The ACT will be one of the most interesting parts of the federal election.
In the past, it has been dismissed as boring because it has almost invariably returned Labor members.
An independent held the sole ACT seat from 1949 to 1951 and a Liberal held Canberra from 1975 to 1980.
Last year’s by-election in the seat of Canberra … caused by the resignation of Ros Kelly … has changed that. Brendan Smyth won the seat for the Liberals with the largest swing in by-election history at 17 per cent.
Further there has been a redistribution. There were two seats called Canberra (south of the lake) and Fraser (north of the lake). There are now three Fraser (Belconnen), Namadgi (Tuggeranong) and Canberra (old centre).
Namadgi has been carved out of the old Canberra seat. So Smyth is standing for Namadgi. Further, he lives in Tuggeranong.
What does Smyth’s victory mean? Was it a reaction against Ros Kelly leaving early? A refusal by many electors to vote for the Labor candidate Sue Robinson as an anti-Robinson vote rather than an anti-Labor one? Was it a typical by-election kick in the pants for a government? Was it an especially anti-Keating vote? Or a combination.
I think we can discount the notion that it was a We Love Brendan vote.
Will he keep the seat? What does it mean for the other two ACT seats.
Leaving aside the by-election, the Electoral Commission has published its estimate of the two-party-preferred vote in the three ACT seats following the redistribution, based on the 1993 result.
Namadgi is 60.8 per cent ALP and 39.2 per cent Liberal; Fraser is 62.1- 37.9 and Canberra is 60.8-39.2. In 1993 the figures were: Fraser 62.8 – 37.2 and Canberra 59.6 – 40.4.
The ACT total in both cases is 61.2 -38.8. Notionally the redistribution converts one safe Labor and one fairly safe Labor seats in 1993 (ignoring the by-election) to three safe Labor seats for the next election.
However, the by-election must change that. There is a clear advantage to a sitting Member, even one who has been on the scene for only a year. Also there is a general reluctance for people to admit they were wrong a year ago and change their mind.
Against that, Labor’s candidate is different, and much improved. Robinson was seen as a far left, party machine person. This time Labor is standing former MLA Annette Ellis. Ellis has done a lot of community spade work in Tuggeranong.
Further, this time Namadgi is being fought in a general election context. The typical by-election kick-in-the-pants factor is gone. This is for real. Also the interest-rates factor (very important in Tuggeranong) is not there.
Taking account of the by-election figures and the redistribution, Malcolm Mackerras’s 1996 Federal Election Guide (AGPS) puts Namadgi as requiring a 6.6 per cent swing to go to Labor; Canberra requiring a 7.4 per cent swing to go Liberal and Fraser requiring a 12 per cent swing to go Liberal.
In 1993 the Liberal policy was extremely anti-public sector and sounded in swing back to Labor from the 1990 result. One might expect, therefore, Labor to lose ground in the ACT this time.
However, it would be extremely unlikely to be enough to unseat John Langmore in Fraser and very unlikely to prevent Bob McMullan from taking Canberra (in fact the new seat) for Labor. McMullan is transferring from the Senate and has had to change his attention from matters of international trade to opening pool halls and kissing babies in the shopping centres of central Canberra.
Like Smyth, McMullan and Langmore are standing against unsuccessful Assembly candidates … Gwen Wilcox and Cheryl Hill respectively.
The real question is whether Namadgi will revert to Labor. Mackerras calls it as a very close seat with Smyth keeping it.
In favour of that theory are the demographics of the seat: marrieds with children. Unmarried young and the aged tend to prefer Labor. And perhaps there is an element of the working-class Tory in the Namadgi seat.
On the other hand, the Robinson, Kelly and by-election-lesson factors must have played a huge role in the by-election. They are now absent.
I would not be surprised if Labor got the seat back.