The Great Mayoral Debate - No Sparks Flying, No Pistols At Dawn

Mark Naglarzas reports

It is fortunate that the organisers of Monday night’s Great Mayoral Debate (which included the Editor of this platform) did not charge an entry fee for the event because the 300 or so punters who squeezed into Notre Dame’s Tannock Hall would be screaming for their money back.

Instead of sparks flying and pistols at dawn it was more puffs of incense and sherry at sunset as the highly anticipated event — “This is the most politicised mayoral race in memory,” I was told by a veteran of port city politics — quickly morphed from a debate in which the candidates clashed and challenged each other into and a dull-as-dirt information night.

Indeed, the five “combatants” (I use the term loosely) were so nice to each other that if the “debate” (even looser) had gone on any longer there was a real danger of an outbreak of hair braiding and neck rubbing.

While the evening lacked entertainment value the five candidates did reveal themselves to be deeply engaged with Fremantle and local government, knowledgeable about the key issues and serious about taking on the role of mayor, with nobody embarrassing themselves or triggering the audience (apart from a throwaway remark from Marija Vujcic that was like a bolt of lightning across the general air of greyness). Indeed, all revealed themselves to possess that quality much spoken about in the final season of Succession: a safe pair of hands.

The seriousness of the event and reluctance of candidates to attack their opponents is no doubt because of two of current Mayor Hannah Fitzhardinge’s challengers sit with her on the council (Lawver and Deputy Mayor Archibald), one has been there before (Vujcic) and the other, Woodcock, religiously attends council meetings and is incredibly engaged (according to Debate moderator and Fremantle Herald Editor Steve Grant). In other words, there are no genuine outsiders.

Steve Grant

Not that there isn’t plenty of bickering in the family, with the entire city riveted by the headline-grabbing clash between Fitzhardinge and the Fremantle Society’s John Dowson that led to legal threats and a public apology and plenty of sniping about the mayor’s management style.

But on the night everyone agreed to leave the skeletons firmly locked in the closet for the sake of the Fremantle public image.

Those who stayed awake learned that Ben Lawver, if elected, would fight to retain Fremantle as a working port, Marija Vujcic promised to focus on financial stability, asset renewal and economic activation, Mark Woodcock intended to act on the selling off of parking assets and on the “draconian changes” to parking regulations that is an added expense to residents, Hannah Fitzhardinge reassured everyone, if re-elected, she would transform the City Plan from a promising document into dazzling reality, and Jenny Archibald, in delaying her planned retirement from city politics and putting her hat in the ring for a second second term, declared her support things we traditionally love about Fremantle.

And each of the candidates revealed something of their personal style and credentials. Lawver leaned into his trademark ebullience, good cheer and people skills, Vujcic emphasised her history in corporate governance and ability to read the books, Woodcock happily projected himself as an average guy concerned with the “back-to-basics deliverables and not “global agendas”, Fitzhardinge didn’t miss a beat as the woman in charge, and Archibald revealed her warmth, empathy and passion for the arts.

However, none of the candidates had an issue with any of the other candidate’s positions — not even when Vujcic drew attention to the cost blow-out on the Walyalup Civic Centre. Afterwards one of the candidates told me that Vujcic was not giving a clear picture of what happened. Why didn’t they turn to Marija and say, “Hang on — that’s not right.”

There was a giddy moment of pushback when Vujcic lamented the loss of Roe 8, the extension of the Roe Highway that had had the community going to the barricades not so many years ago. But it came not from the other candidates but the audience, who let out such a loud rumble it would have had nearby Notre Dame students cursing for not having brought an umbrella.

Surprisingly, not even one of the most talked-about issues of the moment, the arrival of nuclear submarines under the AUKUS defence alliance, opened the way for candidates to challenge Fremantle long-standing policy of being a nuclear-free Zone. Even the conservative Vujcic backed Freo as a nuclear-free zone.

Midway through there was a question from the floor about mayoral candidates and councillors being politically aligned, which is the issue of the moment across all the local governments.

But again no fireworks. Not even a sparkler waved around in protest. All the candidates simply declared their independence, with Labor-aligned Fitizhardinge reminding the audience that all council members are bound by the Local Government Act to vote according to their own views.

There were no cynical snorts, no scepticism about freedom from the party, no emphasis on the importance of genuine independence, which is doubly surprising since Kate Hulett had earlier this year almost unseated sitting Labor members on this very issue.

The only truly contentious moment came when a member of the community took a shot of Fremantle’s tradition of left-leaning activism by accusing Lawver of consorting with known criminals by pointing out that his campaign office had been set up in the offices of Disrupt Burrup Hub. He also wanted to know if it was right for elected members of the Freo council to be involved with political activism.

Lawver handled the question beautifully, declaring that the office was no longer used by Disrupt Burrup Hub, but did not bother to answer the activist question. Again, the night was all about the business of local government and not about the ideological issues Freo is famous for (if anything the debate really dented the port city’s reputation as a hotbed of anti-establishment politics).

Indeed the evening was so dull and so free of conflict, ideology and crazy visionary thinking that you would have to declare Hannah Fitzhardinge the winner — not because she stood above the pack but because all the candidates were largely in sync with her calm, controlled corporate style. Why rock the boat and throw out the competent manager?

At one point Fitzghardinge said that it takes four years to get a handle on the job and another four to use that knowledge and that groundwork to finish it.

The stolid nature of last night’s debate felt like an offshoot of those four years of boring but necessary work of getting things done.

The other four candidates now have their work cut out to convince the electorate to unseat the driver taking them on a dull but safe journey.

By Mark Naglazas

~ For more by Mark Naglazas look here

~ If you’d like to COMMENT on this or any of our stories, don’t hesitate to email our Editor.

~ WHILE YOU’RE HERE –