Election 2016: Liberals' Zed Seselja 'likely' to abstain from same-sex marriage vote if public vote in favour

Updated

ACT Liberal senator Zed Seselja has indicated he would sit out of a vote on same-sex marriage, if a plebiscite carries the measure.

The Coalition has pledged to hold a public vote on the issue if it wins Saturday's federal election.

Last week, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull confirmed Coalition members would be allowed to vote against same-sex marriage, even if the poll returned a vote in favour of it.

Conservative senator Cory Bernardi has already indicated he would vote against same-sex marriage regardless of the plebiscite outcome.

Senator Seselja was asked by 666 Canberra's Phillip Clarke how he would vote if the public supported the change.

This article includes interactive enhancements which are not supported on this platform. For the full interactive experience in this article, you will need a modern web browser with JavaScript enabled. Find out more about browser support at ABC News Online. ACT election preview What's in store for the ACT?



Two very safe seats

The ACT is divided into two seats; Canberra (ALP 7.5 per cent) and Fraser (ALP 12.5 per cent).

Fraser (now re-named

Canberra has fallen into Liberal hands for just six years out of the last 42. Photo: ACT card deck (Supplied: Australian Electoral Commission)



In the Senate

Given Labor holds both House seats so safely, there is usually more political interest in the contest for the second of the ACT's two Senate seats.

Liberal support has tended to be the same in both chambers, while a proportion of Labor's support always peeled away to vote Democrat or Green in the Senate.

However, the changes to the Senate's electoral system make it much less likely that the Greens can capture enough preferences to pass one of the major parties.

No surprises Labor needs 33.3 per cent of the vote to win one Senate, but an impossible 66.7 per cent to win two seats.

Some Labor voters split their vote between Labor in the House and Green in the Senate in the hope of getting the Greens ahead of Labor's second candidate and beating the Liberals on Labor's surplus preferences.

Unless there is a dramatic decline in Labor or Liberal first preference support, one Liberal and one Labor Senator should be elected.

Where are the ACT's sweeteners?

Despite the history of parties pledging money for projects in marginal seats while campaigning, the ACT gets no special treatment.

Although Canberra wants a new stadium and the much-trumpeted light rail project, no federal cash has been forthcoming.

Political experts believe this is not only because neither ACT seats are marginal but also because The ACT is divided into two seats; Canberra (ALP 7.5 per cent) and Fraser (ALP 12.5 per cent).Fraser (now re-named Fenner ) is slightly stronger for Labor than Canberra and has been in Labor hands since its creation in 1974.Canberra has fallen into Liberal hands for just six years out of the last 42.Given Labor holds both House seats so safely, there is usually more political interest in the contest for the second of the ACT's two Senate seats.Liberal support has tended to be the same in both chambers, while a proportion of Labor's support always peeled away to vote Democrat or Green in the Senate.However, the changes to the Senate's electoral system make it much less likely that the Greens can capture enough preferences to pass one of the major parties.Despite the history of parties pledging money for projects in marginal seats while campaigning, the ACT gets no special treatment.Although Canberra wants a new stadium and the much-trumpeted light rail project, no federal cash has been forthcoming.Political experts believe this is not only because neither ACT seats are marginal but also because politicians do not want to be seen lavishing money on a city associated with wealthy politicians

Senator Seselja: What I've said is I certainly won't frustrate it. My position, Phil, is clear that I don't support same-sex marriage. Phillip Clarke: No, no, I'm aware of that. Senator Seselja: I've taken that to the election, so obviously I would reserve the right to abstain. Phillip Clarke: So you would abstain? Senator Seselja: That would be a very likely scenario in those circumstances.

Senator Seselja said while he would potentially sit out the vote, the Parliament as a whole would go whichever way the public decided.

"People will listen to the view of the Australian people. It would be absolutely absurd to go to the Australian people with a plebiscite and then reject what they've done," he said.

"[That's] in exactly the same way it would be absurd the position that's been put by (Labor member) Andrew Leigh and (Labor senator) Katy Gallagher, that they would ignore the alternative vote."

However Mr Leigh said Senator Seselja's comments proved he was not interested in listening to the views of Australians.

"Zed Seselja won't vote yes if a plebiscite votes yes, I won't vote no if a plebiscite votes no. The difference is Zed Seselja wants to spend your money on the plebiscite, and I don't," he said.

"This is simply a political ploy by the Liberal Party - they're not interested in finding out what Australians think, they're just trying to paper over the cracks in a deeply divided party."

Topics: federal-elections, elections, government-and-politics, event, lgbt, community-and-society, canberra-2600, act, australia

First posted