A plebiscite on same-sex marriage could delay change for two years, advocates fear, following reports Tony Abbott was canvassing the idea with colleagues.

Channel 7 reported on Monday night the prime minister had sounded out some of his senior colleagues on holding a plebiscite after the next election, following Labor’s decision to keep a conscience vote for two terms, before moving to make support for same-sex marriage a binding policy. .

Critics say Labor’s decision has taken the urgency out of the debate and potentially deferred a planned Coalition party room discussion on granting a conscience vote.

A cross party bill, backed by Liberal MP Warren Entsch, had been slated to be introduced to parliament on 11 August, paving the way for the Coalition party room to debate whether it would allow a conscience vote.

The opposition leader, Bill Shorten, has criticised talk of a plebiscite as a distraction and avoidance tactic.

“I believe our parliament is up for making marriage equality a reality right now,” Shorten said. “The only thing standing in the way is Tony Abbott and his determination that Liberal MPs must fall in behind his anti-marriage equality views.”

Shorten believes the issue should be resolved in parliament, through the granting of a conscience vote.



“Every day that Tony Abbott denies his MPs a free vote, he is denying millions of Australians a fundamental right [to marriage].”

Guardian Australia has contacted the prime minister’s office to verify reports he is considering a plebiscite. Liberal MPs were coy on whether they had been approached in relation to a plebiscite.

The attorney general, George Brandis, on Tuesday refused to answer reporters’ questions on the issue, saying only: “The prime minister and I speak about a range of issues all the time”.

The parliamentary secretary to the prime minister, Alan Tudge, told Sky News he had not discussed a plebiscite with Abbott, but denied the measure was intended to stall progress on same-sex marriage.

Christopher Pyne: Don’t bludgeon parliament into same-sex marriage debate – link to audio

“It’s not a delaying tactic,” Tudge said. “At the moment we have a party position and that is the position that the Liberal party has had since its formation, that marriage is a union between a man and a woman.”

The national director of Australian Marriage Equality, Rodney Croome, has warned holding a plebiscite could delay same-sex marriage until 2017.

“A plebiscite outcome would not be binding, so even when Australia voted for marriage equality the issue would still return to parliament and face the same set of opponents it does now,” he said. “We are also concerned about the poor rules governing plebiscites, including the fact the government can set the question without parliament’s approval, as well as how potentially divisive and polarising a plebiscite campaign could be.”

He wants the matter dealt with sooner in parliament.

“A plebiscite would be seen as the prime minister spending millions to deny parliament the right to vote because he knows marriage equality could pass if there is a Coalition free vote,” Croome said.

Abbott has previously said same-sex marriage should be dealt with in parliament, rather than through a referendum such as the one held in Ireland in May.

“Plainly, this is a matter that could quite properly come before the commonwealth parliament if members of parliament wanted it to be raised,” he told reporters in May.

The leader of the House, Christopher Pyne, refused to confirm the party room would go ahead with discussion on granting a conscience vote.

“Whether it is a conscience vote if there is a vote on the bill in the spring session or any session is a matter that we need to discuss,” he told ABC Radio on Tuesday morning.

Pyne, who has not declared which way he would vote if a conscience vote was granted, urged caution in rushing the discussion.

“I think it would be a shame if it was raised in such a way as to kill off a discussion on marriage equality, so therefore I think we need to be careful about how this matter is handled,” he said.

“I haven’t yet seen a cross party bill. I’ve seen reporting of a cross party bill. And I think the best way to deal with this, the most appropriate way to deal with it is to ensure that the debate is respectful, that all sides get an opportunity to put their view,” Pyne said.

Tudge also backed the party room as the place for discussion of the matter.

“There certainly are many people in the party who want a conscience vote, but ultimately it is up to the party room to make that determination – whether we have a party vote or a conscience vote,” he said.

But he would not put a timeframe on the discussion.

“That will be discussed at some stage in our party room and a decision will be made in relation to do that.”

Acting Greens leader Larissa Waters said the party was not opposed to holding a plebiscite, but it was unnecessary.

“We just don’t think we need one. If Tony Abbott were to give his party room members a free vote, then we could pass any number of the bills that are before the parliament this year,” she told reporters in Canberra. “Let’s just hurry up and get a vote on one of these bills.”