20 May 2019

So, what happened to the Dump Zed campaign?

| Genevieve Jacobs
Join the conversation

Zed Seselja withstood a strong campaign from Unions ACT and a well funded independent candidate. Photo: George Tsotsos.

After a lot of sound and fury, the end result for the much ballyhooed ACT Senate race turns out to be …nothing new. At the time of writing, Katy Gallagher has been easily re-elected and Senator Zed Seselja is within spitting distance of his required quota as counting continues.

So what happened to the Dump Zed campaign and to independent candidate Anthony Pesec? Months ago, local journalists were briefed on Unions ACT polling by Reachtel indicating a major drop in support for Seselja. The proposition was that there was momentum for change and that progressive Canberra voters were ready to toss out the notably conservative senator.

While the Greens ran a strong campaign for candidate Penny Kyburz, hopes centred on pro-climate change businessman Anthony Pesec. Although pre-polls and below the line votes are still in the mix and Pesec cleared the 4 per cent vote barrier for electoral funding, he’s garnered just over 7,600 votes at this stage or .15 of a quota and his election is therefore impossible.

Pesec campaign chief and candidate Gary Kent says that confusion over the Senate ballot may have been one factor: Pesec and Kent were grouped below the line but the lack of a name in the box above the line appears to have muddled many would-be voters.

Senate candidate Anthony Pesec failed to make a substantial dint in Zed Seselja’s vote. Photo: George Tsotsos.

“We understand that the AEC is taking these concerns seriously and will monitor any unusual trends in regard to Anthony’s’s ballot papers when counting for the Senate begins again,” Mr Kent said.

But he concedes that the idea of an independent toppling the Liberal candidate was “always an uphill battle”. He says that “Anthony ran an excellent campaign but did not have the opportunity to demonstrate his qualifications for the position in an electorate the size of three federal electorates.

“Independents probably need to start months or years beforehand to build recognition. There’s definitely resistance in the population against voting independent and we were up against a ruthless party machine in the Liberals with full-time staffers working around the clock with taxpayer funding.” Mr Kent said that outside RiotACT and ABC Radio, Pesec also struggled to access other mainstream local media.

The ANU’s Emeritus Professor John Warhurst says that whatever candidate a major party puts up, “even if it’s someone out of kilter with the electorate” there will always be a “rusted-on group of people” who identify with a party and will always vote for them.

Only a landslide against a major party is likely to put the ACT’s second Senate seat up for grab, Warhurst says. “There were lots of factors working against Zed with a pro-climate change centrist independent, a strong Green campaign, Unions ACT and Get up. The only thing that was missing was a very strong anti-government vote across the nation and you can’t unseat Zed without that.”

Warhurst says that while it might seem logical for the ACT to have a Liberal senator in the mould of Margaret Reid or Gary Humphries, or former chief minister Kate Carnell, the battleground is inside the party, not among the ordinary voters.

“The fact is, Zed Seselja represents the majority view within the local Liberal party. Pre-selection is where the action is. Around the country, the Senate is determined by the pre-selectors. If you’re on top of the list, you will get in.”

He described Senator Seselja’s campaign strategy as defiant in the face of strong dislike in many quarters of the community. “He’s got a memorable name and he doesn’t step away from that. You could say he brazens it out,” Professor Warhurst said.

Alex White from Unions ACT says the Dump Zed campaign “had a material impact on Zed’s vote. Looking at the current count, the Liberal Senate vote is considerably below the Liberal lower-house vote, both in the raw number of votes and percentage terms”.

He disputes that moderate Liberals stayed loyal to Zed, noting “the -3 per cent swing against Zed and the increase in the Greens vote, the independent vote and Labor’s vote. It’s notable too that Zed’s other campaign, in Warringah for Tony Abbott, saw a massive swing against the Liberals”.


Join the conversation

All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments

Pesec was funded by Malcolm Turnbull’s son. It was always just about the dumping of Malcolm Turnbull and another revenge campaign – just like the failed effort by Julia Banks to unseat Greg Hunt.

Capital Retro8:44 am 22 May 19

I am greatly impressed with the common sense contributions of Ray Atkin on this thread.

HiddenDragon6:24 pm 21 May 19

Given the national result on Saturday, it’s probably just as well that Canberra didn’t give a re-elected LNP government another reason to see it as enemy-occupied territory.

If the leadership and policy planets eventually align for Labor nationally, there might be a chance of both ACT Senate seats being non-Labor, but it would still be a miracle of sorts, and would require a marked departure from the straight-from-central-casting candidate offerings locally from Labor and the Greens.

Once again the “progressives” claimed that Zed would lose.

Once again they were woefully wrong.

It was ever thus.

A Nonny Mouse6:59 pm 23 May 19

I think various non-climate science denying, non-hard right liberal, non-automatically Liberal voting groups and progressives just said ‘Zed could lose’, not ‘would lose’. There were grounds for hope, but I don’t think anyone claimed certainty.

What happened was people who support him either don’t bother commenting in echo chambers, or when they do, their comments aren’t published.

Malcolm Roxburgh10:05 pm 20 May 19

The ACT has elected 3 house of rep seats in opposition. It is going to be a tight 3 years Canberra.

Peter Wilson7:05 pm 20 May 19

The re-election of Seselja should be considered a travesty irrespective of your individual political persuasion. He has taken our votes that put him in the senate and then defied our wishes on a raft of different issues to vote against our desires or best interests. The denial of territory rights and marriage equality issues alone should be grounds for sacking as our representative. He is a vote thief and should be punished accordingly.

That sounds a lot like Andrew Barr. A hypocrite more interested in his own future than the future of Canberra. Who ignores his party’s own report recommending against light rail instead squandering tax payers’ money to replace an existing bus route with light rail just so he can get the Green vote. Who continually pushes his own minority agendas such as LGBT issues, instead of focussing on issues that would improve the life of the majority of Canberrans such as supporting families, hospitals, and local businesses. We already know from Andrew Barr’s history as Treasurer that he is financially inept, and his frivolous poorly targeted spending is creating agony across the Canberra community.

Barr was quite confident Labor would stroll in with a sizeable majority, said so late last week: arrogant, inconsiderate and poor value for money.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.