Anyone thinking that a plebiscite on the Gay Marriage is a good idea should read the report by the accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, who beg to disagree. Before you do so, you should know that PwC won the absurd Australia’s 2015 employer of the year award for workplace support for LGBTIQA people. Then, if you are like me, after spending an hour annoying your neighbours with loud, uproarous laughter, you will pick yourself up off the floor, pull yourself together and look for similar absurdities in the report itself. And you won’t be disappointed.

Firstly, according to PwC (ABC News, 14 March), there is the estimated $438 million cost the taxpayer will have to fork out for the loss of productivity and the actual cost of running of the nationwide campaign itself.
So far, so good. Seems totally legitimate points to raise.

Then reading a little bit further on down you find ample evidence of the type of absurdity; more a sort of lunacy, come to think of it, that would be expected of any company being awarded such an absurdly stupid title. For the PwC report states that the estimated $425 million plebiscite cost doesn’t end there. There is the small matter of therapy.

Therapy for who?
Therapy for Gays and Lesbians. $20 million extra, in fact, say PwC, to fund the therapeutic costs involved in compensating Gays and Lesbians for all the mental health and well-being issues that they are bound to suffer as a result “of the stress and the public nature of the plebiscite.” In other words, Gays and Lesbians are going to need serious therapy if people are allowed to publicly discuss whether they should be allowed to get married or not. Unlike Oscar Wilde, being talked about will be far worse for some gays than not being talked about. So the tax-payer will have to pick up the tab for that too.

Therefore, according to LGBTIQA-friendly PwC, there should be no vote. The cost will be too great. Like many other things in our multi-cultural, rainbow, quasi-totalitarian country, then, we should have no say in the matter. And of course the thought of this is bound to have The Green and Gay Gestapo smacking their lips and rubbing their hands together in glee.

I wonder if PwC have thought about the other side of the coin? Have they thought of the costs involved in a sizeable portion of the population going into therapy if they were to have gay-marriage foisted on them? Should the tax-payer have to fork out for that too?