24 August 2010

Why isn’t Canberra a Marginal Seat?

| Noezis
Join the conversation
58

Just to open debate up and in an effort to continue flogging a dead horse. I want to know why Canberra isn’t a marginal seat?

Being a safe Labor seat means that we cannot take advantage of being invited to the Budget Banquet, instead we are relegated to taking the scraps. Canberra is seen as a safe seat and as such I believe there is not much effort made by the Federal government or the opposition to win over Canberra’s voters at each Federal Election, nor are there any big wins during budget time.

As a quick example during the current election Labor is looking to cut spending in Canberra’s public service in a variety of areas and to the tune of $532.5 million dollars, whilst offering $26.92 million in the form of a GP super clinic and affordable housing.

The Libs are offering $1.05 million in funding for graffiti clean up, the Aboriginal Landkeepers Program and to the RSPCA, whilst reducing the APS by 12,000 and reducing funding for ICT project by $447.5 million.

To keep the pollies on their toes wouldn’t it make sense to swing our vote.

[ED – on the other hand if you add up every ACT based public servant and government employed contractor that’s a lot of government money pumped into this town]

Join the conversation

58
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

“One definition of intelligence is recognising that nothing in this world is really right or wrong. It is all based on our particular judgement, based on our unique beliefs we have taken on. An intelligent person is someone who can step out of judgement mode, and become curious to understand different points of view.”

Absolutely hilarious.

“nothing in this world is right or wrong”

Lordy-me, we do share this planet with some fruitcakesm, don’t we…..?

I noticed the radio tonight was all abuzz with news about more bodies in Belanglo.

“LET’S ALL STEP OUT OF JUDGMNET MODE AND BECOME CURIOUS TO UNDERSTAND IVAN MILAT’S POINT OF VIEW”.

Personally, I would like to personally assist Ivan Milat in escaping from gaol….but that’s just me….

Bloody hell, if you want to live in a marginal seat…
Eden-Monaro is just a few commutable kms down the road.

Ah, but you’re a Canberra person. Everything must come to you. Sorry.

Tetranitrate4:16 pm 26 Aug 10

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Deckard said :

Remember that Brendan Smyth was voted in the when we had the bi-election for Canberra while Keating was prime minister. So we do occasionally change our minds. Although Smyth was voted straight out again when it meant something in the general election.

There were some very specific circumstances to that election; including an appalingly run ALP campaign, a federal govt that was well and truly on the nose. no possible change of government stemming from a change in the seat and the most visous push-polling push-polling by the Liberal Party under the tutelage of Andrew Robb. It was an absolute anomaly.

Not to mention that the sitting member had been forced due to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_rorts_affair

So basically:
-when the sitting member resigns from parliament due to a ministerial scandal
-when it’s a bielection that can’t change the government, only send a message
-when labor is widely unpopular
and when labor screws up the campaign…
THEN Canberra will vote for someone else.

…and then switch right back at the soonest possible opportunity.

colourful sydney racing identity10:54 am 26 Aug 10

Deckard said :

Remember that Brendan Smyth was voted in the when we had the bi-election for Canberra while Keating was prime minister. So we do occasionally change our minds. Although Smyth was voted straight out again when it meant something in the general election.

There were some very specific circumstances to that election; including an appalingly run ALP campaign, a federal govt that was well and truly on the nose. no possible change of government stemming from a change in the seat and the most visous push-polling push-polling by the Liberal Party under the tutelage of Andrew Robb. It was an absolute anomaly.

sepi said :

Canberrans do seem to love a well known candidate – eg Brendan Smyth, Gary Humpphries (also started as an MLA), and the footballers we have had as MLAs.

Could be wrong, but I didn’t think Brendan had been in the Legislative Assembly prior to election to the House of Reps.

Canberrans do seem to love a well known candidate – eg Brendan Smyth, Gary Humpphries (also started as an MLA), and the footballers we have had as MLAs.

Could be a future career for Magnet MArt man.

Remember that Brendan Smyth was voted in the when we had the bi-election for Canberra while Keating was prime minister. So we do occasionally change our minds. Although Smyth was voted straight out again when it meant something in the general election.

justin heywood6:39 pm 25 Aug 10

smilesr said :

Isn’t it because Canberra has a higher than average rate of employee to employer ratio (due to the APS), less entrepreneurs and business owners and hence voting for the union-affiliated Labor party rather than the business-friendly capitalist liberals?

