Expert.</p>
<p>“That’s going to need a mature, reasoned, polite, political debate – and I’m not sure we are having that just yet.”</p>
<p>In this episode of the podcast, we also asked University of Divinity biblical scholar Robyn J. Whitaker to detail what the Bible really says about human sexuality, in a historically grounded analysis informed by disciplines such as archaeology, history and social science. </p>
<p>And Jennifer Power, a La Trobe University researcher who has reviewed the major studies on outcomes for children raised by same-sex parents, fact-checks the oft-repeated claim that kids do best when they are raised by a mother and a father. </p>
<p>Trust Me, I’m An Expert is out at the start of every month. Find us and subscribe in <a href="https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/trust-me-im-an-expert/id1290047736?mt=2">iTunes</a> or wherever you get your podcasts.</p>
<p>You can read more about what the podcast is all about, and listen to our teaser episode, <a href="https://theconversation.com/trust-me-im-an-expert-a-new-podcast-from-the-conversation-84703">here</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Music:</strong></p>
<p>Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from <a href="https://www.elefanttraks.com/">Elefant Traks</a></p>
<p><a href="http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Blue_Dot_Sessions/Landsman_Duets/When_in_the_West">Blue Dot Sessions: When in the West</a>, from Free Music Archive.</p>
<p><a href="http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Podington_Bear/Electronic_1224/Bass_Rider">Podington Bear</a>: Bass Rider, from Free Music Archive</p>
<p><a href="http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Scott_Gratton/Intros_and_Outros/Scott_Gratton_-_04_-_Electro_Lab">Scott Gratton: Electro Lab</a> from Free Music Archive.</p>
<p><strong>Additional audio:</strong></p>
<p>Q&A on ABC TV, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4624231.htm">The Misinformation Ecosystem</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IDF-8khS3w">CNN</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OG6itojBiI">WH.GOV</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGgiGtJk7MA">SkyNews</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNh6LgfTtcU">BBC Radio 5</a></p>
<p>Additional recording by Rhys Woolf.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85089/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
In this episode of Trust Me I'm An Expert, we're wading into the same-sex marriage debate with experts on the Bible and the law, and fact-checking claims that kids do best with a mother and a father.Sunanda Creagh, Senior EditorLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/851802017-10-04T23:42:17Z2017-10-04T23:42:17ZPolitics podcast: Darren Chester on the infrastructure spending spree<p>Jokes about the satirical program Utopia aside, managing the rollout of infrastructure programs in Australia is a formidable task.</p>
<p>Infrastructure Minister Darren Chester says there is too much hyper-partisanship in Australian politics. “I think that the tone of debate in Australia has deteriorated in recent years and we’ve shown ourselves incapable of having a good, rational debate on significant issues and its lead to some poor policies.”</p>
<p>The challenge of projects spanning more than one term requires “making sure that there is a level of transparency in how decisions are made so that any decision we do make may withstand the change of political fortune”.</p>
<p>From managing road safety issues to approving major projects such as those proposed for the Northern Australia Infrastructure Fund, Chester argues there is a record spend on infrastructure. “We’re delivering everything we want to deliver, and some more.”</p>
<p>Chester is one of the few Nationals MPs supporting same-sex marriage. He’s super confident about the result, predicting “every one of the 150 house divisions will vote yes and I think that may surprise some”.</p>
<p><em>We apologise that the sound quality of this podcast is poor due to a technical problem.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85180/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Darren Chester says there is too much hyper-partisanship in Australian politics.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/844372017-10-01T18:37:38Z2017-10-01T18:37:38ZFactCheck: will Safe Schools be ‘mandatory’ if same-sex marriage is legalised?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/187339/original/file-20170925-17375-15ckx9p.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">This pamphlet, authorised by the Australian Conservatives, was received in a letter box in a Victorian suburb in September.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Supplied</span></span></figcaption></figure><blockquote>
