The billions the regressive wasted in power makes this amount for the plebiscite look like chicken feed. The swamp do not want the average aussie to have a say. They will never accept democracy

Legitimising same sex marriage being the foot in the door to legitimising "Safe" Schools" homosexual play acting for kids in the classroom

has been effective NO vote advertising.

The survey and proposed legislation has little to do with homosexuality: after all, no same-sex "couple" would have to prove or even declare that they are homosexual in order to receive a marriage-certificate: suffice that they want to provoke and draw attention (and pay the fee, currently $291)!

There are honour killings if an offended lover is not given a marriage. Probably a priest would be compell-ed not to live in sin if an altar boy expects the priest to marry after raping.

I can readily accept that the ABS are authorised to carry out a survey, that's why the government changed the terminology as the ABS could not carry out a plebiscite.

The question of the appropriation of the funding is more interesting as there was a 2016 budget provision of $170 million in the foreshadowed Plebiscite Bill which, of course, was rejected by the Senate. So how the High Court views urgent and unforeseen will be instructive.

On the surface, it seemed that the Executive were merely re-badging the plebiscite even though the parliament had rejected it on two occasions but evidently the HC see this as a legitimate means of securing funding that has otherwise been denied by the parliament.

The matter really is one of proper financial practice by those we elect to manage our affairs.
We give our government clear rules about the allocation of funds for projects, and we expect them to abide by those rules, not to subvert that application by specious argument.
As our employees, they are bound to obey our wishes.