OPINION
Speculation continues to grow that high profile conservative Senator Cory Bernardi is planning a break away group in an attempt to prevent the passing of same sex marriage legislation, even if Australians support the move through a national plebiscite.
Though he has voiced no intention to leave the Liberal Party, Senator Bernardi, an outspoken critic of same sex marriage, has made no secret of his intention to not vote in favour of the legislation, regardless of the result of the plebiscite, planned to take place in the months after the July 2 election.
Bernardi is not alone. Nationals Senator Bridget McKenzie has also said she would not respect the outcome of the plebiscite if it was in favour of same sex marriage. At a media conference in January she declared “I vote with my conscience on every issue and my conscience on this matter is that I would vote against same-sex marriage.” Senator Eric Abetz, another same sex marriage critic, has also stated that the vote on same sex marriage should be a conscience vote. Add in former DLP (now Independent) Senator John Madigan and we start to see the formation of a bloc of Upper House Parliamentarians intending to vote against legislation supporting same sex marriage. According to peak lobbying group Marriage Equality Australia, almost 30 other senators also oppose same sex marriage being legalised.
But what of it? If the national plebiscite, as predicted, comes out in favour of legalising same sex marriage, then all party parliamentarians would be forced to toe the line and support it, right? Certainly Concetta Fiarravanti-Wells, the conservative Senator from New South Wales has said that she will abide by the will of the people, even though she is a religious conservative and against same sex marriage. That restriction only applies, however, if if they remain members of their respective parties.
Senator Bernardi has been behaving oddly in the lead up to the election. Firstly (and surprisingly for a Senator who has the no.2 spot on the South Australian ticket, though it is a demotion from his no.1 spot) he quietly trademarked the name ‘Australian Conservatives.’ On Twitter he describes himself as ‘Conservative Senator from South Australia’ and on his website he calls himself simply ‘Senator from South Australia.’ You have to dig deep into his site to find any stated relationship between him and the Liberal Party, and it’s a paragraph about his achievements within the Liberal Party, not the achievements of the party itself.
Again, it’s speculation, but if the makeup of the next parliament resulted in a possible coalition of conservative senators holding the balance of power in the Senate, it might be enough to entice those senators to leave the coalition so that they don’t have to choose between their beliefs and their duty to the party (Joe Bullock, the Labor Senator from Western Australia recently left parliament to avoid such a confrontation). And as we’ve seen from the current parliament, just because a particular party funded your campaign, doesn’t mean you are bound to stay a member of that party.
Even if such a political bloc were to form, it may not be enough to prevent a vote on legalising same sex marriage to go through. It could, however, be the catalyst for a conservative split in the Liberal Party, one that gives the proponents power to negotiate conservative positions, a power that is weakened since the demise of Tony Abbott.
stoush 