Spot on, its absolutely ludicrous that the citizenry has never voted directly on the immigration level as it effects jobs and house prices and nearly everything else. With the success of the marriage vote, an immigration vote could be amazing.

Plebiscites, why stop at one?

Well there's this thing called a structural deficit and the enormous waste of money these things could become? Just to convince a hugely puffed up minority, that they and their stone age/insanity personified view, was very much in the minority!

If you want your views better reflected in our so called representatives?

Then we need to jettison/junk the preference system in favour of first past the post. With better than 50% getting the Guernsey. And to a run off between the two best performed candidates, where this hasn't been the case!

I understand the desire for genuine democracy here in Oz, with it's massively manipulated preference system that more than anywhere in so called democracies, effectively destroys the will of the people!

Disraeli and every other progressive conservatives that ever lived, would never ever have stood for it! Not for a minute, never mind the century plus we've had it?

That said, Beggars can't be choosers, and we are, to coin a couple of phrases, a poor beggar country and or the white trash of Asia!

And therefore not a fit and proper country for anything remotely like true progressive democracy!

And given we get the parliament we so obviously deserve! Deserve, as a divided rabble, to be sold down the river every which way, by our alleged representatives? Or, (new) idea free, zone!
Alan B.

Because they're expensive and a pain in the arse. Voting for three different tiers of government is quite enough, thanks.

I am not sure if we could afford the security fees for those on the left losing plebiscites. Look at the tantrums still be thrown by the regressives who still aren't accepting the US vote. I know the regressives have dumbed down many people with the man made gw fantasy and other Marxist nonsense however the 'elite' would never take such things as Islamic immigration to the people.

Btw has the ABC/sbs worked out yet why large amount of Muslims recently voted no or are they still trying to work it out on q&a.

Ben Debney is obviously a Lefty buoyed by the win in the Plebiscite. However I do agree with him in the whole. Below is a sample of "My Think Tank Ideas" something I have been working on since 1995 or there-abouts.

<A Plebiscite must be held during every Governments Term seeking answers to Issues Past Governments have avoided acting upon. A Yes/ No Plebiscite to find out just the people of Australia want the Government to do with these Issues.

The Government procrastination on these issues has cost Australia many Billions of Dollars over a 100 years. The Survey, costing a little over $100000 would be cheap in comparison & would force the Government to act on the Issues presented. The contents of the Plebiscite would not be revealed until the letters went out.>

My suggestions are; Moslim Immigration, Standard Commercial Adult Age, Death Penalty, Overseas Aid V Emergency Aid only, Taxing Religious institutions & Charities, Compulsory Vaccination, Debit Card for all people on Welfare, Euthanasia, Aboriginal People to be considered just as Australians, not a separate identity, no set week-ends, work a 5 day week & 2 days off. Lottery Profits to be returned to fund Medical Services only. Politicians & Political Parties must show what donations they receive, from whom & what benefit the donor will receive. The Donor Organizations must reveal where the donated the money came from to three tiers. Plus about 100 more.

I should imagine that will break a few hearts out there.

There was no plebiscite. A voluntary participation survey was conducted.
The number of respondents was nowhere near "80% of Australians". Only around 70% of Australians were sent survey forms. Around 80% of eligible voters responded.
The claimed outcome of around 61% affirmative responses is significant but 61% of 80% of 70% is not a majority result.
The result does show support is much higher than most expected and therefore the issue probably does deserve a proper referendum to give the outcome the legitimacy it deserves.
The institution of marriage deserves that, same sex included or otherwise.
It's understandable proponents of SSM are enthusiastic to hide the inconclusive nature of the survey results but SSM will never have the legitimacy they yearn if it comes into being without the knowledge it's backed by a confirmed majority.

Voluntary surveys are great but you have to consider the motivation factors otherwise the results could be very misleading.
Plebiscites sound attractive but perhaps there'd be less need for them if we could first agree on a list of individual protections to enshrine in the constitution. Lines the state or anyone else may not cross.

I'm all for voluntary voting and optional preferencing. The good response rate for that postal survey certainly embarrassed claims compulsory voting is needed.

//Only around 70% of Australians were sent survey forms//

Because the other ~30% weren't eligible to vote. The vast majority of those ineligible voters being disqualified on the basis of being under 18. By how much do you propose lowering the voting age? Because if you want 100% of Australians voting, somebody is going to have to figure out a way of explaining all the issues to infants who haven't got to the talking stage yet.

//The result does show support is much higher than most expected//

No it doesn't. In the lead up to the plebiscite, there was poll after poll indicating that support for SMM was sitting around 60%. This was not a shock result by any means.

//the issue probably does deserve a proper referendum//

No, it definitely doesn't deserve a referendum, because it's not constitutional.

It doesn't deserve a plebiscite either. We've already wasted enough time and money on the survey; wasting more on a plebiscite asking the same question and getting much the same result will not endear the Government to anybody. And even then the no voters will whine that it's not a legitimate majority because only eligible voters were polled, and what about all the 2 year olds with strong views on gay marriage?

//I'm all for voluntary voting//

Really? Because you just spent the first half of your post whining that the voluntary nature of the survey means the results are inconclusive and illegitimate. Something that would presumably apply to every single result if we were to adopt voluntary voting. Would you care to make up your mind?

jamo: The number of respondents was nowhere near "80% of Australians". Only around 70% of Australians were sent survey forms. Around 80% of eligible voters responded. The claimed outcome of around 61% affirmative responses is significant but 61% of 80% of 70% is not a majority result.

Over thinking has confused you somewhat.

Jamo: We've already wasted enough time and money on the survey;

I say again. The procrastination of Governments over questions in the "Too Hard Basket" has cost Australia many Billions of Dollars because they have gone unanswered. If the Government refuses, can't or won't answer these questions then let the people answer them. $100000 to answer multiple questions, just yes or No is small change for a positive result.

Ideally there would be no such bodies like the state which violently control our lives. Given that such bodies do exist, allowing real people to have more say over what those bodies do, is overall a good step forward.

However, my fear is that it could be used to further excuse the tyranny of majorities. Take for example Jayb's suggestion of compulsory vaccination - violently interfering with other people's bodies, something we otherwise label as RAPE.

Another concern is that the author proposes to rely for this on the internet, which is controlled by America and constantly hacked by China, Russia and Ukraine, with big stakes in controlling Australia's democratic processes: sooner or later the internet will crash beyond repair, so we must stop relying on it for essential functions.

Yutsie: Take for example Jayb's suggestion of compulsory vaccination

You are nit picking one issue, keep going. Still I don't care if people don't want to Vaccinate. If their children get sick they should be quarantined & left to rot. It's not our problem, it's the parents problem then they must be charged with murder. No problem. There's an All Day Sucker for you to suck on, Yutsie.

Actually, I have this little Book & it has to do with Dilimmas. Like, "if the ship was sinking & you could only save yourself, your Wife, girl child, boy child or your dog. Who would you choose?" There's about 100 Questions. Great book.