I vowed some time ago that I would not vote for a party which opposes same-sex marriage or, for a party led by someone who doesn’t embrace marriage equality. It’s not that I’m a ‘single issue’ voter – far from it. But, to me, a belief in the fundamental equality of all citizens is a foundation principle of democracy. I simply can’t trust a party or politician whose policy decisions do not flow from this simple, but crucially important, understanding of human rights.
Kevin Rudd’s last minute ‘revelation’ in favour of equal marriage, prior to his recent return to the Prime Ministership, had me breathing a sigh of relief. The Greens in my electorate, Fairfax, have self-destructed by ousting a good candidate (my dear friend) Dr Jim McDonald. I don’t know the newly recruited candidate but I know the shenanigans that have gone on behind the scenes and I won’t endorse the local Greens with my vote (although I will vote Greens in the Senate).
For obvious reasons (I’m looking at you, Tony Abbott) – equal marriage among them – the LNP candidate won’t get my vote no matter how many smiley people stand outside our local library, manically waving blue signs at passing motorists.
The other option is Clive Palmer of the Palmer United Party. Now, Clive is an interesting candidate who I expected to despise. But, having seen him in a couple of extended interviews, I have to say I’m seriously impressed at his stance on social justice issues and his plain speaking common-sense. On the other hand, while he hasn’t declared his party’s stance on these matters, I don’t expect Palmer, a conservative Catholic, to support reproductive choice and LGBTI rights – so, if I’m to keep my promise to myself, I probably won’t be scrawling a blunt-pencilled “1” against Palmer’s name on election day, either.
It seems my only real option is to vote Labor. But, standing on principle, that wasn’t possible while Joe de Bruyn … er, I mean Julia Gillard … headed the party.
Rudd’s succession to the Prime Minister’s role was enough to convince me that my vote in Fairfax should go to the ALP candidate, Elaine Hughes. Hughes comes highly recommended by my friend, Ray Marx, president of the ALP’s Labor Unity faction. It’s a recommendation that I rate highly given my respect for Ray and his views on the issues I care most about. It seems Labor was the salve for my election day woes, after all.
But, this week, a rather nasty fly flew into my polling-day ointment. For some insanely ridiculous reason which defies all human understanding (unless one factors in another fucking stupid back-room deal with ALP destroyer Joe de Bruyn and his bat-shit crazy Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association [Union]), Rudd appointed conservative Catholic, anti-abortion, anti-marriage equality, anti-LGBTI equality, anti-stem-cell research Jacinta Collins as Minister for Mental Health and Ageing.
Look! I’m not saying that practising Catholics should be barred from public office (although it’s a tantalising thought to toy with). There’s no reason why Ms Collins couldn’t have been appointed to a ministry where she could do the least harm – Agriculture, Industrial Affairs, or Silly Walks, for instance. But no! Rudd appointed Ms Collins to the position where she could do the most harm and piss off the very people he was, presumably, trying to win back to Labor – left-wing voters, the LGBTI community and their supporters and women.
It was, quite simply, incomprehensibly dumb.
I’m having to review my decision to vote Labor in the forthcoming election and I’ll bet I’m not the only one.
Bernard Keane was the first to raise alarm bells with an article on Crikey: Anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage … and the new mental health minister (paywalled, unfortunately). Keane (revealing why the appointment of this eminently unsuitable candidate to the Mental Health portfolio is still stupid but not incomprehensible after all) says:
“Collins is from the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees’ Association and holds the social views one expects of a Shoppie: she is stridently anti-abortion and a diehard opponent of same-s-x marriage; ‘stable, biological parenting’ should be fostered ‘as a social norm’ she said in reference to the same-s-x marriage bill last year. Less than a fortnight ago, Collins helped vote down a bill recognising overseas same-s-x marriages. During her time out of the Senate, Collins was a director of the anti-choice Caroline Chisholm Society, which is currently run by former Shoppie and Collins adviser Helen Cooney. Collins was at the society when it was controversially funded by then-health minister Tony Abbott to establish a pregnancy counselling service. Collins was a winner last year of an award for ‘Christian Values’ from the ‘Christian Values Institute’.”
