Mystery marriage alliance
Concerns have been raised about who is behind a new Australian marriage equality alliance before the group has been formally announced.
The Marriage Alliance was founded six months ago and lists the Australian Coalition for Equality, Queensland Association for Healthy Communities, Gay & Lesbian Equality WA, NSW Gay & Lesbian Rights Lobby, Victorian Gay & Lesbian Rights Lobby, Tasmanian Gay & Lesbian Rights Group (TGLRG), PFLAG Australia and Australian Marriage Equality (AME) as members.
However, the Star Observer has spoken to leadership individuals from Alliance member organisations, some of whom requested anonymity, who are concerned that focus group research and polling was commissioned on their behalf but without their knowledge.
The research, seen by this newspaper, urges taking a non-confrontational approach in the lead-up to the ALP National Conference in December and, although supportive of marriage equality, notes 鈥渇or those conflicted by the issue or sitting on the fence, the idea of civil unions seem like the easiest and less disruptive path, and a reasonable compromise for both sides … some also think it might be a good first step before same-sex marriage becomes law鈥�.
Groups who organise rallies for marriage equality have not been invited to join the Alliance.
Concerns were also expressed that people purporting to represent the Alliance had used this research to lobby politicians without the knowledge of all Alliance members.
Most Alliance member organisations did not reply to questions by deadline.
However, PFLAG Australia national spokeswoman Shelley Argent told the Star Observer she knew little of the group鈥檚 activities.
鈥淚 have no idea about much of what you are asking because very little contact has been made with me,鈥� Argent said, adding that she had now distanced herself from the Alliance to remain independent.
AME national convenor Alex Greenwich said his group remained independent but was part of the Alliance鈥檚 My Marriage Story online campaign.
鈥淭here are always teething issues at the start of any campaign and I am confident that if there are any issues, they will be resolved,鈥� he said. 鈥淚 will personally ensure that views and concerns of groups like CAAH and Equal Love will be represented.鈥�
However, TGLRG spokesman Rodney Croome said he was 鈥渄eeply concerned鈥� by a lack of 鈥減rocess, accountability and transparency鈥� within the Alliance.
鈥淭here is no board, spokesperson or structure. This would not matter if the Alliance was simply about sharing information or coordinating national actions … but it has gone far beyond that 鈥� commissioning research and polling, and lobbying politicians,鈥� he said.
鈥淥n such an important and sensitive issue as marriage equality 鈥� where politicians are always looking for an easy way out like civil unions 鈥� the LGBTI community deserves to know who is representing it and what they鈥檙e saying … but not even people involved in the Alliance know what it is doing.
鈥淚f we are to avoid the mistrust and division that has plagued marriage equality campaigns in the US, it is vital we all work well together in an open and transparent way.鈥�
The fact is the legal owner of the alliance registered with MelbourneIT is the Labor Party firm. Anyone can check this, along with the legal requirments for the domain name. If the firm was acting on behalf of someone else it had that option to put that at MelbourneIT, but it did not. The Labor firm is registered as the owner of the alliance.
Federal Labor, dominated by the Catholic SDA, is engaged in a campaign of terror excluding us from the Equal Opportunity Act, and trying to shut down debate about Same-Sex Marriage at the State Conference such as the NSW Conference.
If Shelley Argent, a so called “Alliance” Member does not know much about this “Alliance”, and they are using her logo, then this coupled with the fact it is registered as a Labor Party Firm, and Brian Greg AOM said he was asked to run a front for Labor to control debate, leads me with no other conclusion that this is the front he is talking of, he even called it an Alliance.
The Alliance is certainly bringing the result the Catholic SDA Union wants, polling in marginal seats showing people will not tolerate Same-Sex Marriage, but will accept Civil Unions.
At the NSW State Conference I am told the polling was used to argue against Same-Sex Marriage and have Civil Unions. The Catholic SDA Union was certainly good at shutting down debate on this.
Facts do go a long way don’t they.