Good point

Isn’t it because Canberra has a higher than average rate of employee to employer ratio (due to the APS), less entrepreneurs and business owners and hence voting for the union-affiliated Labor party rather than the business-friendly capitalist liberals?

The Traineediplomat4:38 pm 25 Aug 10

I think in the end it’s a range of factors that can be tied to a ‘slightly’ younger than average population, more tertiary educated and more public servants are ‘more likely’ to vote ALP/Left of centre as their perceived core values are more in line with those traits.

I recall reading the ‘e-vote’ they did for 15-17 year olds that had something like 40 seats ALP, 40 seats Liberal, 30 seats green…

ah the ideals of youth….

The Traineediplomat4:34 pm 25 Aug 10

Ahhh ACT – Our total estimated population on 17 Feb 2009 (last AEC calc) was 344,744. As the Quota calculated is 144,497 (population of states / (senators of states *2)) then we are entitled to 2.38 seats. This of course is rounded down.

If the ACT had a boom in population to get our quota up to 2.51 we would get three seats, as we did for that 3 year period…those were the days.

Tasmania has a quota of 3.45, but is guaranteed 5 seats under the Constitution…

justin heywood1:26 pm 25 Aug 10

Aurelius said :

A lot of this thread seems to be people looking at the way the 200,000-odd electors in the ACT vote and asking “Why don’t they vote the way I want them to?”
There’s 200,000 of them. That they choose who to vote according to their own opinions is hardly any great surprise, is it?

Oh really Aurerlius? (always wanted to say that). The OP asked a legitimate question and received an interesting range of answers (including yours at #17). If the swinging seats get all the booty, why don’t we swing? The claim at #11 that ‘anyone who isn’t left of centre is stupid’ is the only one I can see that supports your post.

A common belief of half-smart people is that others who don’t share their views must be stupid or ignorant. A moment’s introspection would detect the error in their logic.

A lot of this thread seems to be people looking at the way the 200,000-odd electors in the ACT vote and asking “Why don’t they vote the way I want them to?”
There’s 200,000 of them. That they choose who to vote according to their own opinions is hardly any great surprise, is it?

Queanbeyan is in a marginal seat. It hasn’t done them any good, it’s still a s#!t hole. They just get an extra road every few years.

It was Socialist Alliance, wasn’t it?

Oh that’s right, their traditional supporters are now handing out material for the Greens 🙂

georgesgenitals9:48 am 25 Aug 10

johnboy said :

Shame the Socialist Alternative couldn’t be bothered running one.

There’s a socialist alternative?

nevermind the fact we’re not a marginal voting zone – how about the fact we only get 2 MPs for our 350K population when tasmania (as an example) gets 5 MPs for their 500k population. we should have at least 1 more MP representing us. yes yes i know it’s ostensibly as we are a territory rather than a state – but seriously can someone explain to me any real reason other than that for this inequity??

Tasmania is an input to federation, Canberra is an output.

On the other hand you can go down to Kingston on wednesday night of a sitting week and bend the ear of any number of MPs.

As for the above Q on marginality, it’s based on two party preferred, not first preference. As Andrew Wilkie is showing in (*cough*) Tasmania you can be a long way behind on first preferences and still win if the 2pp comes back to you.

shaneb said :

Of course, if you actually at the (soft) science you will see that there is a coloration between higher “intelligence” and liberalism. High “intelligence” is also strongly associated with atheism, sexual exclusivity (for men), and weakly associated with vegetarianism and many other lifestyle choices.

Well that’s even more confusing, when you consider that the Liberal Party is a non-liberal party!

Seriously though, I thought marginality could still be achieved with preferences going to Labor; isn’t marginality only measured on the primary vote?

johnboy said :

There’s a major difference between grandstanding and hard work.

So true. Kate Lundy has been the real workhorse for the ACT.

The Traineediplomat10:27 pm 24 Aug 10

Just done a quick check on my own post. In 2007 in the ACT, Liberal Voters were most likely to vote above the line in the Senate for whatever reason with 92.4% of total Liberal senate votes being above the line. Then Labor (86.3%), What Women Want (71.1%), LDP (67.9%), Democrats (65.1%), Climate Change Coalition (63.7%), Greens (63.7%) and Nuclear Disarmanent Party Australia at the least likely to vote above the line with 58.3%.

