Welcome to the Tally Room guide to the 2024 election for the Australian Capital Territory Legislative Assembly. This guide includes comprehensive coverage of each electorate’s history, geography, political situation and results of the 2020 election, as well as maps and tables showing those results.
The next election is due to be held on Saturday, 18 October.
There are profiles of all five ACT electorates. All five of these profiles are now unlocked for everyone to access.
These election guides are a big job and are only possible thanks to the support of my donors. You can sign up to support The Tally Room on Patreon for $5 or more per month to get access to all of my election guides and other benefits.
Table of contents:
Electorates
There are five electorates which cover the Australian Capital Territory. Each of these electorates elects five members of the Legislative Assembly. Guides have been prepared for all five electorates. Click the links below to view each guide:
You can also use the following map to click on any electorate, and then click through to the relevant guide.
Electoral system
The ACT Legislative Assembly is elected using the Hare-Clark system, which is a version of the Single Transferable Vote. Hare-Clark is also used to elect the Tasmanian House of Assembly.
The basics of the counting system are similar to the system used to elect the Senate, and the upper houses of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia. Each voter has a single vote. There is a quota, and any candidate who polls more than a quota distributes their surplus to other candidates. Once all surpluses have been distributed, candidates are knocked out from the bottom until the number of candidates remaining equals the number of seats left to be filled.
The details of how this system is implemented make it quite different to the system used to elect the Senate. Firstly, there is no above-the-line voting. This means that voters can only vote for individual candidates, and thus must also mark preferences for individuals. Secondly, there is no such thing as a party order. In the Senate, the party nominates a first candidate, a second candidate, and so forth, and they appear on the ballot in that order. In the ACT, different ballots show different candidates at the top of their party ticket.
This second difference, called Robson Rotation, weakens the power of the parties and strengthens the power of individual candidates. Votes cast for the party without any regard for an individual candidates are randomised between the candidates, so the candidate who can poll the most personal votes will be in the best position. It’s not unheard of for a sitting MP of one party to be defeated by another candidate of the same party.
In the past, the ACT was covered by one seven-member electorate and two five-member electorates. Since 2016, the ACT has been covered by five five-member electorates, each of which have a quota of approximately 16.7% to win a seat.
Redistribution
There were no electorates used for the first two ACT elections in 1989 and 1992.
In 1995, the new Hare-Clark system required electoral boundaries for the first time, and three electorates were created. The seven-member electorate of Molonglo covered central Canberra, Woden and Gungahlin. The five-member electorate of Brindabella covered Tuggeranong, and the five-member electorate of Ginninderra covered Belconnen.
There were minor redistributions in 2001, 2008 and 2012, but these electorates remained largely the same.
In 2014, the Legislative Assembly voted to expand its membership to 25, by creating five electorates, each represented by five members.
The subsequent redistribution kept the electorates of Brindabella and Ginninderra, although they shrunk in territory. Two new districts of Murrumbidgee (covering Weston Creek and Woden Valley) and Yerrabi (covering Gungahlin) were created. The central district of Molonglo was renamed Kurrajong, and contracted substantially to only cover the inner north, inner south and city centre of Canberra.
Redistributions prior to the 2020 election, and prior to the upcoming election, saw a trend of power shifting towards the northern suburbs of Canberra.
Prior to the 2020 election, Yerrabi contracted, with Ginninderra taking in more of the Belconnen district. These two districts were left untouched in the recent redistribution.
Amongst the other three districts, the trend saw southern electorates push north. Brindabella took in half of Kambah from Murrumbidgee for the 2020 election, and the other half for the 2024 election. Murrumbidgee then expanded north to take in parts of the inner south from Kurrajong: taking Deakin and Yarralumla first, and this time taking in Red Hill and Forrest.
You can read my summary of the recent redistribution here.
