Why we need proportional representation in Queensland

[achiruel]

So, the LNP has been elected with a massive majority but gained only 49.7% of the popular vote (1st preferences)

Likely make-up of the Parliament according to ABC Online

ALP 8
LNP 77
GRN 0
KAP 2
OTH 2

Likely make-up of the Parliament if we had proportional representation

LNP   44
ALP 24
KAP 10
GRN 7
FFP 1
OTH 3

LNP would still form (minority) Government probably with the help of FFP or one of the IND.  But opposition would be a lot healthier!

[Mr X]

I personally don't mind the current system. Normally we end up with a balanced parliament with a healthy margin for the government of the day.
Saturday's amazing swing is just a result of how p%ssed  off Queenslanders really were. I think Campbell Newman can expect to lose 5-10 at the next election when Labor bounces back and some of the traditional Labor voters go back to the party.

[Golliwog]

I personally don't mind the current system. Normally we end up with a balanced parliament with a healthy margin for the government of the day.
Saturday's amazing swing is just a result of how p%ssed  off Queenslanders really were. I think Campbell Newman can expect to lose 5-10 at the next election when Labor bounces back and some of the traditional Labor voters go back to the party.

I expect the LNP to lose more than that when the people of QLD hopefully realise what they've done in 3 years time.

[Jonno]

So, the LNP has been elected with a massive majority but gained only 49.7% of the popular vote (1st preferences)

Likely make-up of the Parliament according to ABC Online

ALP 8
LNP 77
GRN 0
KAP 2
OTH 2

Likely make-up of the Parliament if we had proportional representation

LNP   44
ALP 24
KAP 10
GRN 7
FFP 1
OTH 3

LNP would still form (minority) Government probably with the help of FFP or one of the IND.  But opposition would be a lot healthier!

+1000000

[#Metro]

I'm happy with the current system. Whoever wins locally, that's what you get.
I agree the rest of the votes are wasted, but if concerns aren't physically concentrated/are too dispersed they're hard to work on
and it is hard to represent those constituents because they are 'at large'.

It would work with a senate, but Queensland does not need another house IMHO with the population we have. One house = quick and direct.
Terms are short, so even if power goes to their head, 3 years time they'll have an opportunity to be given the boot too.

[Mr X]

I find it interesting that only now are people starting to jump on the proportional representation bandwagon.

The last Labor government at one stage had 66 seats with 49% of the vote.

[Jonno]

I find it interesting that only now are people starting to jump on the proportional representation bandwagon.

The last Labor government at one stage had 66 seats with 49% of the vote.

Always supported it even when Labour was in!!

[Arnz]

With the Qld ALP and Tarago jokes going around, I remember back in 2001 when the Queensland Liberals can fit in a Mini (and didn't qualify for party status until the eventual merger with the Nationals).

[achiruel]

I've supported PR my entire voting life, I just think the most recent election has illustrated how incredibly UNrepresentative our current system is, more than ever before.  And yes you're right Mr X, the ALP rout in 2001 was also very unrepresentative, but still not as bad as the current situation.

[Gazza]

I'm one for proportional rep too.

but if concerns aren't physically concentrated/are too dispersed they're hard to work on
and it is hard to represent those constituents because they are 'at large'.

On the flip side, concentrated concerns can still be ignored, if they don't match what the ruling party wants to do.
Sunshine coast duplication is a case point.

[colinw]

I dislike the idea of proportional representation, as it gives oxygen to nutjob minority parties and leads to unstable minority or coalition Governments. Ditto for systems like MMP in NZ.

I'd much rather keep the system for the Legislative Assembly as is, and re-instate the Legislative Council as a house of review.  The Legislative Council can be run along proportional representation lines as in other states.

This will sort itself out in a term or two. Remember that the Liberals were reduced to a mere 3 seats not that long ago.

No need to panic. This too shall pass.

[Fares_Fair]

Incidently, the minimum number of seats to be a recognised party in parliament used to be 10.
It has since changed to minimum 10% of the vote AND 3 seats.

[Jonno]

I dislike the idea of proportional representation, as it gives oxygen to nutjob minority parties and leads to unstable minority or coalition Governments. Ditto for systems like MMP in NZ.

Those nutjob parties who actually do international research and have policies that will make a difference..Nutjobs!!!

I'd much rather keep the system for the Legislative Assembly as is, and re-instate the Legislative Council as a house of review.  The Legislative Council can be run along proportional representation lines as in other states.

Yaaaa...more of my taxes being wasted supporting old policies that can never deliver the outcomes they are spruked to be delivering.

[colinw]

I dislike the idea of proportional representation, as it gives oxygen to nutjob minority parties and leads to unstable minority or coalition Governments. Ditto for systems like MMP in NZ.