This might be incidental if Collins had been appointed to another portfolio says Keane, but Mental Health brings Collins’ religious views into sharp relief.
There are many in the anti-abortion lobby, Keane reminds us, who “claim without any evidence that abortion causes mental health problems for women, including, ‘post-abortion syndrome‘, a condition invented by anti-abortionists.”
Also, given her dismissive views (at best) on LGBTI issues, how will Ms Collins engage with and support the many excellent pro-LGBTI initiatives introduced by her predecessor, Mark Butler?
Doug Pollard was quick to spread the bad news amongst the LGBTI community and supporters through his blog, The Stirrer. In his post, Rudd’s New Cabinet – Thank God It’s Only Till the Election, Pollard points out that Ms Collins is “not fond of what she calls ‘the self-appointed enlightened university educated inner city professionals’ in the party.”
Could that be the people who call for policy decisions to be based on evidence rather than religious propaganda? That ghastly intelligentsia which actually reads and responds honestly to academic and medical research rather than ignoring or distorting it to mesh with their own pre-conceived religious prejudices? God forbid!
And, while Ms Collins tut-tuts about we elitist intellectuals it seems she has a few high-falutin’ ideas of her own. In 2009, Gerald McManus at the Herald Sun reported on Ms Collins throwing a tantrum when the temporarily over-stretched Commcar service couldn’t supply a limousine to collect her at Melbourne Airport. It was, apparently, unthinkable that Ms Collins should deign to join the hoi polloi in the taxi queue! Instead, she was put to the shocking inconvenience of having to find another politician who would share their limo and moved to raise the distressing incident in Parliament. Oh! The hardships our politicians suffer to serve us!
Today, the Herald Sun has, again, stepped into the Jacinta Collins fray, with Susie O’Brien writing: Senator Jacinta Collins must tell us where she stands on abortion and gay marriage.
Well, unless Ms Collins has had a ‘road to Damascus ‘revelation à le Rudd, I expect she stands where she has always stood – in total solidarity with the Vatican.
According to O’Brien:
- In 2000, Ms Collins was one of three senators who threatened to refuse to oppose legislation that would stop single women and lesbians accessing IVF.
- In 2002, Collins called stem cell research the “unprecedented sanctioning of destructive research on human life”.
- In 2005 Collins was part of a group of conservative business and church leaders trying to put abortion back on the national agenda under the “pro-women, pro-life” banner. She has also been a member of the ‘pro-life’ Caroline Chisholm society.
In 2008 Collins wondered if there would be “blood on the Medicare card” if there was public funding for abortion. She also hinted that she endorsed the Catholic/pro-life propaganda which links abortion to negative mental-health outcomes for women; a claim which has been widely and definitively debunked by mainstream researchers.
- In 2009 Collins expressed concern about Victoria’s abortion laws, worrying about clauses that force doctors to refer women for terminations even if their personal beliefs oppose abortion.
- In 2010, she called on the ALP to embrace ‘traditional values’ and reject same-sex marriage, or ‘risk losing touch with its political base’.
- Collins is, according to Susie O’Brien, also anti-voluntary euthanasia, which gives people with terminal illnesses right to choose to die with dignity. Quelle surprise!
These kinds of views are, as O’Brien points out, “dangerous and antithetical to a just and fair society. And they are totally at odds with the mental health portfolio.”
As an interesting adjunct to this story, as I was writing it, I got a Facebook message from a friend, Annie Chant (a pseudonym) – a former Catholic*, now an atheist. Annie told me she had recently received an invitation and booked to attend a screening of the documentary, “It’s a Girl!” (ostensibly a ‘balanced’ report on how, “in India, China and many other parts of the world today, girls are killed, aborted and abandoned simply because they are girls”.)
It’s a subject that any woman (or man) would be concerned about. If one is ‘pro-choice’ one is obviously going to be opposed to forced abortions! If one is a feminist, one obviously doesn’t want to see fetuses aborted for no reason other than for being female (or male for that matter!).
