Except for items which have appeared in the party platform there should be no compulsory voting on any issue. Parliamentarians should be free to vote according to their conscience, the wishes of their constituents or the good of Australia and the world if they feel that is not compatible with the directive of the party room.

I favour allowing same sex marriage but would not compel those who do not favour it to vote for it.

Hi Foxy, and welcome back, hope you are ok.

I see the role of MP's differently, they are not in parliament in isolation, I believe in party solidarity. MP's should firstly argue in Parliament, and in the broader community in support of party policy, on behalf of the memberships and those who voted them into office. The place for contrary argument is where party policy is determined and voted on, state and national conference. Secondly MP's should vote to reflect party policy, where party policy exists.
If an MP's feels that strongly on an issue and in all good conscience cannot support party policy then they should resign from the party. if they do indeed feel that strongly.
There is plenty of scope for politicians to argue their point of view publicly and privately before party policy on an issue has been determined, but once determined the party should expect solidarity from that very important voting member.

Dear Paul1405,

We disagree. I don't think a parliamentarian should ever be forced to vote against his or her conscience. That should prevail over party solidarity. If a politician is not in complete agreement with the party platform he or she should not run for office. However, on other items the parliamentarian should be free. Otherwise we do not have a representative democracy. I want the parliamentarian who speaks for my district to take the wishes of his or her constituents into account when he or she votes. Otherwise it is wrong to call our system a representative democracy if all the parliamentarian represents is the wishes of the guiding spirits of the party. Party solidarity is incompatible with democracy in my view.

I'm not sure about the proof 'most Australians support gay marriage'.

The only poll results I've seen, including spot TV polls, was conducted a couple years ago and only about 2000 interviewed. The question "Should the law be changed to allow gay marriage?" was not specifically asked. The question from memory was more open such as "Do you oppose gay marriage?"

Personally I am not opposed to gay marriage but I wouldn't vote for it if given the opportunity.

The only way to know if Australians want to change the law is put it to the vote at the next election. I would hope both sides of the debate would be willing to accept the democratic outcome.

only seared consciences would want to 'normalise' the abnormal.

Nothing should be compulsory.