Skip to content
Political Tracker

11 Oct 2012 · 12:11 PM · Division 2

State-based Marriage Equality Legislation – No Commonwealth challenge

Official title
Motions – State-based Marriage Equality Legislation – No Commonwealth challenge

Noes in the majority

This says only which side won the vote, because what Aye and No meant here depends on the exact question put in the chamber.

Aye
10
No
38
Not recorded voting
28

“Not recorded voting” is everyone eligible who isn't recorded as Aye or No, for example absent, paired, or presiding.

What was decided

The majority voted against a motion to ask the Gillard Government to “rule out a Commonwealth challenge of any state-based marriage equality legislation”. This means that the majority believe that the Government should be able to challenge state same-sex marriage laws in the High Court.

Greens Party Senator Sarah Hanson-Young introduced the motion.

###Background to the motion

Two weeks ago, the Tasmanian Legislative Council voted against a bill that would have made Tasmania the first state to recognise same-sex marriage in Australia. Members who opposed the bill were concerned that it may not be constitutionally valid because it was inconsistent with Commonwealth marriage law. And their main concern was the potential cost of a Commonwealth challenge against the bill (see ABC News).

Professor Anne Twomey gives a good discussion of the bill's constitutional issues.

Summary written by They Vote For You contributors. Read it with the debate

Policies this vote counts towards

How They Vote For You uses this vote when scoring members against each policy.

Votes by party

Both bars use the same scale: number of members.
Aye
10
No
38
Votes by party as a table
PartyAyeNo
Australian Labor Party020
Liberal Party013
Australian Greens90
National Party03
Deputy Senate President01
Democratic Labor Party01
Independent10

How each member voted

Aye · 10

No · 38

Spotted a mistake? Report a correction.