The results of the Canberra Times Datacol poll during the week show us that we will have to get used to minority governments in the ACT and a higher-than-average level support for independents than elsewhere in Australia.
This need be no bad thing. Indeed, looking back over the three years there have been some major pluses with minority government. In a word, it has meant a clear separation between the legislative function of government and the executive function and it has meant the executive has had to be genuinely accountable to the Parliament.
This has been evidenced in several ways. Numerous small changes to government legislation, often for the better, have been passed that would otherwise have been squashed by a government rubber-stamp treatment of the Assembly. A range of non-government legislation that would otherwise have been lost causes have at least been discussed if not passed. And one minister has been held accountable to the Assembly in a true Westminster way that Federal and other-state experience suggests would not have happened otherwise. Wayne Berry was held accountable for his misstatements to the Assembly over Vitab.
That said, there is more to good government than having afew independents. The crucial question is the quality of both the independents and the candidates for the major parties.
The opinion poll suggests an underlying dissatisfaction with the way the government has dealt with some of the issues and no faith that the Liberals will do any better with land-use and planning issues, though they might do better in health.
The critical point is that the Hare-Clark system empowers voters to be selective about the candidates of the major parties and that voter sentiment suggests room for several independents. It is therefore important than in the next five months people take an active interest in the way candidates perform because the people of the ACT will have to deal with the consequences in the next three years. It puts a special responsibility on the media, too.
In the past two elections independents and candidates of the major parties of variable quality have snuck in _ some good, some bad some mediocre.
To poll showed a continuing support for voting for independents, even if they were not always identified. It also showed a large percentage of undecided. The polls before previous elections showed the same thing. And the resulting elections showed a tendency for the undecided to stay away from the major parties, unlike federal and other-state experience.
The short ACT electoral history shows that a lot of the independent voting is centred around planning and development. At the state and local level, of course, it is often the issue because it defines the way we live and the rates we pay. State and local government history in Australia is rife with examples of the central role that land-use plays in the political fortunes of those responsible for it.
In the first ACT election the Residents Rally was founded on it, even if the Rally later badly miscued. In the second election Michael Moore retained his seat on the strength of it and brought Helen Szuty in on his apron strings.
This time the issue is again up for grabs. The poll showed widespread dissatisfaction, but no belief the Liberals would do it better. It is ripe for independents. The important thing is to ensure they are not opportunists, but genuine.
Surprisingly the Government has therefore not lost much on the issue. The poll indicates that the Minister for Planning, Bill Wood, has been unscathed by dissatisfaction on the area of his portfolio. He topped Brindabella with a score of 54 per cent of Labor voters’ support in defiance of Labor’s ticket which has him third.
Wood avoided standing in Molonglo where the issue is hotter. He has managed to steer community anger to his bureaucrats and to a lesser extent his colleague David Lamont who headed the Assembly’s planning committee and had the task of attempting to fix the draft territory plan which he only partially managed.
When planning hit the Brindabella electorate with mushrooming dual occupancies in Banks the independent ACT Planning Authority for the first time used the “”qualitative” requirements in the plan to knock them on the head permanently. Anti-infill residents in other electorates will no doubt be jealous.
The result, according to the polling, is that Mr Wood has the least “”turn-off” factor of any off his colleagues with a deliciously low 2 per cent for respondents choice as last candidate.
It is certainly good politics. The factionless Wood has defied the party machine which put both Andrew Whitecross of the left and Annette Ellis of the right ahead of him on the “”how-to-vote ticket”.
Otherwise the poll shows a remarkable turnaround in Liberal fortunes. It must surely be put down to the Carnell factor. Her predecessor as leader Trevor Kaine carries a 22 per cent “”turn-off” factor in Brindabella. Her pursuit of health and ability to get staff capable of pursuing things like Vitab and budgetary failings also show through in the polls.
The personal comfort for Chief Minister Rosemary Follett in her several point loss in support must be that she did not so much loose the support but that the reinvigorated Opposition gained it.
The test for the Liberals in the ACT will be whether they can shake off the ideologically natural pro-Labor anti-Liberal nature of the electorate by successfully running a pragmatic campaign around the theme: “”We can run the city better.”
That will be a difficult task. My guess from the history and last poll is that several independents will hold the balance and that right now, Moore aside, we have no idea whose those independents will be.