The following table summarises changes in the vote for the three main parties due to the redistribution.
| Pre-redistribution | Post-redistribution | |||||
| Electorate | Labor | Liberal | Greens | Labor | Liberal | Greens |
| Brindabella | 40.71 | 38.42 | 10.80 | 40.49 | 38.42 | 10.76 |
| Ginninderra | 40.00 | 26.73 | 12.51 | 40.00 | 26.73 | 12.51 |
| Kurrajong | 37.97 | 27.59 | 22.99 | 38.41 | 26.34 | 23.84 |
| Murrumbidgee | 36.06 | 35.57 | 11.73 | 35.65 | 35.96 | 11.80 |
| Yerrabi | 34.16 | 40.59 | 10.18 | 34.16 | 40.59 | 10.18 |
Political history
The ACT was granted self-government in 1989. An elected House of Assembly had previously existed from 1975 to 1986, but had only played an advisory role in ACT government.
The ACT Legislative Assembly was originally elected using party-list proportional representation in one ACT-wide electorate.
At the 1989 election, the ALP won five seats, the Liberal Party won four seats, and eight other seats were won by independent tickets: four seats to the Residents Rally, three seats to the No Self-Government Party, and one seat to the Abolish Self Government Coalition.
Following the election, the Labor Party formed a minority government led by Rosemary Follett. Six months later, the government was defeated, and Trevor Kaine led a minority Liberal government. Kaine governed until 1991, when a split in the Residents Rally led to Follett returning to power.
At the 1992 election, the ALP won eight seats, the Liberal Party won six, and three were won by independents. Follett’s minority Labor government governed for the entirety of the 1992-1995 term.
The electoral system was changed to the current system for the 1995 election. At that election the Liberal Party won seven seats, the ALP won six, the Greens won two, and two independents were elected. Kate Carnell formed a minority Liberal government with independent support. Carnell was re-elected in 1998, when one of the two Greens seats was lost to another conservative independent.
The ALP returned to power in 2001, when they formed a minority government led by Jon Stanhope. All three independents lost their seats, with one going to the Democrats and two going to Labor, putting Labor only one seat short of a majority.
Jon Stanhope won a second term in 2004, when Labor won a majority, with nine seats. The Liberal Party held seven seats and the Greens one.
At the 2008 election, the ALP lost two seats and the Liberal Party lost one, all of which went to the Greens. The ALP and the Greens formed an agreement to support a minority Labor government. Stanhope led the government until 2011, when he was succeeded as Chief Minister by Katy Gallagher.
At the 2012 election, both major parties gained seats at the expense of the Greens. Labor and Liberal both found themselves on eight seats each, with only one Green, Shane Rattenbury, surviving. Labor and the Greens again formed a government, this time with Rattenbury taking on a ministry.
In 2014, Gallagher stepped down as chief minister and was succeeded by Andrew Barr. Gallagher was appointed to the Senate in early 2015.
The Assembly was expanded from 17 seats to 25 seats in 2016. This was achieved by the creation of five five-member districts, replacing the previous three districts.
The 2016 election saw Labor win twelve seats, the Liberal Party win eleven, and the Greens won two seats. The Labor-Greens alliance was renewed after the 2016 election, with Rattenbury continuing to serve as a minister in the Labor-led government.
The 2020 election saw both major parties go backwards, with the Greens winning their biggest seat haul in ACT history. The Greens won six seats, alongside ten Labor and nine Liberals. The Labor-Greens government continued, now with multiple Greens ministers.
Contact
If you have a correction or an update for a single electorate page, feel free to post a comment. You can also send an email by using this form.
If you’d like me to include a candidate name or website link in my election guide, please check out my candidate information policy.
@Votante it will be hard for the Liberals to win anyway.
How things change…. this is a milder version of Washington dc… almost guaranteed alp.
I remember back in.1975. There was one Canberra. Lower house seat which was won.by chap named John Haslem for the liberal party. Don’t think this is possible now
@Mick the only federal seat they could win is Bean which they would likely win if they won a landslide.
