Malcolm Turnbull asked people in the meeting to indicate whether or not they wanted the plebiscite dumped in favour of a free vote. Photograph: Richard Wainwright/AAP
The Liberal party has elected to stick with its plebiscite policy with a postal vote as a backup rather than moving immediately to a free vote, after a special party room discussion on Monday evening.
Liberals were told at the opening of the party room meeting the cabinet was in favour of resuscitating the governments original plebiscite proposal, followed by a postal vote in the event the plebiscite is rejected by parliament once again.
After a two-hour discussion, only a handful of Liberal MPs, some sources say six, others say eight, raised their hands when Malcolm Turnbull asked people to indicate whether or not they wanted the plebiscite dumped now, and the party to move to a free vote.
No formal vote was taken in the party room on the plebiscite, either the current policy or the postal option.
Only one of the group of Liberal campaigners for marriage equality who have reopened the internally incendiary issue over the winter recess Warren Entsch publicly reserved his position during Monday nights meeting on bringing on a bill to legalise same sex marriage after the Senate had reconsidered the plebiscite.
But while the party room tacitly endorsed the position favoured by the cabinet to reintroduce the plebiscite, then proceed with a postal vote in the event the plebiscite was again knocked back by the parliament a number of concerns were ventilated during the meeting about the postal vote.
Government sources have told Guardian Australia the attorney general, George Brandis, also has reservations about the postal vote option.
The Victorian Liberal MP Russell Broadbent said the government should just maintain its original policy, not the postal vote, and the New South Wales MP Julian Leeser expressed concerns about the postal vote, arguing if the government tried hard enough, it would get the original proposal through.
The former prime minister Tony Abbott and Victorian Liberal Kevin Andrews also said the government should maintain the original plebiscite position.
Abbott said if the government moved off its plebiscite commitment, then voters would again gain the impression the government didnt stand for anything or fight for anything.
The prime minister pushed back against Abbotts intervention, saying the government did plenty and stood for plenty.
Entsch told the ABC on Monday night he was happy to go through the process of seeing the original plebiscite proposal resubmitted to the Senate, but he predicted the crossbench would not budge.
Entsch also argued the postal plebiscite was fraught. If they then put up a plebiscite, a postal plebiscite, they will see the warts and the prickles attached to that.
Conservative MP Craig Kelly said after the meeting the Senate negotiating team should be given wider latitude to attempt to get the original plebiscite policy through the Senate.
Specifically, he suggested the government could compromise by ditching the $15m of public funds for each of the yes and no case in the plebiscite because theres been so much debate it may not be needed, and even consider what the bill would look like.
Marriage equality campaigners have foreshadowed a legal challenge to the postal plebiscite in the event the government proceeds down that path without appropriate underpinning legislation.
In an effort to strong-arm the Senate ahead of the reintroduction of the plebiscite legislation, the finance minister, Mathias Cormann, told reporters after the Liberal party meeting if there were concerns about the legality of the voluntary postal vote, then I would encourage those Senators who are so concerned to consider supporting the governments bill for a compulsory attendance plebiscite.
The government is committed to keep faith with the promise we made at the last election, Cormann said Monday night.
It is now up to others in the Senate, who may have voted against the plebiscite in the past, the full compulsory attendance plebiscite, and make a decision on whether they prefer a compulsory attendance plebiscite or whether they prefer a postal voluntary plebiscite.
Cormann declined to say how much any postal vote would cost.
Some in the government are hopeful that marriage equality groups could swing behind the original plebiscite proposal if the alternative is a postal vote.
Advocates were giving no sign of that on Monday night. Long-time marriage equality advocate Rodney Croome urged Liberals to press ahead with trying to engineer a parliamentary vote.
We urge Liberals who support marriage equality to table marriage equality legislation and cross the floor to vote for it, Croome said.
Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays national spokesperson, Shelley Argent, said: We will lobby the Senate to continue to oppose a plebiscite and we will move to have a postal vote struck down in the high court.
We do not accept, and will never accept, the demeaning terms and conditions the government has attached to marriage equality.
Political parties in the Senate opposed to the plebiscite have given no sign they will budge on their opposition to the governments proposal.
Same sex marriage will be considered again by the joint party room meeting in Canberra on Tuesday, and will continue to play out as a divisive issue for much of the rest of the year.
Read more:
Marriage equality: Liberals vote to keep plebiscite with postal vote as backup - The Guardian