The fate of the marriage equality plebiscite lies in the hands of the Labor party.
On Friday, Greens leader Richard Di Natale said his party would definitely vote against the plebiscite. The announcement makes the government's job of finding the numbers to pass the plebiscite through the senate a little more more difficult.
Currently, the government looks to have 37 votes, and needs 39. With the Greens gone, their two options for getting over the line are Labor, who have heavily criticised the public vote, and Nick Xenophon, who told the ABC "right now, it's a no" earlier this week.
On one hand, Labor has said time and time again that the plebiscite will be an unnecessary, costly, and potentially harmful way of resolving the issue.
On the other, the government has made it very clear that if the plebiscite is blocked, there won't be same-sex marriage in this term of parliament. So...
* If the plebiscite is carried, obviously.
"But wait!" I hear you say. Aren't there more than two options?
Well, yes. What marriage equality advocates would *really* like to see is the plebiscite blocked in the senate and a free vote held in parliament instead – but this scenario is extremely unlikely.
After taking the plebiscite policy to the election and winning a (slim) mandate, Turnbull cannot go back on his word without risking his job, and the wrath of the conservative right wing of his party.
The plebiscite could also, of course, go ahead and fail – potentially putting marriage equality off the agenda for a far longer stretch than the next three years. Polling suggests a solid victory for "yes", but given Australia's paltry record when it comes to referendums, anything could happen.
What would you rather?