Mike Rann Comes Out

This weekend during a speech at my alma mater, Flinders University, outgoing South Australian Premier Mike Rann publicly pronounced his support for gay marriage. During this speech, he said he formed these views during conversations in the 1970s with the late, great Don Dunstan and former High Court Justice Michael Kirby. This seems to suggest that he has held these views for almost his entire public life, but has only chosen to voice them now. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a very long time to remain in the closet. Why has he waited until now? There are various possibilities.

To completely understand Mike Rann’s actions throughout his premiership, you must be aware of the influence of the Right faction on the security of his tenure. To ignore this fact would be akin to reading DH Lawrence’s Sons and Lovers without the knowledge that Lawrence was gay. Rann would not be Premier without Don Farrell and the Right. They supported him when nobody else would, through opposition, Chantelois and onwards. While I am not suggesting that Rann was the Right’s puppet (he certainly had a degree of autonomy), he was certainly restricted when dealing with certain policy areas. I will call them the holy trinity; stem-cell research, gay marriage and shop trading hours.

This morning, Catholic Right faction warhorse Michael Atkinson apparently (I am interstate) went on 891 ABC and spoke against the concept of gay marriage, saying they were statistically more likely to end in divorce. Leaving aside the fact that Atkinson’s own marriage didn’t last, I cannot see how this statistic is relevant, even if it is true. In a way, such a statistic makes sense, because many marriages/long term relationships stay together for the sake of the children. Gay relationships would clearly have a much smaller incidence of children. Accuracy of any such research aside, the main motivation for Atkinson and Co’s opposition to gay marriage stems from another, more famous text; the Holy Bible.

The only real reasons to oppose the union of gay people in marriage are religious. As an agnostic, therefore, I have no objection to a policy that would reduce the suffering of and prejudice against a significant percentage of our community whilst creating no adverse impact on those in society with no vested interest in the issue. With the majority of society moving towards this view point, it is less controversial for a political leader to come out in support. Rann could point to the passing of motions at ALP state conventions around the country as his reason for finally voicing his position. I wonder, however, if there was perhaps a more sneaky motivation.

As I write, we are one week away from Jay Weatherill’s ascension to the position of Premier. When he takes over, he will need to make some overt and dramatic changes to signal to the party and the public that it is not a transition, but a transformation. With the Treasury cupboards bare, however, he will be restricted to symbolic and attitudinal changes. As a long term supporter of a gay marriage, Jay perhaps was planning to use this issue to signal a changing of the guard. Mike Rann, however, got there first, just as he did with the new police station etc. Not only did he beat Weatherill to the punch, he also poisoned any potential State action by saying that only the Feds can take meaningful action. Rann seems determined to suck every single gust of wind from Weatherill’s sails, like some cosmic political vacuum cleaner. While it is a very Machiavellian scenario, it is certainly not a plot beyond the capabilities of the maestro, Mike Rann.