The left has been reduced to two arguments against the government’s proposed gay marriage plebiscite: hate speech and cost. TMR deals with both.

Cost

It’s intriguing that Bill Shorten and Labor have suddenly found the road to Damscus on our country’s finances over (an alleged cost of) $160 million when:

• it completely wasted $400 billion of our money – and I do mean wasted;

• the daily interest we’re paying on the debt it racked up is currently about $45 million per day (i.e. $16.6 billion per year).

Clearly, Shorten and Labor are yet to get the hang of the practical differences between millions and billions of dollars.

To amplify this point, Andrew Bolt shows us yet another disgraceful and real waste of our money by Labor:

Another green energy fail:

A potential energy source in Australia is set to remain untapped, with a geothermal power project in the far north of South Australia now closed.

Energy company Geodynamics closed and remediated the sites of several test wells and generation plants in the Cooper Basin after deciding they were not financially viable.

So who spruiked it? Climate catastrophist Tim Flannery:

In fact, Flannery (actually a Geodynamics shareholder) managed to help persuade the Rudd Government into giving Geodynamics a $90 million grant that’s now gone:

Geodynamics Limited is pleased to announce that all conditions precedent for the $90 million grant awarded to the Company under the Federal Government’s Renewable Energy Demonstration Program (REDP) have been satisfied… The $90 million grant was initially awarded to Geodynamics in November 2009 and is the largest amount awarded to any project under the program.

So how expensive does $160 million look now?

Perhaps the left would prefer it if we applied Gillard/Swan economic principles, introduced a ‘gay marriage levy’ and said that it would cost Australians only 1.8 cents per day for the next year to pay for the plebiscite? Surely we all have 2 cents a day in our pockets to help gay people don’t we?

Community harmony

Changing the definition of marriage is something significant and worthy enough of giving the people their say – and the people clearly agree:

A thumping 69 per cent majority of voters backed the idea of having their say on the issue, rather than a parliamentary vote.

Even when the Sydney Morning Herald later repeated its poll and tried to doctor the result, 48% of people still supported the plebiscite:

Less than half of Australians want a plebiscite on same-sex marriage, a poll has found, with support for a national vote plummeting once voters are aware that the Turnbull Government’s proposal will cost $160 million but not compel members of Parliament to respect the result.

A Galaxy poll of 1000 people taken from Thursday to Sunday this week found 48 per cent support holding a plebiscite to determine whether same-sex couples should be extended the same marriage rights as heterosexual couples.

Consequently, it is unsurprising that there’s no evidence showing that a plebiscite would create anything close to a dangerous or unacceptable amount of hateful conduct. Indeed, the opposite appears to be the case:

One of the architects of Ireland’s overwhelming victory for “yes” in its same-sex marriage referendum has disputed Bill Shorten’s depiction of the Irish experience as ugly division.

Tiernan Brady, who is in Australia to advise the marriage equality campaign, said the lead up to the vote was mentally taxing for LGBT people but the vote itself was ultimately a “unifying moment for our country”.

Mr Brady said there was no doubt a plebiscite was “the more difficult” way to go about change but said the campaign “brought people together instead of tearing them apart”.

“But the approach of people in the campaign decides what the tone is and I think that is a critical point,” he said. “The referendum was an astounding and unifying moment for our country.”

Will nasty things be said and some feelings be hurt along the way? Definitely – on both sides. Boohoo. Last I checked, Ireland’s doing just fine and didn’t suffer any referendum induced violence or deaths along the way.

That aside, if the left really thinks that a plebiscite would result in a hate crime wave, what does it think forcing a law through on a parliamentary vote will do? Fix the ‘problem’?

A successfully carried plebiscite will give finality to the marriage issue. The ‘losers’ will have to accept the result as the will of the people. A law forced on people on the other hand will breed continued resentment – particularly given that a plebiscite was promised and supported by the community.

Lastly, Labor had six years of parliamentary control to legalise gay marriage and did not do so. Why not?

And why did Penny Wong (of all people) and Labor hold this position in 2010?

Openly gay Minister for Climate Change Penny Wong says she agrees with her party’s opposition to same-sex marriage.

‘‘On the issue of marriage I think the reality is there is a cultural, religious, historical view around that which we have to respect,’’ she told Network Ten today.

‘‘The party’s position is very clear that this is an institution that is between a man and a woman.’’

‘‘I am part of a party and I support the party’s policies.’’

People are starting to see through this charade.

Shorten and Labor may well have to concede on a plebiscite yet. It all depends on how long Turnbull can last.