Like “October surprise” in US Presidential elections, the “Ides of March” in South Australian politics refers not to the assassination of Caesar in Rome, but to a disruptive event that makes a difference in the final days of an election. Even with early voting well underway, the final week will again be the pivot point of this campaign.

Already there are signposts of change. At yesterday’s SA Press Club lunch debate, one contestant looked like a winner and the other was Premier Steven Marshall.

Labor Leader Peter Malinauskas looked strong, positive, thoughtful and ready to lead. Marshall, perhaps wearied by a shambolic campaign, at times came across as shallow.

The Libs’ campaign is like a game of constantly changing tactics with no overriding strategy. Even the avalanche of attack ads on Malinauskas are scattergun. Marshall’s pitch to voters seems devoid of any narrative about why he should be re-elected. And, as with his Covid credentials, his claims of economic renaissance are unravelling. The official statistics simply don’t support his rhetoric. The latest State Final Demand figures for the December quarter show South Australia’s economic growth at 0.3% – well behind New South Wales’ 6.7% and Victoria’s 3.7%. Our unemployment rate is the highest in the nation.

Next Wednesday’s debate might be Marshall’s last chance to present some kind of vision, or fall on his sword.

People often ask me whether debates can really make a difference to the outcome of an election. The answer is “rarely”. There is hardly ever a “gotcha” moment, let alone a knockout blow. For the contestants, the objective is usually to play it safe, reinforce key themes and avoid own goals. If you whack your opponent too aggressively you usually do more damage to yourself.  The impact of a debate also depends on its timing.

In 1997, the debate between Premier John Olsen and me, hosted by Ray Martin, played an important role in putting the Liberals into an unhappy minority status. The problem for the Liberals was that they agreed to hold the only televised debate on the final Tuesday of the campaign. That’s about the time when swinging voters begin to really focus on the campaign. For Labor, it was make or break. My political career was on the line.

That debate was held the day after we dropped a leaked SA Treasury document that canvassed a state-based GST. The story was broken by Channel 9’s national political editor Laurie Oakes because we were unhappy with the station’s local coverage of our campaign. We wanted to go over the top of their local political reporter heading into the debate, as well as give the issue national prominence. That leak destabilised the debate and that in turn destabilised the Libs’ campaign. I’m forever grateful to our strategist Bruce Hawker for his great role in this.

A massive effort is underway to shore up the Premier’s base. Resources have been diverted and he has been distracted.

Appearing head-to-head against a Premier or PM elevates the challenger. It’s also the best way to enable voters to compare and contrast both leaders: their substance, style, vision and energy levels. And priorities. Interestingly, the impact of a perceived “debate win” takes a few days to sink in as commentators, friends and neighbours spread the news about “who won”. That’s why timing is important and next Wednesday’s debate potentially perilous.

The results of a recent poll in Steven Marshall’s Norwood centred seat of “Dunstan” have also spooked the Liberals. It shows Marshall falling behind Labor’s candidate and behind Peter Malinauskas as preferred Premier.

Most leaders of major parties have safe seats. That wasn’t the case with Norwood, which Don Dunstan represented for 26 years. He knew he couldn’t rely on his television star power to translate into local votes. Don didn’t want to win elections for Labor statewide and then suffer the ignominy of losing his own seat. Similarly, he resisted jumping ship for a safer seat because he believed that would simply result in handing Norwood and possibly the state to the Libs. So, Norwood became Labor’s “jewel in the crown”.

Don worked the electorate hard. He was involved in the Norwood Football Club and in countless Italian, Greek and other community organisations. Dunstan became synonymous with Norwood, so much so that the electorate is named after him.

There are now signs of Liberal panic in Norwood. A massive effort is underway to shore up the Premier’s base. Resources have been diverted and he has been distracted. If Steven Marshall loses Dunstan, it will not only be a disaster for him and SA Liberals but will also be seen nationally as a signal that change is on the way. In politics, momentum is everything.

Labor has an outstanding candidate in Cressida O’Hanlon. Will voters in Dunstan, who apparently feel taken for granted by the Liberals, make history on March 19 and make Don Dunstan smile down on Cressida and Labor on election night?

Mike Rann was Labor Premier of South Australia from 2002 to 2011. He is the CEO of Rann Strategy Group, Visiting Professor at the Policy Institute of King’s College London and a former High Commissioner to the UK and Ambassador to Italy.

Mike Rann’s election commentary will be published in InDaily every Friday of the campaign, alongside a weekly contribution from Liberal veteran Amanda Vanstone. Read her contribution here.