Interesting…or not…..

troll-sniffer said :

A lower percentage of bogans and catholics means that the relative IQ is higher. … Sorry if this offends the dumb liberal voters… nah I’m not.

Of course, if you actually at the (soft) science you will see that there is a coloration between higher “intelligence” and liberalism. High “intelligence” is also strongly associated with atheism, sexual exclusivity (for men), and weakly associated with vegetarianism and many other lifestyle choices.

FWIW I voted Liberal after the Greens but only because it is a safe Labor seat.

The Traineediplomat9:50 pm 24 Aug 10

Yes if/when Gary Humphries retires, I would assume that a new #1 Liberal Senate Candidate will find it hard to maintain the personal vote he gets/got…

whitelaughter7:57 pm 24 Aug 10

Deref said :

Wouldn’t it be nice to see a federal pollie actually standing up for the national capital.

He has on occasion: one of the advantages of being in Opposition:
http://www.openaustralia.org/senator/gary_humphries/act

Kate Lundy has also made a few token efforts, though hamstrung by being govt:
http://www.openaustralia.org/senator/kate_lundy/act

But yeah, being marginal would do us the world of good. Given we are surrounded by marginal seats, I guess everyone who realises this has been crossing the border.

Gungahlin Al5:50 pm 24 Aug 10

johnboy said :

There’s a major difference between grandstanding and hard work.

Indeed! And crossing the floor only when you know it will make no difference.

Pommy bastard5:28 pm 24 Aug 10

What Canberra needs is a viable alternative party, like this lot:

http://www.omrlp.com/

johnboy said :

It might have something to do with him being the ACT’s most hard working representative in parliament by a country mile.

Then we really are in deep do-do. Mind you, he did convince Little Johnny to stay away – we should be grateful for that.

Wouldn’t it be nice to see a federal pollie actually standing up for the national capital.

There’s a major difference between grandstanding and hard work.

The Traineediplomat said :

– Do you not understand proportional representation? Looking at the 2010 vote, there are 33% Liberal voters in the ACT, enough to get the one senate seat they require.

– Do you not study English as part of your diplomacy course? The question was “why”, not “how”. I well-understand the mechanics; it’s why anybody votes for him that’s got me stumped.

It might have something to do with him being the ACT’s most hard working representative in parliament by a country mile.

If Kevin Rudd’s socialist nephew had run here in Canberra, rather than against Gillard, I suspect he would have done relatively well …

The Traineediplomat4:39 pm 24 Aug 10

Safe Labor? Then why do we keep electing that oxygen thief, Humphries, just as we did his predecessor, Margaret Reid?

– Do you not understand proportional representation? Looking at the 2010 vote, there are 33% Liberal voters in the ACT, enough to get the one senate seat they require.

I say for the 2011 election, if the minority government doesn’t last, we put up a RiotACT sponsored party. Hmmm Canberra Independence Party (not Independents, INDEPENDENCE!!).. Kingdom of Canberra Party? Toorak-Blaxland Party?

justin heywood said :

There’s an alternative? Would that be the …..Socialist Alternative? Passy, is that you?

No, though I take it as a compliment.

There were Green, independent and Secular Party candidates. I’d have voted for the Sex Party if they’d run.

I’d love to see a viable left-wing party in Australia, but I’m not going to hold my breath.

In 1996, when the Liberals last came into govt federally, their public service cuts cut Canberra real estate prices by around 20-25%. And unemployment figures in the ACT took a hit at the same time. Why does Canberra tend to vote Labor ahead of Liberal? Because most voters understand that outcome.

Actually, quite a few young people enjoyed the propsect of being able to afford a house in 1996-2000. There’s a few wanna-be home buyers who wouldn’t mind seeing house prices plunge back to something reasonable. From memory (although I haven’t reviewed the data for a while) the unemployment rate overall didn’t take too much of a hit beyond what you would expect with a decline in Commonwealth tax receipts (we were a bit behind the rest of the country in those pre-GST days).

Whoever gets in takes the knife to the public service, it’s only a question of how they do it. On top of that, there is no disincentive to either major party – labor can do what it wants with no repurcussions, and we won’t put a Lib in the lower house, so there’s no point in the Libs doing anything.

