Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Tony Windsor says he wouldn’t vote for same-sex marriage in Parliament but would vote for a referendum to put the question to the nation.
The New England MP became a focus for the gay debate yesterday when metropolitan media reported the politician was calling for a gay marriage referendum.
Mr Windsor stood his ground after he was tracked down by media seeking to see why the radical proposal was suddenly coming from a conservative regional MP who has in the past declared he’s not for same-sex marriage and voted against the most recent bill.
He spent a lot of yesterday clarifying suggestions that he was calling for a referendum on the highly-debated topic.
A wide-ranging discussion about community support for a referendum some 20 years ago led to the independent MP discussing the impact of social media.
“The discussion then went around to what would happen with the high-speed Facebook and Twitter reaction and what would happen in today’s context with the same-sex marriage issue,” he said.
“If, in fact the community, on a significant issue should have some say with Facebook and Twitter, it probably could have influence on the political process far greater than in the past.
“What if one million people actually wanted to have their say on this and call for a referendum, would that have any impact on the political process?
"My suggestion on this was it probably would.”
Mr Windsor insisted he was not calling for a referendum on marriage equality.
“I’m not calling for a referendum, but if the community called for a referendum, there could be an opportunity on September 14 for that to take place,” he said.
“I’m hopeful we’ll see a referendum on local government for national recognition, and if in fact that was happening, then it wouldn’t be much more expensive to ask some additional questions.
“If a referendum question was put to me in parliament, I would vote for it.”
Mr Windsor said however if the issue came back to parliament for a vote, he would not vote in favour of it.
“If it comes back in the parliament again, I deem my vote is to try and represent what the community want and the evidence we have is the community would not want that,” he said.
Mr Windsor referred to a poll he conducted in the New England electorate in July 2011, which returned a majority vote of “no” to same-sex marriage.
“We’ve had people on both sides of the fence wanting this resolved long-term, one way or another,” he said.
“Are these issues something that just 150 should make up their minds on or that the population should decide?”
Mr Windsor said it appeared people on both sides of the debate were frustrated with the lack of resolution of the issue and if the federal parliament hadn’t been able to resolve the issue, maybe it was time for the people to decide.
“Discussion of same-sex marriage hasn’t fallen away despite the recent rejection of the proposal by the federal parliament, and local people continue to lobby me both for and against the change,” Mr Windsor said.
“If people think the federal parliament hasn’t adequately dealt with the issue, then maybe it’s time for the people to decide the issue once and for all at a referendum.
“But it’s up to the people to make the case for the referendum, keep the politicians away from it.
“Then we will know for sure whether Australia supports same sex marriage or not."