Annie, however, was astounded to be contacted by phone and ‘uninvited’ to the event this morning by an angry organiser who had checked her Facebook page and found a post questioning the wisdom of Jacinta Collins’ appointment to the Mental Health Ministry. The woman became so ‘vile’ and ‘shouty’ says Annie that she had to hang up on her.
Now, this was clearly not at Ms Collins instigation nor within her control. But I think it speaks to the rabidity of the kinds of views Ms Collins espouses that her supporters would not even countenance allowing a pro-choice atheist to attend a screening which is presumably not about abortion per se but about the wider, humanitarian issue of how women and girls are so poorly valued in too many countries. (Curiously, I discovered, the film is almost certainly, secretly funded by a pro-life ministry).
Like the anti-euthanasia movement, the anti-abortion movement is a labyrinth of grubby propaganda, outright lies, Trojan Horse and astro-turf organisations, and a slew of pseudo-academic and political backers who swear blind that their views are not influenced one iota by their poorly-concealed links to various forms of fundamentalist religion – most often, Catholicism.
These people, of course, have every right to their views. They have every right to ignore the academic and medical literature which shows that abortion is an overwhelmingly safe procedure and does not, under normal circumstances, negatively impact the mental or physical well-being of women. (See, for example, the attached 2011 meta-analysis on “Induced Abortion and Mental Health” from the UK’s National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health.)
Pro-lifers have every right to hold a religious view on abortion and to choose not to have an abortion themselves. I will even concede they have a right to try to persuade others to their view (although not to physically and/or verbally intimidate women as they enter abortion clinics).
What I, and an increasing number of other concerned commentators, am questioning, is the wisdom of appointing someone with these views as Minister for Mental Health!
If Rudd is to lead the Labor government to victory he will need every vote he can muster. This ham-fisted attempt to get in good with the Shoppies and the ALP’s faceless fundies is very likely to lose my vote. How about yours?
You can contact the Prime Minister on Twitter at @KRuddPM or send an email via his Contact Page.
* The original edition of this post referred to ‘Annie Chant’ as a former Pentecostal youth leader. I had the histories of two friends confused and have corrected it to ‘former Catholic’. Apologies to ‘Annie Chant’ and thanks to her for drawing the inaccuracy to my attention.
“Collins’ views ‘at odds with portfolio'” – Patricia Karvelas, The Australian
I just wanted to make a comment about the new Greens candidate for Fairfax. I know Dave Knobel personally, and his wife Psaltis Cauley, and I couldn’t think of a more honest, hardworking guy. He’s a person of the utmost integrity and conviction – and I can assure you he stands for marriage equality as well as host of other fundamental values that make up the core beliefs of the Greens. Dave has worked in the area of Indigenous housing and he’s currently doing a postgraduate degree in law. If I lived in the Fairfax electorate he would have my vote in a heartbeat.
He may well be an excellent candidate, Mel, but the team backing him has (and continues to) behave disgracefully and in the most incredible petty ways against Dr McDonald. Knobel now leads the team and the fact that their juvenile behaviour continues under his leadership disinclines me to direct my vote in that direction.
Hmmm…at this stage I’m thinking maybe an intentional informal vote is the go. And I’ll write a message on it to give the scrutineers a giggle.
Don’t forget that your primary vote, successful or not, brings with it campaign funding for the person you voted for. Even if its a forlorn vote vote for the people you want to continue in politics. This will help them to continue to campaign.
As tempting as it is, I will not vote informal. As you stand at the ballot box consider what the suffragettes suffered to give you the vote. How could one betray them by squandering the right and voting informally. I won’t do it.
Good point. 🙂
I’d never vote informal in the Senate. But the House of Reps…still a while to think about it.
I see your point about the reps, I have never lived in an electorate where my reps vote has made a difference, such is our ‘democracy’.
The senate always makes a difference and I always vote below the line and I number my vote very carefully with Libs and NATS last and in reverse order. I always vote green first and labor second, ensuring that my preferences go to labor.