If you want money spent in the ACT, you need to get rid of an ALP lower house MP and preferably replace them with an independent. A Green won’t do, because they are always happy to work with an ALP government before they even know the terms and conditions (eg the new Green from Melbourne) – this is the ‘a vote for green is a vote for labor’ thing. It’s about more than preferences.

colourful sydney racing identity4:06 pm 24 Aug 10

johnboy said :

Shame the Socialist Alternative couldn’t be bothered running one.

True that, surely someone will put their name under their banner next time? anyone? *coyote howls*

colourful sydney racing identity4:04 pm 24 Aug 10

Deref said :

Safe Labor? Then why do we keep electing that oxygen thief, Humphries, just as we did his predecessor, Margaret Reid?

Don’t misunderstand – I’d like nothing better than to see Canberra abandon both major parties, but for what’s supposed to be the most politically-aware electorate in Australia, we’re as regular as an All Bran junkie and we get precisely what we deserve as a result.

It is the way that the preferential system works when there are only two seats. The two major parties will share the spoils every time, they only need 1/3 of the votes to get elected.

justin heywood3:57 pm 24 Aug 10

Deref said :

….why do we keep voting for right wing parties (Liberal and Labor)?

There’s an alternative? Would that be the …..Socialist Alternative? Passy, is that you?

Shame the Socialist Alternative couldn’t be bothered running one.

Bosworth said :

hax said :

To keep the pollies on their toes wouldn’t it make sense to swing our vote.

I think we need some more options – who do you intend to swing to?

Canberra seems to be endlessly anti-liberal and voting for the greens is giving your preference to labor – not much of a ‘punishment’ if a swing to the greens gets labor back in at the end of the day, and time and time again whether they are actually serving us well or not. That’s not how it should work, and IMO it isn’t working for us.

That is not how it works. Every individual person chooses where their preferences go.

Yes and no. In the house of reps yes, you choose, in the senate if you vote below the line then again yes you choose, but if you vote above the line then the party you vote for can then decide where to send preferences to if they are over quota for a seat.

troll-sniffer said :

A lower percentage of bogans and catholics means that the relative IQ is higher. More intelligent people tend to have left of centre views and vote accordingly. quote]
Then why do we keep voting for right wing parties (Liberal and Labor)?

Safe Labor? Then why do we keep electing that oxygen thief, Humphries, just as we did his predecessor, Margaret Reid?

Don’t misunderstand – I’d like nothing better than to see Canberra abandon both major parties, but for what’s supposed to be the most politically-aware electorate in Australia, we’re as regular as an All Bran junkie and we get precisely what we deserve as a result.

In 1996, when the Liberals last came into govt federally, their public service cuts cut Canberra real estate prices by around 20-25%. And unemployment figures in the ACT took a hit at the same time.
Why does Canberra tend to vote Labor ahead of Liberal? Because most voters understand that outcome.

Diggety said :

troll-sniffer said :

A lower percentage of bogans and catholics means that the relative IQ is higher. More intelligent people tend to have left of centre views and vote accordingly. quote]

Usually a sign of intelligence in an individual is one who can avoid assumptions and provide evidence for their position, or rant as the case may be.

The reasoning for Labor dominance in the seat of Canberra is a little more complex and far from what you have stated.

And a little more complex than the average troll-sniffer can comprehend. Is there actually any point in a debate, when comments like those grace these pages.

One definition of intelligence is recognising that nothing in this world is really right or wrong. It is all based on our particular judgement, based on our unique beliefs we have taken on. An intelligent person is someone who can step out of judgement mode, and become curious to understand different points of view.

All progress in the history of mankind came about when someone suspended their belief of what they “knew to be right”, and became curious about something new that was unknown, or simply judged to be wrong or not possible at that point.

If you watched Four Corners last night, you might get an insight into why some people made the choice not to vote labour again. But before you jump back into judgement mode and down my throat, watch the program when it is re run in the coming days.

Just a suggestion.

Mark of Sydney3:00 pm 24 Aug 10

troll-sniffer said that ‘a lower percentage of bogans and catholics means that the relative IQ is higher.’

