“Introducing five electorates with seven representatives in a 35 MLA Assembly would deliver a much more diverse representation and a wider range of views,” writes political columnist MICHAEL MOORE.

Is it time to modify how we do politics in the ACT? Or, will it mean leaping from the frying pan into the fire? 

One suggestion is an expansion of the ACT Assembly to 35 MLAs and another to introduce local councils. The goal must be the best interests of Canberrans. 

David Smith, the Federal Labor member for Bean in the south of the ACT, argued in a recent opinion article: “If our current arrangements are no longer providing the clear local voice and accountability that citizens deserve, we must have the confidence to acknowledge it and the courage to fix it”.

Most confronting is his suggestion that “a sensible starting point is a review by the federal parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories into the operation and effectiveness of the ACT Self-Government Act 1988”. 

No David! The last thing we need is more patronising overreach of the federal government, interfering again with the ACT.

Interference by the federal government regarding Volunteering Active Dying and with same-sex marriage had to be reversed after other Australian jurisdictions caught up with the ACT.

Abide by your own statement David Smith: “Ultimately, any decision belongs to the people of the ACT”. Leave the federal parliament and its committees out of the equation!

Mr Smith’s arguments draw the conclusion that if Canberra is to be successful, “stronger local representation, clearer accountability and closer connections between communities and their representatives are how we secure its future”.

Firstly, compared to other jurisdictions, Canberra is successful. Secondly, there are certainly advantages in expanding the size of the Legislative Assembly to give greater local representation. 

The current government has struggled to find competent ministers to cover the range of portfolios. At the same time, they have not had enough Labor MLAs to cover the extensive day-to-day work of Assembly committees. 

This pressure also means less time for reaching out to their constituents. David Smith argues “this weakens the connection between voters and decision-makers”.

He went on to explain: “At the 2024 election, voters elected the first crossbenchers from outside the established parties in more than two decades”. Excellent, this means broader representation.

Thomas Emerson and Fiona Carrick were elected following dissatisfaction of large parts of their electorates with the performance of the three major parties.

Mr Smith makes the point that “both campaigned squarely on stronger local representation… and closer connection between communities and those elected to serve them”.

This is just one aspect of the failure of the major parties before the election. No doubt, an increase of MLAs in the ACT Assembly would assist in improving the connection. As an aside, this argument was also put forward when the size of the Legislative Assembly increased from 17 to 25 MLAs just over a decade ago.

Two other arguments that are regularly raised include establishing local councils and changing to single-member electorates. 

Compared to Tasmania, we are extraordinarily under-governed. An alternative view is that the Tasmanians, with a population quite close to that of the ACT, are comparatively over-governed. They have a Legislative Assembly of 35 MLAs elected, like the ACT, under Hare-Clark.

The Tasmanian Legislative Council (or Upper House) has 15 members elected from single districts. Additionally, there are 12 senators compared to the ACT’s two senators as well as 29 local councils.

Compared to all states and the NT, the ACT is under-governed. However, failures in budgeting, allowing development to get out of control, the poor performance in health and education cannot be attributed to the lack of elected representatives.

Labor’s Trojan Horse in the arguments for change are the suggestion of single-member electorates.

In one of the responses to Mr Smith’s opinion piece, Catherine Rossiter points out “single-member electorates in a relatively homogeneous place like Canberra would probably deliver a huge majority for Labor, which would not be healthy”. 

She argues that the problem is that “we’ve already had a Labor government in office for far too long. They have become arrogant, entitled and do not listen to the community”.

Her solution is simple – vote for more independents.

Introducing five electorates with seven representatives in a 35 MLA Assembly would deliver a much more diverse representation and a wider range of views. Isn’t that the point of proportional representation?

Michael Moore is a former member of the ACT Legislative Assembly and an independent minister for health. He has been a political columnist with CityNews since 2006.

News all day, every day at CityNewsQBN.com.au.