The seat of Canberra was won by Liberal Brendan Smyth at a by-election in 1995 but Labor regained it in 1996 despite John Howard’s Coalition winning in a landslide. Smyth didn’t contest Canberra in 1996, instead he opted to contest the nearby seat of Namadgi, but failed to win.
But yes it was also won in 1975. Interestingly the 1975 election was not only the first and only federal election where the Liberals won the territorywide TPP vote in the ACT but also the first and only time any party has ever won a majority of the TPP vote in every state and territory.
The Northern Territory has shown that old governments that haven’t dealt with local issues and federal issues gets punished. I think the Liberals have a serious shot of pulling off a narrow victory given the cost of living and people seeming to Balme Labor plus the government here is 23 years old so there could be its time factor. Other reason was when the federal Labor is unpopular it usually hurts Labor the examples been in 1995 when Labor lost office and in 2012 where they had a near death experience. One thing for sure is that if I was a Liberal I would be feeling a lot more confident.
Things just got interesting.
Two days ago, it was reported in the Canberra Times that Vanessa Picker, an Independents for Canberra candidate for Brindabella, has said she will not support Andrew Barr’s Labor-Greens coalition to remain in power.
If she gets elected along with other independents perhaps they would prefer to support the Liberals under moderate Elizabeth Lee over the progressive coalition that has governed the ACT for seven terms. Labor has provided the Chief Minister of the ACT for 23 years (since 2001).
@NP but it wont matter the labor-greens coalition will continue i wonder how long the act is off a Greens-Labor coalition?
It will be another 2012 where the Liberals couldn’t overcome the ultra-progressive voters of Canberra. The Greens will likely make further gains and independents will only win seats off the Liberals.
Barr has been here for far too long, feel sorry for the ACT.
If a moderate like Elizabeth Lee cannot win the election then who will??? She is the best leader they have had since Kate Carnell who was the last Liberal to win government in the ACT.
Dutton won’t help the Canberra Liberals however.
The Canberra Liberals blew the 2012 election by keeping right-winger Abbott supporter Zed Seselja. They were a few thousand or so votes from capturing the 13th seat. They could’ve done it with a more moderate leader, they blew their chance.
*9th seat sorry, there were not 25 seats back then.
This actually could be surprisingly close. State politics is not federal politics and if you look at booth results you’ll see what I mean. I’ll report back here soon but I’ll try and find some booths that voted Liberal on the state level but Labor on the federal level.
I would love for Elizabeth Lee to win, even though I already support the Liberals. Barr is the only remaining COVID era head of government in Australia.
The teals could still get votes off Labor and the Greens. More small-l-liberals will vote Liberal though and the independents will likely be mostly just ex-Labor voters who want change.
Dutton won’t help federally but as we saw in the NT (although a more conservative jurisdiction in general) voters see the difference.
In Brindabella, the suburbs of Chisholm, Fadden, Gowrie, Tharwa (why was the AJP vote so high there?), Theodore and Waniassa all voted Liberal on the state level but Labor on the federal level.
Interestingly, in the Voice referendum, Chisholm and Tharwa were the only two suburbs of those six aforementioned suburbs that voted No.
Something tells me Barr will retire next term after clocking up a decade. He was the CM before the pandemic and so it feels like an eternity. Lee is moderate and more small l liberal but the party isn’t really. The party is still quite religious and conservative given that it’s Canberra. The Libs have split on a few issues ranging from voluntary assisted dying to the voice.
Brindabella is the Greens’ weakest seat and easiest to be lost.
I doubt the independents or teals will make significant in roads. Could be one, who knows. I wrote previously that the forces that elected now Senator Pocock aren’t around at this election.
Votante, so I suppose the ACT branch of the Liberal Party could be akin to say the Massachusetts branch of the Republican Party which still has a few hardcore conservatives (one being Alan Diehl who beat out a moderate in the primary to succeed retiring Charlie Baker as governor).
Since the territories can be controlled by the federal government, In theory could the coalition force the ACT to switch to single member districts if it wanted to?