Rainbow Labor websites are not owned by essential media, so I h
@Dave – “A few facts go a very long way” … but unfortunately you’ve not presented any … re “Whoever runs the website, owns the website, runs the group!” – that’s insinuation not fact … the group may have ten people running it; they delegated the task of setting up the website to one of those people; that person, because of a prior relationship with Essential Media, chooses to register the website with Essential Media – that doesn’t PROOVE that the group is a Labor front … re Shelley Argent – again insinuation … her ignorance of the group’s activities doesn’t PROOVE that the group is a Labor front … re “A well respected gay man who was on the Queens Birthday Honors list said this was a Labor Party front for this secretive group” – again, insinuation … an anonymous individual makes an assertion about this alliance which cannot be verified doesn’t PROOVE that his allegation is true … re Groups that organise rallies have not been invited to join – irrelevant … why would a group dedicated to achieving same-sex marriage equality through one-on-one lobbying rather than mass protest action invite the organisers of mass protest action to be a part of their one-on-one lobbying group – certainly doesn’t PROOVE that the group is a Labor front … re the polling was done in marginal Labor seats – the polling was done in marginal Coalition seats too … again doesn’t PROOVE that the group is a Labor front.
@Perkin re “Now, a little correction of my own 鈥� you say, ‘鈥he kind of alliance of lobbyists armed with research which individuals such as Perkin are denouncing here as not in the best interests of achieving full marriage equality.’ Hmm.. perhaps, to use the politicians favourite phrase, I鈥檝e been taken out of context? I don鈥檛 believe I said anything of the sort, Brian. … actually, Perkin, you did. Your July 7, 2011 at 11:52 am states “This group and it鈥檚 survey are not in the best interests of achieving full marriage equality”. This group is an alliance of lobbyists armed with research. Your post clearly states that you believe that neither this group nor the survey they undertook as research are in the best interests of achieving full marriage equality.
And then we get to the crux of the matter. Perkin then posted “My debate is over the nature of this less than transparent lobby group, who appear to have their website registered to Essential Media Communications, an ALP affiliate communications, polling and media firm, and how such a group could easily divert the debate away from what really matters.”
The key word here, for me at least, is COULD. Indeed, this group COULD easily divert the debate away from what really matters. HOWEVER (and this is the reason why I have been defending the group – not the ALP – in this comment thread) is that there is absolutely NO evidence that this group is either doing that or intending to do that.
Brian Grieg posts an item on Crikey SUGGESTING that the alliance MIGHT be a Labor front and all of a sudden people are denouncing them and demanding that they disband etc etc. The fact that their website is hosted by Essential Media indicates that the member(s) of the group responsible for setting up the website have Labor connections (and even then they are not automatically representative of the group which may contain non-Labor people) … but that does NOT PROOVE that this group has been deliberately set-up by the ALP to shut-down the debate.
This group then conducts some research which, hardly surprisingly, finds that there is a section of society that is conflicted about same-sex marriage and see civil unions as a possible compromise. Well that’s hardly a revelation, is it? And again, people are suddenly declaring that this group is not only a Labor front but are trying or steer the debate towards a civil union compromise … again, there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that they are doing that at all. The only evidence at all about the intentions of this group is their website, which clearly states that their objective is full marriage equality. If they were trying to steer the debate towards civil unions, surely they would have set up a website promoting civil unions as a ‘safe’ compromise for those who think full marriage equality goes to far?
People are perfectly entitled to come together, form an alliance, conduct research and lobby politicians without their activities being transparent and completely open! It may very well be that some of the people involved in this group have jobs or political associations that would be compromised or jeopardised if their involvement was public. That does not automatically that their intentions are genuine and that their commitment to achieving full marriage equality is not absolute.
Rodney Cruise,
The website is registered and owned by the Labor Firm Essential Media. You can check this with the domain company MelbourneIT. If even PFLAG did not know what they are up to, then the assertion it is a Labor Party front to control debate appears correct.
Brian – thank you for coming out as a Liberal voter. Much obliged for the correction, thank you. See how easy it is these days to confuse the ALP and LNP?
