The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Legislative Assembly election was held on 16 October 2004, a week after the Federal election. It was contested by 77 candidates from 9 political parties and 9 independents in 3 electorates—Brindabella (5 seats), Ginninderra (7 seats) and Molonglo (7 seats). Labor and the Liberals fielded seventeen candidates: 7 in Molonglo and 5 each in Brindabella and Ginninderra. The Greens fielded 7 candidates—3 in Molonglo and 2 each in Brindabella and Ginninderra—and the Democrats ran 2 candidates in each seat.

Background

The Labor Party, led by Jon Stanhope, won office in 2001 with 8 of the seventeen Legislative Assembly seats. The Liberal Party won 7 seats and lost office after 6 years in government. Several issues during Labor’s term in office were of potential significance in the 2004 poll:

These events led The Canberra Times to note on election eve that ‘the major parties are in all sorts of trouble’.⁽²⁾ Still, an opinion poll shortly before the election found forty three per cent of respondents could not nominate any policy area where the Government had failed.⁽³⁾

The campaign

State and territory election campaigns tend to be fought on the big ticket items of health and education. The 2004 ACT campaign was no exception.

The Liberal Party’s campaign focussed on the Labor government’s alleged neglect of the health system. It presented the electoral contest as ‘a simple choice’ between the government’s proposed construction of a $110 million prison, and the Liberal Party’s plan to redirect this money into the public hospital system. Liberals’ leader, Brendan Smyth, highlighted the increase in public hospital waiting lists from 3 488, when the Liberals left office in September 2001, to 4 698 at the end of July 2004. Smyth argued that ‘money has to be targeted at more beds and more operating theatres to ensure we get rid of bed block’.⁽⁴⁾ The Liberals’ pledged to build four new operating theatres and to fund a special surgical team ‘to reduce elective surgery waiting lists by thirty per cent in the first year’.⁽⁵⁾ The Liberals’ campaign slogan was ‘Vote as if your life depended on it’.

The Labor Party’s campaign employed the slogan ‘Getting on with the job’. Jon Stanhope’s campaign launch contrasted the government’s ‘responsible, considered and carefully costed election platform’, with the Liberals’ proposals which ‘would blow the projected budget surplus six times over’.⁽⁶⁾ Stanhope argued that his government was spending $161 million more annually on the health system than was spent under the previous Liberal government.⁽⁷⁾ Labor’s campaign launch pledged eighty additional beds in public hospitals over the next 2 years, and an extra $9.75 million for elective surgery. Its overall campaign spending commitment in health was $53 million.

In education, the Liberals pledged optional separate core curriculum subject classes for boys, as well as a recruitment drive for male teachers.⁽⁸⁾ Labor promised $12 million for high school education ‘to increase the focus on pastoral care … and student welfare’—part of a $48 million spending increase in education.⁽⁹⁾

Campaign tactics

As with the federal contest, the ACT election campaign relied heavily on television and brochure advertisements.  The overlap of the federal campaign meant voter fatigue was a potential difficulty for ACT candidates in delivering their messages. Many Liberal candidates ran their own television advertisements, supported by flyers distributed by mail and in person. Labor’s candidates also ran intensive letterbox drops, although the Party’s television advertisements focussed on the government’s achievements under Chief Minister Stanhope. Of particular note was the campaign of the former Australian Hotels Association Executive Director Richard Mulcahy. Mulcahy sent pre-recorded phone messages to 17 500 voters on the Friday night before election day. The messages—authorised by the Canberra Liberals’ divisional office—were part of Mulcahy’s big-spending campaign, which also included cinema advertisements. The Canberra Times noted, ‘it seems unlikely that any candidate, in any party, put in anything like the effort and money into the campaign as Richard Mulcahy did’.⁽¹⁰⁾

The result

The Stanhope Labor government was returned with 9 of the seventeen seats in the Legislative Assembly to form the ACT’s first majority government since the collapse of the alliance government in 1991. The Liberals retained 7 seats, the Greens retained a seat in Molonglo, while the sitting Democrat and Independent Members both lost their seats (see Table).