Reminds me in UK where British government forced London to switch to FPTP.
It might be easier for the Libs to win under single member districts and while they shouldn’t just do it to benefit them, the idea of single member districts brings the power back to the representatives and actually allows “local members” instead of having 5 members like the LC has in other states (and Tasmania)
Hare-Clark unfortunately benefits the Greens who in my view are dangerous extremists, but my argument to changing to single member districts is give people 1 MP, and make ACT elections competitive again and just become you win the popular vote, shouldn’t guarantee you government, it should be the seats, this will allow no corner of the territory to be forgotten.
By having Hare-Clark, the politicians will only focus on the bigger population centres of the district and they can ignore the smaller communities which may otherwise have been in a swing district if they had been single-member districts.
Coalition should call a referendum in the NT next time they are in government to give voters the option to switch to single-member districts.
Does anyone else favour single-member districts?
@Daniel T If the Coalition ever did that to the electoral system it would be political suicide for them, the only other option is if the federal seats mirrored the territory seats with 7 or 9 members
@Daniel, I would go even further and scrap self government for the territories altogether. I don’t think it works on a number of levels (and some of this goes for Tassie as well).
* Limited population, meaning not only is there a much smaller pool of politicians to choose from
*Similarly, a much smaller population to choose top management levels for Police, judiciary, health etc.
* Fewer options for revenue to fund health, police, education etc departments
* (I think) more transient population making a coherent population more difficult and long term planning much harder at a political level.
I think either the residential and main non government business areas should be part of NSW and the Federal Government overseas the parliament and Government offices, or we go back to the ACT being administered from the Federal Government with funding etc, and the local government being given a bit more power than your normal council but still at that level of government.
It just seems strange to me that we essentially treat Northcote Council as if it were on a level with NSW and VIC when it clearly isn’t.
Agree Labor Voter, ACT probably should be like Washington DC with all residential areas transferred to NSW with only the National Capital area (Parliament house and surrounds) being treated as an entity overseen by the Federal Government with no representation.
Or else have the ACT expand to include all surrounding townships (Queanbeyan, Yass and Goulburn) that have a close connection with Canberra. That way it can be treated as a separate state from NSW, similar to what Virginia or Maryland are like in the US.
@MLV the ACT and the NT need self-government, otherwise it’s undemocratic and they should just cease to exist.
@Yoh An that seems reasonable, though that would probably require the NT to become a state, which is something I would be open to.
Single member districts would be disastrous for the Canberra Liberals! They would get wiped out far worse than what we’ve seen in the NT this year for Labor or in 2016 for the CLP.
What would the Liberals win if the ACT had single-member electorates? Maybe a seat around Gunghalin and one around Red Hill? Or is even that too generous? They’d both be marginal.
I think it’s sad that some want to get rid of the uniquely Australian Hare-Clark voting system mainly because they don’t like that it benefits a political party they disagree with. Scaremongering about “dangerous extremists” isn’t a valid argument against an electoral system. I don’t understand the argument against the popular vote, as it represents the view of the whole population (if preferencing is allowed). And Hare-Clark still has geographic electorates, so it isn’t a pure representation of the popular vote anyway. It just reduces how great an impact geography plays, and I’d argue geography matters less in a densely populated area.
There is nothing in Hare-Clark that prevents parties from nominating candidates who are based in areas of smaller population, and nothing that prevents voters choosing to vote for candidates based in those areas, if local representation is important to them. And I disagree that politicians only focus on larger areas under Hare-Clark, because the size of the settlement isn’t necessarily correlated with how much voters will swing depending on the focus paid to them. If appealing to a smaller settlement will win a party enough votes to go from 2 to 3 representatives in a Hare-Clark seat, they are not going to turn it down, especially if bigger settlements are divided and full of rusted-on voters.
