Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to rise this afternoon to speak on the Plebiscite (Same-Sex Marriage) Bill 2016. Firstly, I would like to note that this debate is not about the merits or the pros and cons of the same-sex marriage debate. What we are debating is whether we should go ahead with a plebiscite in February next year to make a determination to give every single Australian the opportunity to have their say on this issue.

What has been a bit disappointing during the debate on this particular bill is that it has shown there has been a growing disdain on the Left side of politics from Labor and the Greens—a disdain for our democracy. The issue we are debating was taken to the last election. At the last election, on one side we had the coalition. We set out our position. We said that, if there were to be a change, a redefinition of the term 'marriage' in the Marriage Act, changing a definition that was centuries-old through Western civilisation, that change should be done through a national plebiscite where every single Australian has the opportunity to have their say. In the alternative, we had the Labor Party and the Greens. Their position going to the election was that, if they were successful, they would legislate to change the Marriage Act during this term of parliament. We had that debate during the election period. The different positions were crystal clear. Many Australians went to the ballot box at the last election and cast their vote knowing that there was a clear choice. We saw the results of the election. Labor and the Greens lost the election. The coalition was able to form government.

If we are to have any respect for our democracy, once we have had that debate during the election period, the opposition should not come into this parliament and try to block the will of the Australian people as demonstrated at the election. Otherwise, why even have elections? Why have debates during elections if the result of the election is not going to be respected by those on the other side? The positions were clear at the last election. The vote was held. Our position to have a plebiscite was crystal clear. We have formed government. The opposition should allow us to continue with this process.

Sadly, this is not just a one-off incident where we see those on the Left side of politics having a growing disdain for our election process and our democracy. In 2013, we saw the then Labor Prime Minister go to the election with the promise, 'There will be no carbon tax under a government that I lead.' To make that commitment before an election and reverse it afterwards simply shows a complete disdain. We again saw it at the last election. Yes, there was vigorous debate about many issues, and that is the way it should be, with one side putting up one proposition and the other side countering it. That is how our democratic process should work—a contest of ideas.

At the last election we saw the Labor Party creating false electronic documents—millions of them. They sent those false documents out to millions of Australians—which created the false impression that this was some type of official communication from Medicare, a government organisation—with what was the complete untruth, that the coalition would privatise Medicare. Rather than be embarrassed about that act, rather than come in and be a bit contrite and say, 'Yes, we need to change these laws,' the Labor Party came into this parliament and laughed and said, 'Ha-ha, we tricked you.' They tricked millions of Australians at the last election, and there is no embarrassment, no apology—it is just, 'Ha-ha, we've tricked you.' That is the disdain that we are seeing for the democratic process in this country. If that were undertaken in trade or commerce, it would be an offence. We have also seen disdain for democracy. We saw it with the Orwellian Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal—

See this speech in context