Table

	Seats	Votes (%)	Swing (%)
Labor Party	9 (+1)	46.8	+5.1
Liberal Party	7 (-)	34.8	+3.2
ACT Greens	1 (-)	9.3	+0.2
Democrats	0 (-1)	2.2	-5.8
Other	0 (-1)	6.9	0.5

 

 

 

 

The 2004 ACT election confirmed the benefit of incumbency as all major party incumbents were returned. The election also continued the trend over the six elections since self-government of the major parties increasing their vote. In the 1998 election, the major parties won sixty three per cent of the vote and thirteen of the seventeen seats. In 2004, the major parties won eighty two per cent of the vote and all bar 1 seat (see Table).

The Democrats were the major losers in the election. The loss of its Ginninderra seat matched its poor performance in the federal election. A Canberra Times editorial on Sunday 17 October commented:

Labor’s good result is partly a result of the predictable collapse in the Democrat vote … and also a reflection of steady and cautious, if rather bland and diffident Labor administration. ⁽¹¹⁾

The re-election of key government ministers in spite of perceived policy failings was explained by an editorial in terms of the Hare Clark system’s focus on personalities; ‘It is just as likely that the votes were as much judgements about the individuals on offer as on their specific policies’.⁽¹²⁾ Journalist Crispin Hull noted that Stanhope’s shouldering of blame after the fires ‘probably earned him a lot of support’.⁽¹³⁾ His bravery was also noted. The Gungahlin Drive controversy was not significant in the campaign. The ACT Labor Party won support for its environment policy from the Conservation Council and the Planning Minister was comfortably re-elected.⁽¹⁴⁾ The Greens did not meet their pre-election aspirations of three of four seats.

Majority government in the ACT is unlikely to have great impact. Much of the government’s legislation was passed in the previous Assembly with the negotiated support of the Greens and the Democrats. Labor’s majority may increase public pressure for action to reform the public hospital system and community expectations for a more decisive style of governance.

ACT Legislative Assemblies are appointed for fixed four-year terms. The newly elected government will hold power until the third weekend of October 2008.

Electronic voting

One of the most interesting aspects of recent ACT elections is the emerging use of electronic voting. It was trialled by the ACT Electoral Commission in the 2001 ACT election and again in 2004.⁽¹⁵⁾ Voters are given a paper barcode, which when swiped, brings up a ballot paper for the required electorate.⁽¹⁶⁾ Paper votes are transferred to computer and combined with the electronic votes before the computer program distributes the preferences. The advantage of the electronic option is that at the close of polls at 6 pm, a sizeable proportion of the votes are instantly available. In the 2004 ACT election, with electronic voting used in 8 polling booths, the result of around 27 000 votes (twelve per cent) was available at the close of polls.⁽¹⁷⁾ Despite criticism that electronic voting does not leave a paper trail, ACT Electoral Commissioner Phil Green said it had worked well.

Endnotes

1. R. Campbell, ‘Final bid by save the ridge to stop road’, Canberra Times, 28 September 2004, p. 3.
2. C. Hull, ‘Swing in Labor’s roundabout’, Canberra Times, 13 October 2004, p. 17.
3. B. Doherty, ‘Health top of voters’ list’, Canberra Times, 15 October 2004, p. 5.
4. ibid.
5. ‘Fixing our hospitals’, Policy Statement 2004, Canberra Liberals, p. 1.
6. J. Stanhope, ACT Election Campaign Launch Speech, Australian Labor Party, 11 October 2004.
7. ibid.
8. ‘Boys’ education: Creating a more supportive learning environment’, Policy Statement 2004, Canberra Liberals. 
9. S. Hannaford, ‘Where the four major parties stand’, Canberra Times, 15 October 2004, p. 20.
10. Editorial, ‘Changing vision’, Canberra Sunday Times, 17 October 2004, p. 40.
11. ibid.
12. Editorial, ‘ACT vote sends no big signals’, The Canberra Times, 18 October 2004, p. 10.
13. C. Hull, ‘Stanhope’s passion has won him a majority government and a rise in expectations’, Canberra Times, 17 October 2004, p. 2.
14. B. Doherty, ‘ALP wins backing for green policy’, Canberra Times, 16 October 2004, p. 7.
15. See L. Manthorpe, ‘Electronic voting in the 2001 ACT election’, Research Note, no. 16, Parliamentary Library, 18 June 2002.
16. D. Landon, ‘Electronic voting again on trial in ACT election’, Canberra Times, 1 October 2004, p. 4.
17. P. Malone, ‘Electronic votes will be good early guide to results’, Canberra Times, 15 October 2004, p. 20.