I think it’s even sadder that some people hate democracy and self-government so much that they want to take it away from the territories. This is a solution in search of a problem. The ACT is a well-governed area with lots of highly-educated people, and has managed to plan for the long term enough to implement a light rail line. It’s laughable to suggest it’s talent-poor, revenue-poor or unable to plan for the long term. The NT may not have all the same advantages, but it carries the burden of having to govern for many isolated areas with limited infrastructure, and communities like that deserve some autonomy over infrastructure spending rather than having it all dictated to them by the Federal Government.
Single-member electorates would benefit the Labor party and disadvantage the Libs and Greens. Labor would be laughing. Labor generally finishes in the top two and will benefit from Greens preferences in outer and middle ring suburbs. The Greens might win one or two seats in Kurrajong. The Liberals would fare best in Brindabella and that’s pretty much it.
In NT and TAS, there is a diversity of communities and interest groups and geographic and economic diversity which make elections more competitive. Image if a state were just the Melbourne CBD and a 15km radius from it. Canberra would be wealthier, more homogeneous, less Green than inner Melbourne.
Agree Votante, that is why ACT should be expanded outwards to include some rural communities (at least the LGA’s of Queanbeyan-Palerang, Yass Valley and Goulburn Mulwaree) which have the greatest connection to Canberra. Such a state would probably still be Labor leaning like Victoria but would also give the Liberals better chance of building support to win power.
@yoh an it simply cant becuase thats nsw
Hare-Clark system was voted on in a referendum in 1992 – 65.3% of the population voted in favour of it – single member electorates would be a democratic disaster and that was the reason Hare clark got strong support. Some random observations on the 2024 election:
– independents need 10% of the vote to have a chance
Independents will take votes largely off the Liberals, less so off Labor – unlikely to hurt the Greens
– Brindabella – Greens will lose their seat but its not clear that the Liberals would win it – Labor is a good chance unless there is a big swing
– Gininderra – Bello Party is a sneaky chance but it would probably be at the expense of the Liberals
Yerrabi –
Kurrajong – a moderate independent vote may have the outcome of helping the Greens to hold their second seat in this electorate
Murrumbidgee – chance for an Independent here – not clear though at whose expense it would be
I would like to see the states and territories entirely reworked at some point. Their current borders are a colonial relic. Even the desire for federation largely arose from the absurdity of the border between New South Wales and Victoria. I would propose that the metropolitan areas of the major cities should each become their own state, with the regions divided in a way that actually makes sense. I’m not holding my breath for this to ever happen, though.
Agree Nicholas, other borders that don’t really work include NSW/Queensland in the Tweed area which like NSW/Victoria runs through the centre of a major urban area and splits two communities across a state border.
@ Nicholas
That is probably in the too hard basket. I do see some merit but if the Metro areas of each states become their own state it will mean that some states are much richer than others. If you take Sydney out of NSW then the rest of the state will be much poorer and require subsidies etc just to deliver adequate services. In the US there are big gaps between states for example Maryland, NJ and Connecticut are very rich as they dont really have much rural and remote areas. I do agree that apart from Sport we dont really have state-based identities, The Private school Kid in Mosman has more in common with the Private school kid in Beaumaris than he does with the Vietnamese immigrant in Cabrammata who has more in common with the people in St Albans. Apart from infrastructure funding we dont have state-based interests either. What i think is possible that the ACT may expand northwards to allow for more greenfield housing estates. There is already some talk of the Parkwood estate in NSW being moved into ACT.
Ideally if creating new states out of the existing ones you would have a ‘Gadigal’ type state covering Sydney and its surrounds extending out to Kiama, Port Stevens, Maitland, Blue Mountains and Wollondilly Shire.
You would then have states focussed on the South Coast (Nowra to Bega), a Canberra region state (ACT plus Goulburn, Yass and Queanbeyan), a North Coast one (stretching from Foster/Tuncurry up to Grafton) and maybe two covering the interior parts of NSW (with some areas like Bellingen being part of the North Coast state).
All towns and LGA’s north of Ballina ought to be included with SEQ locations as a new state due to their close connections. Some border communities like Goondiwindi could also be paired with the northern NSW towns as part of a wider state.
