Seriously, how has this debate taken any longer than 15 minutes? This should have been sorted out on a Friday afternoon just before knock-off.
You just pick a stance and announce that as your policy and move on. Regardless of whether your decision is yes or no, you’re going to piss off a bunch of people. And a segment of those people won’t vote for you again at the next election. That consequence comes with decision making.
You announce that homosexuals will be able to marry and all the religious nut jobs will carry on like two bob watches. You announce that marriage is only for hetro couples and the homosexuals will be pissed off. There is no avoiding it, so just deal with it.
Instead we have this stupid situation where the government is hinting ‘no’ without any real conviction in the hope of stringing both sides of the argument along, therefore not pissing anyone off enough to vote differently next time we go around. The world famous ‘non decision’ decision. We’ve had studies, polls, debates and discussions. Now there’s talk of talking about voting for the possibility a ‘conscience vote’ at some point down the track. Even though everyone involved knows that such a ‘conscience vote’ has a zero chance of actually succeeding unless the opposition does the same thing. Which they won’t. Partly because they’re conservatives and partly to fuck over the government with the hopes of creating enough discord to raise the possibility of a no confidence vote. It’s like an episode of Yes Minister, only not funny or in any way entertaining.
Why all the hassle? It’s pretty simple really. I’ve long held the belief that politicians care foremost about holding power, and everything else becomes a very distant second. Politicians that are happy to flip flop on policy in order to maintain the afore mentioned power. So with a minority government that has taken a flogging for most of it’s term the number one policy is: Don’t do anything that could lead to an early election being called. Because we’ll probably lose.
What about observing the will of the people? Implementing policy that the majority of people want? Pfft! That doesn’t matter. It’s never fucking mattered. But at least in other times politicians seemed to have a little ideology about them! And give back the word “pragmatic” while we’re about it. It used to have a degree of common sense about it. These cretins have turned it into “politician who stands for nothing!”