Same‑Sex Marriage postal survey

Same‑Sex Marriage postal survey
Name	Same‑Sex Marriage postal survey
Date	September–November 2017
Country	Australia
Type	Postal survey
Participants	16,463,920 eligible voters
Outcome	Majority "Yes" response

Same‑Sex Marriage postal survey was a national voluntary postal survey conducted in Australia in 2017 to measure public opinion on legalising Marriage Act 1961 amendments to allow same‑sex marriage. Commissioned during the Turnbull Government and administered by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the survey preceded parliamentary passage of the Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Act 2017. The exercise generated intense public, legal, and political debate involving leading figures, institutions, and civil society groups.

Background

The survey emerged amid ongoing disputes following landmark decisions and campaigns in jurisdictions such as the United States Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, the legislative reforms in New Zealand Parliament, and court challenges like High Court of Australia. Prominent Australian political actors including Malcolm Turnbull, Bill Shorten, Scott Morrison, and Julie Bishop played roles in negotiating a national response. Advocacy organisations such as Australian Marriage Equality, LGBTQIA+ community groups, Australian Christian Lobby, and National Civic Council mobilised public attention alongside media outlets like the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, The Sydney Morning Herald, and The Australian.

Legislative and Legal Context

The legal framework involved the Marriage Act 1961 and proposed amendments debated in the Parliament of Australia. Attempts to legislate included private member's bills introduced by MPs including Bob Katter and Dean Smith. The issue intersected with judicial review by the High Court of Australia concerning the Australian Constitution and executive powers. Key institutional actors included the Australian Electoral Commission, the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, and the Attorney-General of Australia; legal opinions referenced precedents such as Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZSSJ.

Survey Design and Administration

The survey was run by the Australian Bureau of Statistics using a voluntary postal mechanism similar to the Australian Census mail processes, with enrolment based on the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 rolls maintained by the Australian Electoral Commission. The question presented to voters was crafted following consultations involving the Turnbull Ministry and legal advisors like the Solicitor-General of Australia. Administration involved state and territory electoral commissions including the Electoral Commission of New South Wales and the Victorian Electoral Commission coordinating logistics, while the ABS reported turnout figures and response rates.

Campaigns and Public Debate

Campaigns on both sides engaged major public figures and institutions: the "Yes" campaign saw support from personalities such as Julie Bishop (later), Cate Blanchett, and organisations like Australian Marriage Equality and GetUp!; the "No" campaign included groups such as the Australian Christian Lobby, Coalition for Marriage, and politicians like Tony Abbott and George Christensen. Religious institutions including the Catholic Church in Australia and Uniting Church in Australia contributed statements, while unions like the Australian Council of Trade Unions and business groups such as the Business Council of Australia expressed positions. Media coverage involved outlets including the Nine Network, Seven Network, The Guardian Australia, and international commentary from organisations like Human Rights Campaign.

Results and Statistical Analysis

The ABS released results indicating a national majority "Yes" response; detailed breakdowns were provided by state and territory, including New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, Australian Capital Territory, and Northern Territory. Statistical analysis compared turnout with enrolment data from the Australian Electoral Commission and demographic patterns derived from sources such as the Australian Bureau of Statistics surveys. Scholarly analysis by researchers affiliated with institutions like the University of Melbourne, Australian National University, and Monash University examined voting patterns alongside census data and polling from organisations like Newspoll and Ipsos.

Political and Social Impact

The survey's result precipitated swift legislative action in the Senate of Australia and the House of Representatives (Australia), culminating in passage of the Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Act 2017. Political consequences affected leaders and parties including the Liberal Party of Australia, the Australian Labor Party, and minor parties such as the Nick Xenophon Team. Social impacts involved shifts in public discourse on LGBT rights in Australia, legal recognition of same‑sex couples, and engagement by institutions including the Australian Human Rights Commission and advocacy groups like Equality Australia.

Criticisms and Controversies

Critics cited concerns raised by legal experts from universities such as the University of Sydney and commentators in publications including The Conversation about the non‑binding nature of the survey and its compatibility with the Australian Constitution. Human rights organisations such as Amnesty International and advocacy lawyers referenced mental health impacts noted by health bodies including the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists and Beyond Blue. Media ethics debates involved outlets like The Australian Financial Review and inquiries into campaign funding highlighted roles played by donors, think tanks such as the Institute of Public Affairs, and faith‑based organisations including Civil Liberties Australia.

Category:2017 in Australia Category:LGBT rights in Australia