Now, a little correction of my own – you say, “…the kind of alliance of lobbyists armed with research which individuals such as Perkin are denouncing here as not in the best interests of achieving full marriage equality.” Hmm.. perhaps, to use the politicians favourite phrase, I’ve been taken out of context? I don’t believe I said anything of the sort, Brian. My debate is over the nature of this less than transparent lobby group, who appear to have their website registered to Essential Media Communications, an ALP affiliate communications, polling and media firm, and how such a group could easily divert the debate away from what really matters. Labor do not want this debate to be happening at all, particularly so loud and going on for so long. No party wants a distraction from it’s message and Labor is trying to sell messages on climate change, primary industries and asylum seekers. But this issue is drawing valuable oxygen from the public sphere for debate and it must be frustrating for those in charge to not be in command but will find ways around this nuisance. Nothing odd in that, all parties of the mainstream, historically run ilk will do that to remain in control of the debate and not have it run them. However, when the leader of that party says she won’t necessarily follow the directive of the national conference, you ask yourself, wouldn’t a better system of government be preferable?
So, Brian – how’s all that Liberal voting going for you, with the Mad Monk as leader and a front bench stuffed with the political living dead?
Has Star Observer asked the VGLRL for a response. After all the mymarriagestory.com.au website is owned and operated by them.
Ed: Comment was sought from all Marriage Alliance member organisations
Dave, your posts are becoming parodies. Nazi bishops and the Freemasons?? What next? Silly and paranoid and kind of sad.
Mmmm- their website looks legite- but it’s the backroom deals with Labor that are the worry. By looking legit, it gives them a voice to speak out at the last minute “on our behalf” endorsing civil unions as a compromise in December during the Labor conference (thereby drowning out other voices such as Shelley Argent).
Civil Unions for all then. Abolish state sanctioned marriages.
A few facts go a very long way. Especially about the vile Labor Party pigs on this website.
Fact.
Go to Melbourne it and do a 鈥淲ho is Who鈥� search of the Domain Name. mymarriagestory.com.au
The website is registered to ESSENTIAL MEDIA COMMUNICATIONS PTY LTD. This is the Labor Party Communications company. So a Labor Party group runs the website and some Labor Party hacks here are distinctly hiding this in damage control. Whoever runs the website, owns the website, runs the group! I run online businesses, only I can register my business name for a domain.
Fact:
PFLAG legend Shelly Argent said she new little about the group.
Fact: A well respected gay man who was on the Queens Birthday Honors list said this was a Labor Party front for this secretive group. Secretive as even Shelly Argent, who runs PFLAG who this website uses the logo of, did not even know much about them or what they were up to.
Fact:
Groups who organise rallies for marriage equality have not been invited to join the Alliance. Why would a Marriage Equality group be scared of Marriage Equality advocates?
Fact:
Polling was done in marginal seats of Labor.
Fact: Labor stooges such as the username Ben.
Fact: Labor is caught out once again trying to deny us rights.
Fact: This is going viral.
Ah Perkin! I am hardly “one of those stalwart Labor defenders” … I am actually a Liberal voter and have been all my life … and I have not trashed anyone’s name – Brian Grieg’s article makes assertions but offers no evidence – pointing out that his article lacks substance is merely opinion and insinuation is a critique of his article and not an attack on his person … similarly, there is absolutely no evidence that this group is even contemplating civil unions … as Brosh says, the website makes it quite clear that this group is about achieving same-sex marriage and nothing less … there are a lot of people prepared to express definite opinions about the nature and objectives of this group even though the membership of the group is yet to be revealed. Until there is evidence to contrary, I am prepared to give this group the benefit of the doubt and will not join the hysterical calls for them to be dissolved or outed.
And Brosh, in response to “name ONE piece of gay law reform in the history of gay law reform in this country that WASN鈥橳 initiated by the ALP” … three examples (of many) come immediately to mind … legislation to prevent the vilification of people with HIV/AIDS in NSW was NOT initiated by the ALP (it was initiated by the Liberal Government of Nick Greiner); the equal age of consent legislation in NSW was NOT initiated by the ALP (it was a private member’s bill); the recent same-sex adoption legislation in NSW was NOT initiated by the ALP (it was a private member’s bill – and because so many ALP Members voted against it, the legislation only passed because of the support of Liberal and Nationals Members).