Likewise for Victorian border towns like Wodonga and Wangaratta, alongside the Alpine region, they probably should be combined with southern NSW areas to form a larger state encompassing common agricultural communities
I think we should abolish the federation and states and replace them with a unitary state and devolved regions. An example of a region could be northern Victoria and south-western NSW.
@ Ian that will require a referendum and i doubt it will pass and the party who proposed it will likely Cop a backlash at the following election. The average voter will see it is a distraction/vanity project.
I think it’s pretty clear that there’ll probably never be any changes to state and territory borders, the names of states and territories, the state and territory capitals and their names, etc. And the only new state that could ever be created would be North Australia or whatever the Northern Territory would be called after statehood.
@ NP
i am with you, i dont generally support changes to states, their names, capitals or the names of Capitals. However, one change i do support is the change to ACT border see link below.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-14/act-seeks-border-expansion-into-nsw-for-housing-development/103468132
@Wilson tbh, I’ve thought for some time that having multi member electorates in the lower houses state and federally would actually be good.
Instead of one sole member representing an electorate, you have multiple members. E.g. a safe seat wouldn’t always just be 100% ALP or Liberal or National or Green, but say perhaps 2 members of the safe seat party, and 1 from a different one (if the electorates had 3 members each). This would mean voters in safe seats who don’t support the majority vote in said safe seat would have at least one member who better represents them. Same for marginal seats except they would swap their members more often. And occasionally you’d see each member in an electorate all from different parties, or even say 2 parties, 1 independent.
The electorates would probably become larger though I suppose. And then if many of them are merged, you have the issue of which names to retain and which get discarded. But that’s another issue altogether.
@Nimalan yeah that particular change to include Parkwood in Canberra seems feasible.
Anyway, could you please resend the link to the Republic referendum on current boundaries? I lost it somehow and I’ve been trying to find it to complete the map.
@NP i think something kakadu would suffice either that or keep it as Northern Territory or one of the orginal proposed names like Centralia
@ Nether Portal
The link below shows the 1999 Republic results on the 2022 boundaries. Drake has done some calculations on the Corio 2022 thread for some seats as well
https://www.tallyroom.com.au/53501
ACT won’t expand. Redrawing boundaries will be a political nightmare.
Queanbeyan grew as a commuter town or satellite city after Canberra was established. There are lots of cross-state or province metro areas around the world. Ottawa and Gatineau in Canada, Washington DC and Maryland and northern Virginia.
Andrew Barr has never produced a surplus for the ACT, while that is irrelevant to the system of government they use, I believe the ACT could be represented better.
Would single-member districts actually make it worse? Under 2020 the Libs would have been annihilated, but under a close election like 2012, the Libs would be close.
If the Libs win the popular vote then it wouldn’t be a rout, I think it would make it easier for them to win when they do well, but will be routed to 1-2 seats when they do very poorly.
If you’re gonna have Hare-Clark, might as well have full blown Proportional representation or you want a better idea? MPP like NZ has. Have half single member districts and then list seats so people have 2 votes but the party vote is more proportional.
MPP would open the door to more minor parties getting into parliament like the early 1990s in the ACT.
20 years of Labor-Green coalition, If not change now, When?
@Nimalan thanks, I’ll try and get it completed tomorrow.
Cool Nether Portal, Look forward to it
Is there any reason why the Greens vote is significantly lower at territory elections than federal elections? Are people less comfortable voting for them under a proportional system where it is more likely they will be elected?
@Darcy More candidates is probably a big part of it. Each ACT lower house seat only had 5 candidates at the last federal election, with the UAP and PHON running in all three, and the then-Liberal Democrats running in one. Contrast that with the state election where you have several different minor parties (and independents for that matter) competing for votes the Greens would win at federal elections, and the emphasis placed on individual candidates that comes with Hare-Clarke, and you have a reasonable explanation of see why the Green vote is lower