<p>If same-sex marriage is legalised, Safe Schools and others like it will be mandatory in schools. </p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>– Australian Conservatives <a href="https://www.conservatives.org.au/voteno_material">“Vote No” campaign material</a>, September, 2017.</strong> </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186962/original/file-20170921-8185-44xcm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186962/original/file-20170921-8185-44xcm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186962/original/file-20170921-8185-44xcm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=849&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186962/original/file-20170921-8185-44xcm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=849&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186962/original/file-20170921-8185-44xcm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=849&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186962/original/file-20170921-8185-44xcm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1067&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186962/original/file-20170921-8185-44xcm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1067&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186962/original/file-20170921-8185-44xcm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1067&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">‘Vote No’ campaign material authorised by the Australian Conservatives party.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.conservatives.org.au/stop_the_safe_schools_agenda#safeschools">Australian Conservatives</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Campaigning for and against same-sex marriage continues as Australians respond to a <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/">national voluntary postal survey</a> asking whether same-sex couples should be able to marry under Australian law.</p>
<p>“Vote No” campaign material distributed by the Australian Conservatives, a political party founded by Senator Cory Bernardi, claims that “if same-sex marriage is legalised, Safe Schools and others like it will be mandatory in schools”.</p>
<p>Let’s look at the facts. </p>
<h2>Checking the source</h2>
<p>The Conversation contacted the Australian Conservatives requesting sources to support the claims made in the party’s “Vote No” campaign material, but did not receive a response. </p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>The information published in the Australian Conservatives “Vote No” campaign material is incorrect and misleading.</p>
<p>There is no link between the federal Marriage Act and the Australian Curriculum.</p>
<p>The Safe Schools program is a resource for schools and teachers to use at their own discretion. It is not a “mandatory” part of any national, state or territory curriculum – and never was. Making such programs mandatory in the classroom would be inconsistent with curriculum policy and practice in Australia. </p>
<h2>There is no link between same-sex marriage and Safe Schools</h2>
<p>Let’s cover the basic points first:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>the <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma196185/">federal Marriage Act</a> and the <a href="http://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/education-and-training/curriculum">Australian Curriculum</a> are not related to each other. Any change to one does not have any effect on the other</p></li>
<li><p>the <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/">postal survey</a> currently being conducted asking whether the law should be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry has no relation to teacher professional development and learning resources made available to schools, and </p></li>
<li><p>whether or not same-sex marriage is legalised in Australia also has no relation to teacher professional development and learning resources made available to schools. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>However, because such claims are being made, let’s take a closer look.</p>
<h2>What is the Safe Schools program?</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://www.safeschoolscoalition.org.au/">Safe Schools Coalition Australia</a> was <a href="http://www.education.vic.gov.au/about/programs/health/Pages/safe-schools-coalition.aspx?Redirect=1#link93">first established by the Victorian Government in 2010</a>. It’s now a <a href="http://www.safeschoolscoalition.org.au/our-supporters/organisations">national network</a> convened by the <a href="https://www.fya.org.au/our-programs/">Foundation for Young Australians</a>, and delivered by <a href="http://www.safeschoolscoalition.org.au/contact-us">partner organisations</a> in several Australian states and territories. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.safeschoolscoalition.org.au/resources">published aim</a> of the Safe Schools Coalition is “to help school staff create safer and more inclusive environments for same sex attracted, intersex and gender diverse students, school staff and families”.</p>
<p>The Safe Schools program provides <a href="http://www.safeschoolscoalition.org.au/resources">optional resources</a> for secondary schools, including professional development for teachers and one <a href="https://www.studentwellbeinghub.edu.au/resources/detail?id=72144922-d5c5-6d32-997d-ff0000a69c30#/">classroom-level teaching resource</a> designed for Year 7 and 8 students.</p>
<p>All of the Safe Schools resources are optional, and not a mandatory component of any national, state or territory curriculum.</p>
<p>Schools that choose to participate in the Safe Schools program are <a href="http://www.safeschoolscoalition.org.au/resources">expected</a> to make their own judgements about which policies and practices they adopt and which resources they use. </p>
<h2>State and territory support for Safe Schools</h2>
<p>The Safe Schools program is supported in some form by several state and territory governments. But it is not a compulsory part of the curriculum in any Australian jurisdiction. </p>