Ironically, the same-sex adoption legislation in NSW succeeded only because of the efforts of exactly the kind of alliance of lobbyists armed with research which individuals such as Perkin are denouncing here as not in the best interests of achieving full marriage equality. Rather than negating, subverting or blunting the legislation, the group’s efforts actually succeeded in broadening the scope of the bill in the upper house, securing greater reform for same-sex couples than originally intended by the bill, requiring it to go to the lower house with amendments. It was the efforts of the group that secured a BETTER outcome for the same-sex community.
Given that both the Labor and Coalition are so divided on the issue of same-sex marriage, it is likely that the legislation will be the subject of a conscience vote for both sides … Labor Members will vote for and against … and Liberal Members will vote for and against … neither of the major parties will act as a unit … it unhelpful to assume that all Labor Members will be on our side … and unhelpful to assume that all Liberal Members will be against us … some Labor Members will be our enemies, some Liberal Members will be our friends … in the circumstances it is necessary for lobbyists to ascertain the personal position of each and every Member of Federal Parliament, regardless of their political party … and once they have identified the uncertain, conflicted, fence-sitting ones, meet with them and present sound arguments (based on solid, credible research) that are likely to assuage or counter whatever are their particular reservations and ensure that enough of them end up supporting the legislation in full and neither vote against the bill nor vote for some unsatisfactory compromise, such as civil unions.
As there are fence-sitting Members of Parliament who think civil unions are an option to make the issue go away, I for one am pleased that experienced lobbyists, regardless of their political persuasion, are bothering to do some research and work behind the scenes if necessary to convince such Members that civil unions are not an acceptable compromise and further explain why they should support full marriage equality.
Ben you are Labor stooge, you always have been here. You argued in previous post for Civil Unions as gay people are to 鈥減romiscuous鈥� . If the Catholic Church once again advocated killing gay people, as the Nazi Bishops did, I have no doubt you and the Labor Party would support that also.
You believe in power at all cost, no matter if this means an older Australian cannot get a Nursing Home on the basis of their sexuality, or a person is denied a job, let alone have the right to marry. You have told so many lies to support Labor. Constantly argueing heterosexual people are superior and GLBTI people should be subject to discrimination does not help your beloved Labor Party, it hurts it.
[…] week the Star Observer reports on a “Mystery marriage alliance”: Concerns have been raised about who is behind a new Australian marriage equality alliance before […]
And finally – here’s the Website of that ‘mystery organisation’:
Looks like it’s all about about same-sex marriage to me..
A few facts, people, might go a very long way.
Ah, Brian! One of those stalwart Labor defenders who decide that trashing the name of another (former) politician and senator (Brian Grieg) with the time honoured use of “..as opposed to the unsubstantiated insinuation…” is valuable in this debate.
Nonsense.
The ALP would like this issue to go away, the ALP would like to be seen to not have to deal with this issue. However, they DO have to deal with it and from my experience of Labor they know how to corrupt a debate and make it go the way they want.
As a disclaimer, I am not a member of any political party, I had not been a member of any political party since the mid 1980s when I was a member. I chose not to renew my membership because of changed circumstances and a growing belief that the mainstream “duopoly” was ineffective and unrepresentative. That was 25 years ago, it’s a heck of a lot worse now.
Labor is in government, they have the power to legislate this at any time yet they choose not to. This same Labor party backed Howard to the hilt in 2004 and continue to use the furphy of “community standards” and “tradition” as excuses to not act. Labor has a conservative, Catholic membership that is at odds with those who saw it as a party of progressive social policy, fair values and support for the workers and protection for those less able to defend themselves.
This group and it’s survey are not in the best interests of achieving full marriage equality and it has all the hallmarks of a Labor front organization. It has been 7 long years since Labor co-opted with the Coalition to deny the rights to all same sex attracted couples in this country to achieve marriage equality and through their insensitive use of the CNI continue to deny that equality to Australians living overseas. It is time Labor changed and changed now.
Also – me thinks Rodney Croome is just whinging because he’s not involved (I gather).
ANYONE – even an individual – can commission polling and lobby a politician, you don’t need a board and a public spokesperson to do so.
EVERY push for marriage equality helps.
ED: The TGLRG which Rodney is the spokesperson for and Australian Coalition for Equality, which Rodney is also one of the chief spokesmen for, are both Marriage Alliance member organisations
What? What’s with the hating on the ALP?