Except that according to the most recent figures I can quickly find on the ABS website, the ACT has the highest percentage of catholics of any state or territory — see http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/2f762f95845417aeca25706c00834efa/d82c7917c3363ac8ca2570ec00787e6d!OpenDocument

troll-sniffer said :

A lower percentage of bogans and catholics means that the relative IQ is higher. More intelligent people tend to have left of centre views and vote accordingly. quote]

Usually a sign of intelligence in an individual is one who can avoid assumptions and provide evidence for their position, or rant as the case may be.

The reasoning for Labor dominance in the seat of Canberra is a little more complex and far from what you have stated.

A bit of the pot calling the kettle black there, troll-sniffer.

justin heywood2:25 pm 24 Aug 10

troll-sniffer said :

A lower percentage of bogans and catholics means that the relative IQ [of Canberra voters] is higher.

..and the evidence for that piece of arrogant bigotry would be…..entirely in your own mind.

There IS evidence that older voters tend to become more conservative. Perhaps people lose intelligence as they get older -or maybe they just become wiser.

troll-sniffer2:09 pm 24 Aug 10

A lower percentage of bogans and catholics means that the relative IQ is higher. More intelligent people tend to have left of centre views and vote accordingly. Unfortunately for the Alan Jones crowd and other similar low brow sections of society, Canberra will probably retain a higher average level of thinking intelligence for the forseeable future, meaning that reactionary fools like Abbott will continue to be seen for what they really are and not attract our votes.

Sorry if this offends the dumb liberal voters… nah I’m not.

Is this where we suggest the option of “None of the Above”?

Can someone help me out here? I’m trying to figure out:

(a) which Greens used to be in Labor (to support #7 justin heywood’s claim that Greens are just the traditional left of the Labor party) and

(b) how a vote for the Greens turns into a vote for Labor. The Greens preferences in Canberra were to two Democrats, then Labor then an independent, then Liberal – so it’s just as true to say that a vote for Greens is a vote for Democrats or Liberal, and that’s all assuming you don’t vote by numbering every box below the line.

I’m all in favour of removing the requirement to number every box below the line, by the way. I’d prefer that my vote for Greens, Democrats, then Independents didn’t stand a chance in Hell of turning into a vote for Liberal or Labor.

Canberrans live like they reside in Toorak and vote like they live in Blaxland!

justin heywood1:31 pm 24 Aug 10

hax said :

We need a really good independent – imagine if we did this time around, we would be getting some special attention!

I agree. There does appear to be too many ‘rusted on’ Labor voters in this town. No matter how badly we are ignored Federally, no matter how hopeless local Labor is, a significant number of Canberrans seem unable to bring themselves to vote for the other side. (The Greens are pretty much just the traditional ‘left’ of the Labor Party, so they don’t count).

But people might be able to bring themselves to vote for a credible and charismatic independent, if one stepped forward.

Lets form a “Vote Marginal” lobby group 🙂

Doesn’t matter who you like or loathe, you vote for the number two person in your electorate regardless, with the intention of swinging the vote enough that we start to get some of that election time funding money coming in …

hax said :

To keep the pollies on their toes wouldn’t it make sense to swing our vote.

I think we need some more options – who do you intend to swing to?

Canberra seems to be endlessly anti-liberal and voting for the greens is giving your preference to labor – not much of a ‘punishment’ if a swing to the greens gets labor back in at the end of the day, and time and time again whether they are actually serving us well or not. That’s not how it should work, and IMO it isn’t working for us.

That is not how it works. Every individual person chooses where their preferences go.

hax, voting for the Greens isn’t giving your preference to Labor unless you also choose to give your preference to Labor.

Your preference distribution is entirely up to you. Voting “1. Green 2. Liberal” is perfectly cromulent.

To keep the pollies on their toes wouldn’t it make sense to swing our vote.

I think we need some more options – who do you intend to swing to?

Canberra seems to be endlessly anti-liberal and voting for the greens is giving your preference to labor – not much of a ‘punishment’ if a swing to the greens gets labor back in at the end of the day, and time and time again whether they are actually serving us well or not. That’s not how it should work, and IMO it isn’t working for us.

We need a really good independent – imagine if we did this time around, we would be getting some special attention!

To keep the pollies on their toes wouldn’t it make sense to swing our vote.

I think the major parties have been working towards this aim for a while now.

Inappropriate12:27 pm 24 Aug 10

The demographic of Canberra and Frasier is working families, with 19% of voters being public servants; working families tend to be non-conservative voters.

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.