<p>The Safe Schools program received <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/news/safe-schools-coalition-australia-launched">federal funding</a> for four years, <a href="http://www.safeschoolscoalition.org.au/from-a-safe-schools-coalition-australia-ssca-spokesperson-4">but this ended in June 2017</a>. Some state and territory governments have committed to continue funding the program to make it available for government schools. Independent (non-government) schools set their own policies about which programs they will fund and/or implement. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.education.vic.gov.au/about/programs/health/Pages/safe-schools-coalition.aspx?Redirect=1">Victoria</a>, the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-26/safe-schools-act-government-funding-federal-changes/7790254">Australian Capital Territory</a> and <a href="https://www.markmcgowan.com.au/news/wa-labor-to-fundsafeschools-in-western-australia-1141">Western Australia</a> will continue to fund the program. <a href="https://www.decd.sa.gov.au/department/media-centre/news/new-safe-schools-anti-bullying-program">South Australia</a> is funding a <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-17/sa-to-push-ahead-with-revised-safe-schools-program/8534682">revised</a> <a href="https://www.shinesa.org.au/community-information/sexual-gender-diversity/shine-sa-safe-schools/">version</a> of the Safe Schools program. </p>
<p>Safe Schools will continue to provide professional development for teachers in Queensland, although the government is <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/kate-jones-denies-qld-safe-schools-cuts/news-story/70245fcbdbaa72fe9d8c1f2d7e750e14">yet to confirm</a> whether it will fund the program when its federal allocation runs out in October.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.theadvocate.com.au/story/4603979/safe-schools-funding-cuts/">Tasmania</a> and New South Wales <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/nsw-education-minister-rob-stokes-to-dump-safe-schools-program-20170416-gvlp47.html">will not be funding the program</a>, with both states <a href="http://www.dec.nsw.gov.au/about-us/news-at-det/media-releases/minister-stokes/launch-of-new-school-anti-bullying-strategy">replacing it</a> with <a href="https://antibullying.nsw.gov.au/">other anti-bullying resources</a>.</p>
<p>In March 2017 the Victorian Department of Education and Training <a href="http://www.jamesmerlino.com.au/news/safe-schools-program/">took responsibility for the delivery</a> of Safe Schools in that state. The Victorian government has <a href="http://www.education.vic.gov.au/about/programs/health/Pages/safe-schools-coalition.aspx?Redirect=1">said</a> that it will expand the program “to all government secondary schools by the end of 2018”. But as the government <a href="http://www.education.vic.gov.au/about/programs/health/Pages/safe-schools-coalition.aspx?Redirect=1#link56">has outlined</a>, schools will have discretion about using the program:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Safe Schools program helps schools foster a safe environment that is supportive and inclusive of LGBTI students. How this commitment is realised is determined by each school, based on its local context and the needs of its school community. </p>
<p>Safe Schools is not a subject in the curriculum, nor is it prescriptive in any way. Schools have the discretion to use as many or as few of the resources, training materials, and other support that the program offers to help them deliver their commitment.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Safe Schools is not a ‘mandatory’ part of any Australian curriculum</h2>
<p>In each Australian state and territory there is a compulsory <a href="http://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/education-and-training/school-education">Foundation to Year 10 curriculum</a>. The curriculums vary from one state or territory to another, but all resemble the <a href="https://australiancurriculum.edu.au/">Australian Curriculum</a>. All government and independent (private) schools are required to teach according to the relevant state or territory curriculum.</p>
<p>The curriculum outlines the subjects that must be taught (maths and English, for example) and the content descriptions for those subjects. As an example, here’s <a href="https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/Search/?q=ACPPS074">one of the Australian Curriculum content descriptions</a> for <a href="https://australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/health-and-physical-education/?strand=Personal,+Social+and+Community+Health&strand=Movement+and+Physical+Activity&capability=ignore&priority=ignore&elaborations=true">health and physical education</a> for Year 7 and 8 students:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Investigate the benefits of relationships and examine their impact on their own and others’ health and well being.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Teachers following the Australian Curriculum are expected to teach this content, but there are no compulsory lesson plans, activities or textbooks. </p>
<p>The Safe Schools program is one of many <a href="https://www.scootle.edu.au/ec/p/about">sets</a> of <a href="http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/edresources/teacherskits.htm">optional</a> <a href="https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/teaching/teaching-resources">resources</a> available for teachers. </p>
<p>Making any of these lesson plans or resources compulsory would be inconsistent with curriculum policy and practice in Australia, which regulates the subjects and content students are taught, not any resources used at a classroom level.</p>
<h2>Blind review #1</h2>
<p>The verdict is valid. The explanation provided is accurate and balanced, and the source material is correct and appropriate.</p>
<p>The resources that teachers use in implementing their lessons is a matter of professional judgement in the context of the particular needs of their students.</p>
<p>There are no outcomes or content descriptions in either the Australian Curriculum or various state/territory curriculum documents that would require teachers to use the Safe Schools resources. <strong>– Philip Roberts</strong></p>
<h2>Blind review #2</h2>
<p>The FactCheck is correct. Whether or not same-sex marriage is legalised has no bearing on whether states or schools would engage with any particular teacher professional development or learning resource. </p>
<p>There is one clarification regarding the term “curriculum”. Many people argue that the school curriculum is the list of school subjects that are taught to students. Safe Schools is not required as a school subject, or within a school subject.</p>
<p>Others claim “curriculum” consists of all the planned learning offered to students. Using this definition, if an individual school or state required Safe Schools to be part of the student learning experience, then it would become a mandatory part of a school curriculum. Even in such cases, the engagement with any program would be the responsibility of individual schools. Again, this has no relation to the outcome of the postal survey, or any subsequent legislation.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the FactCheck verdict is correct. Safe Schools will not be made mandatory in schools as a result of same-sex marriage being legal in Australia. <strong>– Murray Print</strong></p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Conversation FactCheck is accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>The Conversation’s FactCheck unit is the first fact-checking team in Australia and one of the first worldwide to be accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network, an alliance of fact-checkers hosted at the Poynter Institute in the US. <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-conversations-factcheck-granted-accreditation-by-international-fact-checking-network-at-poynter-74363">Read more here</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>Have you seen a “fact” worth checking? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at <a href="mailto:checkit@theconversation.edu.au">checkit@theconversation.edu.au</a>. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84437/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bill Louden has received funding in the past from state and federal governments. He was previously on the board of the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). In 2016, Bill Louden was commissioned by Education Minister Simon Birmingham to conduct an independent review into the appropriateness and efficacy of the Safe Schools Coalition Australia program resources.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Murray Print has received government research grants.
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Philip Roberts has received funding from the Australian government.</span></em></p>‘Vote No’ campaign material distributed by the Australian Conservatives claims that if same-sex marriage is legalised, the Safe Schools program will be ‘mandatory in schools’. We looked at the facts.Bill Louden, Emeritus Professor of Education, The University of Western AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/849132017-09-29T04:37:55Z2017-09-29T04:37:55ZVIDEO: Michelle Grattan on the government’s not-so-new message on energy security<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ePqk7ZIk87s?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Michelle Grattan speaks with the University of Canberra’s vice-chancellor, Deep Saini, about the week in Australian politics. They discuss the government’s latest message on solving the energy crisis, Tony Abbott’s objection to Macklemore performing at the NRL Grand Final, same-sex marriage campaigners taking to bulk SMS and robocalls, and Peter Dutton’s unhelpful comments about refugees leaving Manus Island and Nauru for the US.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84913/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Michelle Grattan speaks with Deep Saini about the week in Australian politics.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraPaddy Nixon, Vice-Chancellor and President, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/847192017-09-26T11:46:32Z2017-09-26T11:46:32ZYes case’s SMS campaign was not invasive<p>Like millions of others, I received an SMS at the weekend from the “Yes” campaign for the marriage ballot. It said:</p>
<p>The Marriage Equality Survey forms have arrived! Help make history and vote YES for a fairer Australia.</p>
<p>These SMSs, which were properly authorised <a href="http://www.yes.org.au/">on a site</a> to which the message was linked, have become an issue in themselves, but the outrage that’s been generated is surely faux.</p>
<p>Acting Special Minister of State Mathias Cormann on Tuesday said his advice from the electoral commissioner was that text messages circulated so far had been consistent with the electoral requirements.</p>