Yep, they’ve dragged their feet on marriage equality. But all the signs are good that they’re moving to support it – note all the motions in support of marriage equality getting passed at State Conferences – WA, Qld, Vic, NSW, ACT & Tas.
People apparently have short memories – name ONE piece of gay law reform in the history of gay law reform in this country that WASN’T initiated by the ALP?
Seriously – they’re hardly out to destroy LGBT people.
Anyway. The ALP-backed movement for marriage is really (and I mean really) clearly labelled as such.
You can see it here:
Ravin’ Dave, your silliness and wild hysteria destroys any credibility in your posts.
For fucks sake who is this party called Labor and their mates writing into here?
What sort of castration of the truth is acceptable, the part where group members are surprised they are in the 鈥渃oalition鈥�, or the part about doing 鈥渞esearch鈥� and spending money on behalf of the group with a Labor Party firm who says they speak for equality and us? What else do you call the firm that reports to who? Oh that is right, they report to the Labor Party they are doing 鈥渞esearch鈥� for us.
Labor is once again Guilty, once again Cruel, once again a great Human Rights Abuser, trying to strip away our Civil Rights. Gillard needs to look up the Bible, the bit about Judas.
I think we need stop listening to Federal Labor fucking us over, who is doing the Judas on us, for the sake of one conservative Catholic man in the SDA Union, who follows a cardinal who had allegations made against him, who follows a Pope who was a member of the Hitler Youth, and who as promoted Bishops who deny the Holocaust ever happened.
Labor has once again betrayed us, they are even trying to stop couples marrying overseas.
The bloody Carbon Tax did not have to wait until the Labor Party Conference, what utter bullshit for our rights to wait for the Labor Party.
I have a question, was it the SDA Union who funded the survey for the Labor Party?
I am voting Green.
I am at a complete loss as to why anyone thinks this group supports civil union as a compromise option. The article refers to the findings of the group’s research not to the position of the group. As the article says the research found that 鈥淔OR THOSE CONFLICTED BY THE ISSUE OR SITTING ON THE FENCE, the idea of civil unions seem like the easiest and less disruptive path, and a reasonable compromise for both sides”. The members of this group (people whose aim to achieve marriage equality) are neither conflicted nor sitting on the fence. Just because these people have conducted research that, unsurprisingly, reveals that various conflicted and fence-sitting politicians think civil unions is an acceptable compromise or first step does not mean that the members of this group share or endorse that belief in any way. Nor does it mean that confirmation of the existence of such conflicted and fence-sitting MPs will result in the group settling for a civil union compromise.
As for the view that “We didn鈥檛 get here by begging for our rights or back hand deals behind closed doors” … the truth is that a significant amount of gay-rights reform legislation over the years has been achieved because of behind closed doors discussions one-on-one between MPs and skilled lobbyists with comprehensive research … there is absolutely no way, for example, that the recent same-sex adoption legislation in NSW would have passed (which is only very narrowly did) without hours of careful, strategic lobbying and negotiation behind closed doors of the very kind that is being denounced in this thread of comments.
Given the proven importance of lobbying in achieving same-sex law reform and given the absence of any evidence (as opposed to the unsubstantiated insinuations of Brian Greg) that the group is any kind of ALP front and given the complete lack of any evidence that this group is in fact considering civil unions as an option in any way, I think the calls for it to be disbanded or forcibly outed are entirely unwarranted.
Ed: The research was not into the views of politicians, it was into the views of voters in particular marginal electorates and was then used to lobby politicians. This research was commissioned and carried out without informing all of the Alliance member groups and the same was the case in the lobbying of politicians
I will NOT accept a civil union.
I want COMPLETE equality.
Agreed Jason. All marriage equality groups should drop all affiliation with this group until their intentions are made clear and civil unions are dropped as a compromise.
AME, PFFLAG etc should leave the alliance straight away and label it for what it is. We didn’t get here by begging for our rights or back hand deals behind closed doors. We got here by mass rallies across Australia calling the ban on equality what it is – homophobic, disgusting and immoral. I for one hope to see everyone at their local rally on aug 17.. We the people will decide this movement not self appointed lobbyists.