Those nutjob parties who actually do international research and have policies that will make a difference..Nutjobs!!!

What, like One Nation, Katter's Australian Party, NZ First, The Sex Party?

Not prepared to risk it just to benefit the Greens. For that matter, I am not convinced that the Greens position on any non-environmental issue are trustworthy. There is simply no way we could afford many of the things they advocate, much as they align with some of our own beliefs.

Yaaaa...more of my taxes being wasted supporting old policies that can never deliver the outcomes they are spruked to be delivering.

That negative attitude toward the politicians is a major part of the problem. To a large degree, we elect the kind of pollies we expect, and the expectations in Australia are miserably low.

IMHO, the lack of an upper house in Queensland was a major contributing factor to the excesses of the Joh era.

[Mr X]

With the Qld ALP and Tarago jokes going around, I remember back in 2001 when the Queensland Liberals can fit in a Mini (and didn't qualify for party status until the eventual merger with the Nationals).

With 3 seats they could have fit in a golf caddy 

[Mr X]

If we want PR, put it in a new upper house only. If we had PR we'd never/rarely get a majority government. Even the Newmanslide wouldn't deliver one.
I have seen the idea floating around that we should have an upper house made up of all the mayors in QLD. I don't like it either, gives too much power to tiny, whining councils with an agenda.

[Fares_Fair]

Some history...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensland_Legislative_Council

The Legislative Council was seen by the Australian Labor Party as undemocratic and a tool of patronage, and upon the establishment of a secure Labor majority in the Assembly in 1915, Labor sought the house's abolition. Unsurprisingly, bills for its abolition were rejected by the Council itself in 1915 and 1916, and a referendum failed on 5 May 1917 on a vote of 179,105 to 116,196. In 1920, the Government under Premier Ted Theodore changed tack, persuading the Governor of Queensland to appoint additional members of the Council, thus securing a majority in that Chamber.

The abolition bill was eventually passed by the Assembly on a 51–15 vote on 24 October 1921. The bill was then introduced to the Council by the leader of the Government in the Council, Alfred James Jones, who remarked, "Until we had a majority here, [the Council] was obstructive, and now that we have a majority here it is useless." However, Opposition councillor Patrick Leahy protested that the abolition of the chamber would result in the Assembly being "able to do what it thinks fit" and becoming unaccountable. On 27 October 1921, the Council voted itself out of existence; the members who voted for the abolition were known as the "suicide squad". The Council rose for the last time at 8:37 p.m. that evening.

The non-Labor parties petitioned the British Government, but Colonial Secretary, Winston Churchill, concluded that the matter was "essentially one for determination locally", and the Governor felt "unable to say that there is evidence of any strong or widespread feeling in the country against this assent being given." Royal Assent was given on 3 March 1922, and the Act was proclaimed in the Government Gazette 20 days later.

Labor's view was summed up in 1980 by Labor politician and historian Dr Denis Murphy, who claimed the "dominance of wealth and property over the Queensland parliament" was broken. However, some scholars and political commentators have argued that the excesses of the Bjelke-Petersen years (1968–1987) in Queensland were only possible because of the absence of a house of review, and that the problem was not the Council itself but its existence as a nominated rather than elected body (Legislative Councils in all other states were fully elective by 1900, except in New South Wales where some nominative features lasted until the 1970s.)

[#Metro]

Yes, but the electoral system was corrupted to weight towards country seats wasn't it?
I don't think there is a need for an upper house. You should get what you vote for and wear it.

[SurfRail]

Mind you, from memory the qualifications to actually be an elector for some of the other state's upper houses did not change until well into the 20th century - it was far from universal suffrage.  I think in SA you actually needed to be a landholder even after WWII!

In Canada, most of the provincial legislatures are unicameral I believe, and their Parliament has an appointed upper house.

[SteelPan]

So, the LNP has been elected with a massive majority .......

Yaawwwnnn
Funny how this topic always raises its "theoretical head" when the LNP (or its forerunner) hold office!
I mean the ALP was in office for the better part of 20yrs and did you hear it raised?
Give us all a break - the people wanted a change, as they will again one day!
No need to roll off the MULTIUDE of issues why people felt some fresh eyes were needed - as they will again one day.  For now the LNP are "having a go"...go for a picnic, go for a walk, take a few days off and take a long-distance train trip somewhere...it's ONLY politics!   

[Mr X]

Why do people always forget Beattie's magic 66 in 2001 and the Liberals with a puny 3 and the Nationals, with the opposition parties in a factional war?

Gosh if it wasn't for the existence of Katter's party it just may be that the LNP could have held up to 80 seats!