<p>The Yes message itself could hardly have been more inoffensive. But critics say it’s unacceptable that it came on one’s mobile. </p>
<p>Well, mobile phones are not rare and special these days. And is it different from receiving a call to one’s landline?</p>
<p>In fact an SMS is less intrusive than a robocall or a call from a canvasser, which one has to answer. Let alone someone arriving at the door to campaign on this or any other issue.</p>
<p>Indeed I’m rather glad I got the SMS rather than mine being among the more than 100,000 doors that Yes campaigners knocked on last weekend. I don’t dispute anybody’s right to come on a mission of persuasion, but such visitors can be a pain on a Sunday morning.</p>
<p>The weekend Yes canvassers, incidentally, reported that most people said they’d already voted.</p>
<p>The claim that the SMS messages were an invasion of privacy is a huge and unwarranted stretch. The mobile numbers were generated through some random system, not obtained from a data base. If a few highly confidential numbers were by chance reached, it’s hard to see what harm was done.</p>
<p>Critics claim to worry about under-age people getting messages. The father of a 16-year-old was quoted as objecting. “My concern is he was only 16,” the man was <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/privacy-concerns-over-yes-votes-bulk-sms/news-story/3747b7e7d88724136f64f594c4f65ce1">reported as saying</a>. Really? It was only the other week that some 16-year-olds were clamouring for the right to vote in the ballot. </p>
<p>As for young children: it was a pretty harmless text – kids are seeing and hearing a lot worse on many issues.</p>
<p>So let’s call the complaints for what they often were – a bit of exaggerated hyperbole, pushed to generate publicity. In a campaign that is seeing some shocker claims and incidents on both sides, the SMS message blitz was certainly not one among them.</p>
<p>Anyway the Yes side is unlikely to be too concerned. Campaign director of the The Equality Campaign, Tim Gartrell – one-time ALP national secretary – says 20,000 people signed up to volunteer as a result of the SMS effort.</p>
<p>All due caution has to be applied in speculating on how this ballot is going, given its voluntary nature. But the Yes side would have to be encouraged by Tuesday’s <a href="http://www.essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport">Essential poll</a>.</p>
<p>After a dip last week, to 55%, in the support for a change in the law – and a fall in this week’s <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/samesex-yes-vote-losing-ground-in-newspoll/news-story/1d21b1dbe415c8a678f39a311f9d6d9c">Newspoll</a> – Essential’s figure is now on 58%, with 33% (down one point) opposed.</p>
<p>More than one-third (36%) had already voted when the poll was taken in the second half of last week; 72% of those support same-sex marriage while 28% oppose.</p>
<p>The No case is making much of the dangers to religious freedom if the law changes. Asked “how concerned are you that allowing same-sex marriage may impact on religious freedoms?” Essential found 20% were “very concerned” and 15% “concerned”; 16% were “not very concerned”, while 42% were “not at all concerned”.</p>
<p>People were also asked whether over the last couple of weeks their concerns about the impact on religious freedoms had increased or decreased or stayed about the same. More than six in ten (61%) said their concerns had stayed the same; 24% said they had increased.</p>
<p>When we look back on this rather extraordinary campaign, it will be remembered in part for its ongoing episodes of The Abbott Family.</p>
<p>Tony Abbott and sister Christine are megastars for the No and Yes sides respectively. Abbott is constantly in the news. There was <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/man-charged-over-tony-abbott-headbutt-20170922-gymv7l.html">blanket coverage</a> after he was headbutted last Thursday by a man with a “Yes” badge, who later said the marriage issue did not figure in his motives.</p>
<p>Christine lets her brother get away with nothing; she is quick out of the blocks with tweets to respond to his various comments.</p>
<p>Now another Abbott is on the stage. A <a href="https://twitter.com/AMEquality/status/912527205443411968">powerful video</a> has been released with Abbott’s daughter Frances promoting the Yes case.</p>
<p>After Frances posted a <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BZCUYAsFmz6/?hl=en&taken-by=notanotherfitnessblogger">picture of herself</a> in a “vote yes” T-shirt, the Yes campaign, which is specialising in “human stories” and closely monitors social media for leads, reached out to her to become more involved.</p>
<p>She was keen to do the video, in which she says she wants to see “Aunty Chris” able to get married. Frances’ story was soon running on <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-41382612">BBC News</a>.</p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/4vmna-742f96?from=site&skin=1&share=1&fonts=Helvetica&auto=0&download=0" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84719/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Like millions of others, I received an SMS at the weekend from the “Yes” campaign for the marriage ballot. It said: The Marriage Equality Survey forms have arrived! Help make history and vote YES for a…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.