Regarding marriage equality, as long as the Libs and NATS are last preference that must be the best hope. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Rudd bring on a vote on it or at least commit to doing so ASAP after the election and at least the Labor members get a conscience vote. Not that I agree with a conscience vote. It should be a representative vote where the MPs vote according to the wishes of their electorate.
Thank you again for an important well researched and argued post.
I, too was stunned to learn of Jacinta Collins’ stance ( through Facebook heads up and then via Wikipaedia and another informative biography of this Labor member.
I only have one disagreement with you;
This sentence I question.
“Kevin Rudd’s last minute ‘revelation’ in favour of equal marriage, prior to his recent return to the Prime Ministership,…”
Having been aware of Mr Rudd’s change of stance for at least a month I doubt it can be called ‘last minute revelation’.
But i get your point.
I am appalled by Ms Collins stance and asked for the person who put it forward to ‘please check’. All they really had to do was to quote; “A good Christian woman” and I would have been sold.
This woman is not for the voting.
I want Labor to win and I am sorry you don’t feel good about your local Greens candidate, but trust your ‘hunch’.
It really doesn’t matter what I vote being in the National Party heartland but, like you, I am always and forever mindful of the women who went before who fought for my right to vote so always do so with respect.
Thank you for this piece and I am sorry we have another fight on our hands against the religious who wish to control our choices ( no matter what that choice may be), especially GLBTI citizens, but women also.
I don’t care what the religious do, as long as they don’t politicise it or affect anyone’s equality in our society.
I expect that a lot of former ALP voters will be seeing the ALP as too right-wing, and scrutinising the minor parties more than ever this year. (it’s a good thing to do this for every election anyway)
As an informed voter, I always srutinise all parties. And unlike many voters, I realise there are many more options than just the two major parties, though it pays to consider your preferences too.
I’m really looking forward to the local meet the candidates event where we can put our questions directly to all candidates.
Collins is not the only right wing Catholic Shoppies Union plant in Rudd’s freshly landscaped garden http://www.thestirrer.com.au/don-farrell-minister-for-sporting-homophobia/
Great piece! With all the bloody right-wing dinosaurs coming out of the ALP woodwork, it seems that what Ruddie really needs is another Ice Age!
C Palmer cant even run a football team let alone a country
just for starters….
and never but never trust the SDA
Chrys ……. another issue that you didn’t mention that will be ignored by the Liberal party ….. legalisation of voluntary euthanasia. there’s legislation up or soon to get up in NT too.
I believe I did mention it …. Ah, may not have mentioned it here, but I definitely have elsewhere in my other pre-election commentaries.
Ah yes, actually, I did mention euthanasia above – twice:
“Collins is, according to Susie O’Brien, also anti-voluntary euthanasia, which gives people with terminal illnesses right to choose to die with dignity. Quelle surprise!”
“Like the anti-euthanasia movement, the anti-abortion movement is a labyrinth of grubby propaganda, outright lies, Trojan Horse and astro-turf organisations, and a slew of pseudo-academic and political backers who swear blind that their views are not influenced one iota by their poorly-concealed links to various forms of fundamentalist religion – most often, Catholicism.”
When you don’t have anyone you can vote for maybe it’s time to run?
Fairfax would be a tough gig. Interesting though.
“Ms Collins is ”not fond of what she calls ‘the self-appointed enlightened university educated inner city professionals’”
Like psychologists and psychiatrists perhaps? That would make her even less suited to the role as mental health minister
Pingback: On religion, hairdryers, anti-abortion lunacy, and Jacinta Collins
Holy fuck. I just don’t know what to do any more –
i’m numb with horror
Pauls last comment on conscience votes is spot on. Despite polls showing 80% in favour of dying with dignity for over 40 years the Catholic minority have managed to stymie every proposal presented to any parliament. Using lies, false “case histories” and every kind of distortion of the facts they have controlled the votes. Allthough the Catholics are in the forefront, they are not the only ones, with the Anglicans and the Dutch Reform also contributing – here in Tassie anyway.. And it’s called democracy!!!!
Pingback: The 63rd Down Under Feminists’ Carnival | can be bitter