Undecided voters call for legal protections to accompany vote

A new poll signals legal protections for religion and freedom of speech could determine the marriage plebiscite.

The ACL poll mirrors previous polling finding that a majority of Australians back gay marriage. Picture: AFP

A third of all Australian voters say they are undecided over whether to allow gay marriage in a national poll that signals the issue of legal protections for religion and freedom of speech could determine Malcolm Turnbull’s postal plebiscite.

A national poll of 4,000 people commissioned by the Australian Christian Lobby suggests that 61 per cent would likely vote Yes with protections for children, freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

But, in an indication the No campaign could be influencing voters, the Yes vote tanked to just 17 per cent when people were presented with a scenario in which gay marriage was unaccompanied by legal protections.

In this situation, the number of people prepared to change their vote to No doubled, while 29 per cent of respondents said they were undecided.

The poll results come as the government yesterday finalised the safeguards that would apply to the Yes and No campaigns for the duration of the same sex postal survey, with penalties of up to $12,600 to apply who break the rules.

The safeguards will cover vilification, intimidation and threats to cause harm to persons on the basis of their sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status or religious conviction, with the government aiming to have the legislation passed by the end of the week.

Acting special minister of state Mathias Cormann said the government would introduce the additional safeguards bill into the parliament today and confirmed it would be in operation until the “declaration of a result on November 15”.

“We urge all campaigners on both sides of this debate to express their arguments with courtesy and respect,” he said.

The safeguards will ensure political authorisations are included on campaign advertisements, that there will be “reasonable opportunity to have opposing views broadcast” and that prohibitions will apply to misleading conduct.

The ACL poll, conducted by research firm Sexton marketing and research — the Nationals preferred polling company — mirrors previous polling finding that a majority of Australians back gay marriage with support ranging from 58-72 per cent in favour.

It also suggests the issue of appropriate legal protections for schools that teach traditional marriage, service providers that cater to marriage ceremonies and individuals who continue to defend traditional marriage could prove to be a potential sleeper issue and generate a significant swing vote.

The Equality Campaign, regarded as the moderate force behind the Vote Yes movement, have said it would never support a bill that interfered with the sacraments or rights of freedom of speech and the rights of Christian schools to teach traditional marriage.

ACL managing director Lyle Shelton said the debate on same sex marriage had shifted to a question of what the broader knock-on consequences would be.

“When the public consider the question of changing the marriage act, it all comes down to consequences,” Mr Shelton said. “All we have is a promise from certain politicians that we need to trust them. And other politicians are openly saying that they will not support protections of speech and faith.”

“Further the research clearly identifies the level of concern among mums and dads about what impact changing the marriage act will have in their kids’ classroom. We have already seen overseas that parents are losing the right to say no, as governments enshrine radical LGBTIQ sex and gender programs in the classroom.

“Australians are supportive of a fair go, they are supportive of equal treatment under the law. However, this support does not extend to a loss of free speech or the right to practice your faith. And it certainly does not extend to losing control of what their kids are exposed to at school”.

Bill Shorten yesterday said Labor wanted to “make sure that people are protected from hurtful speech” because members of the LGBTIQ community had become a “talking point” in “discussions they thought were done and dusted”.

The Opposition Leader argued the debate was not about broader issues or the knock-on consequences of gay marriage, dismissing the arguments of the No campaign as “a whole lot of other distractions”.

“We don’t have a 1950s definition of a family, whatever one thinks of that definition. Families come in all shapes and sizes,” he said. “There is one question on the survey. Do you support same-sex couples being able to get married?”