Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Home loans made clear

Gungahlin sundered for 2012 in the electoral redistribution

By johnboy 29 September 2011 21

close shot

Elections ACT has announced their redistribution of electorates in the ACT for the 2012 election.

Crace and Palmerston are being shuffled into Ginninderra, further splitting Gungahlin. But the lunatic plan to split the Inner North along Northbourne Avenue with Turner, Lyneham and O’Connor smashed into Belconnen, has thankfully been consigned to the dustbin of history.

The Augmented Electoral Commission held a public hearing into the objections on 30 August 2011. After considering the objections the Augmented ACT Electoral Commission decided to alter the existing electoral boundaries by adopting the Redistribution Committee’s proposal to transfer the Gungahlin suburbs of Crace and Palmerston from the electorate of Molonglo to the electorate of Ginninderra. This change was made to ensure that each of the ACT’s three electorates will be within 5% of the enrolment quota at the time of the 2012 election. The electorate of Brindabella was not changed.

The redistribution of electoral boundaries will formally be completed by notification of an official instrument. A formal report will be tabled in the ACT Legislative Assembly.

UPDATE: The ABC’s Antony Green has opined that this will mean minimal changes.

electoral map for 2012

What’s Your opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
21 Responses to
Gungahlin sundered for 2012 in the electoral redistribution
Showing only Website comments
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
whitelaughter 8:18 pm 29 Sep 11

Bosworth said :

Also, why don’t we have one electorate with 17 members? That way the minor parties might have a chance. The Community alliance and Motorist Party miss out. They would have one seat each under this system in 2008. ‘local representation’ can be solved by the major parties assigning members to deal with local issues from specific areas

You’ve just answered your own question: a single electorate means fewer plum positions for the major parties. (Labor didn’t have the numbers to inflict self-government on us without bribing the Democrats, which is why we don’t have single member electorates. We were at least able to express our displeasure at the Democrats by keeping them out of the assembly).
Mind you, if the Greens and Liberals between them had a majority in the assembly, they could attempt to change to a single electorate – whether it would get through the Federal govt or not, don’t know. Maybe, at least after the next election! (I guess it depends on whether the preferences of the minor parties go mostly to Labor or the Liberals).

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | | |

Search across the site