LETTER TO THE EDITOR:
I WAS shocked to read in the letters section of this paper a few weeks ago a local woman stating that Darren Chester had the right, like everybody else, to change his mind in this case on the issue of same sex marriage.
The problem is, Mr Chester isn’t like everybody else.
He is an elected representative.
That means, as the description states, he is elected to represent us.
And that is just where the problem lies he doesn’t always.
Mr Chester was elected to represent Gippsland and the National Party and neither agree with same sex marriage.
Mr Chester was all too happy to remind us of this fact before he changed his mind on the issue.
On several occasions he would quote the results of his surveys, which found the majority of the electorate didn’t want same sex marriage, while also stating this was the view of the party and his own personal view.
Then Mr Chester changed his position on this issue and changed his story.
He went from saying he represented the Nationals for Gippsland to “all Gippslanders … whether they are members of the Nationals, Greens, Labor, Liberal…” etc.
The problem is Mr Chester has abandoned the people who got him to the position he is in today.
I think it’s great for everybody to be represented politically, but the question is who is going to represent the majority?
There are many parties supporting same sex marriage, but the Nationals was one of the remaining elected parties to uphold traditional family and marriage.
While Mr Chester represented the Nationals’ values and policies, he represented the majority of Gippslanders.
He gave us a voice in parliament.
Now that he has betrayed what his party stands for, he has left the majority without a voice and without a vote.
He has removed choice from the political landscape.
At next year’s election, who will that 66 per cent vote for that will reflect their views?
Labor has adopted a position of compulsory support for same sex marriage and Liberal is unable to field a candidate because of its Coalition agreement and even if it did it would have to preference Nationals.
Mr Chester cannot chop and change whenever he likes.
There is much more at stake than his own personal view.
And if Mr Chester can change his mind on Bronwyn Bishop and same sex marriage, what else is he going to change his mind on?
Same sex marriage was only one of many issues covered in his survey.
Others included the economy, agriculture, terrorism and more.