鈥淓ssential Media Communications鈥� website is It is a Labor Party firm. Imagine the PR on the media releases when they announce the GLBTI community supports Civil Unions over Marriage, and those who want Marriage are not speaking for the vast majority of people in our community. Gillard will then announce 鈥淚 am with the majority of Australians including our Gay and Lesbian friends, who support Civil Unions, they believe, as I do, that Marriage has a special biblical place in our community, and should always be between a Man and a Woman鈥�.
Given that one of the “supporters” of this mysterious Marriage Alliance is “Essential Media Communications”, a well known Labor affiliated PR/communication/polling firm the suspicion of Labor links are probably correct.
It behoves organisations such as Australian Marriage Equality (who have done an exemplary role up until now) to ensure that the campaign is not derailed by Labor political interests.
If this Alliance is not accountable to its participating groups, then it is obviously being run to achieve other ends that are (most likely) not in the long term interest of the GLBT community.
Given the wealth of support for same-sex marriage, both in polling and more recently on-line in the media (ABC and Fairfax), where there was overwhelming support for same-sex marriage in the comment forums, it is strange that “civil unions” are suddenly being raised as an option.
As someone who has been reading the online forums on this topic for some time, the sudden rise in “civil union” supporters (usually couched with “I’d support civil unions, but not marriage”) does appear to look like an orchestrated campaign.
Who this group is needs clearing up – what is clear is the very public support same-sex marriage has in the ALP. Victoria, Queensland, WA, South Australia and Tasmania have passed resolutions in favour of same-sex marriage and this weekend the NSW ALP will debate same-sex marriage.
Some people may support this groups position. But within the Labor Party, it is clear a majority do not.
Oh I see, pat us on the head, tell us to sit in the naughty corner till we are told to come out? Never. If it must be confrontational to achieve this change then so be it. As Lady Di said, we won’t go quietly.
Can you please provide a link to this mystery groups mystery website?
Labor is not the people’s party, it is now the Catholic Party.
This new Australian Marriage Equality Allianc needs to dissolve right away. This is a typical Labor Party strategy, to take over a GLBTI group, and then become their spokesperson arguing for the easiest result Labor wants. Here they are using our money to get the result they want 鈥揅ivil Unions. There are over 1084 pieces of legislation that discriminate in favour of married couples as they are referenced by the Marriage Act, there is no plan by Labor to change that. They may well introduce a Civil Unions bill, but you will still be discriminated in many areas where Federal Law affects you. Labor Party hacks even write in here from time to time saying there is no discrimination. Well let鈥檚 think, we are not even included in the Federal Equal Opportunity Act, the superannuation changes did not affect Private Superannuation, and the list goes and on and on.
Brian Greg OAM wrote a terrific piece in about the way Labor infiltrates groups, and then becomes their 鈥淪pokesperson鈥�. He also talks of Gillard鈥檚 private support for Same-Sex Marriage, and her conundrum with the Catholic SDA Union that holds the numbers to remove her at any moment. I have had dinner with Labor people who even know one of Gillards closest friends who is Same-Sex attracted and he was wild about the SDA Union.
The whole Marriage debate has exposed the inner workings of the power within the Labor Party, and the machinery that will kill a sitting Prime Minister if they dare to challenge the Catholic SDA Union. Gillard is a product of what is wrong with Labor, and the best example of this is the debate surrounding Same-Sex Marriage. One conservative Catholic Man, Joe de Bruyn, holds the power of 20 million people in Australia. One unelected man, whose views would never make him Prime Minister, is using that power, to require the population to follow his religious beliefs.
The link for Brian Greg鈥檚 article is:
This is probably a Labor front organisation: Brian Grieg predicted some time ago that they would set out to create a tame in-house marriage equality body to try to hijack the debate, steer it to civil unions, and take the heat off Gillard, who is getting very grumpy about being put under pressure. This looks very much like the predicted fake ‘community’ organisation.
Most likely its the Labor party themselves behind it. Why would they do that? To give Gillard a way out on December.
Suggesting civil unions instead of marriage as justified by a peak “Gay and Lesbian rights lobby” which secretly has been organised by the Labor party.
Brian Greig has already suggested this in his opinion piece from Crikey: