Harry, as someone who lives in Tasmania I can tell you that having greens in parliament does nothing to eradicate "the often childish slanging matches between the Government and the Opposition". Slanging is alive and well here between the Liberals, Labor, and, wait for it, The Greens.

Sure, with the demise of the Democrats the 'green' vote has picked up from a low base and they sometimes get to double figures but that doesn't mean the system should be changed to ensure that a party with less than 20% of the vote should get the balance of power and dictate policies. That's just way too Joh-ish.

Welcome to Queensland, the deep north.

There is no perfect system of representative democracy in theory. In practice, the "first past the post" system we have in most jurisdictions is probably as good as it gets.

We only need to look at the Senate to see the injury done to good governance when governments have to "buy" the votes of a minor party or parties. The Greens and Democrats individually represent very few people. They predominantly get elected in the small States where they only need to fool around 25,000 people as opposed to the 320,000 people they'd need to con in a major State. There is nothing they can say to explain their inability to get seats in large States. So, Bob Brown represents around 2% of the population. On what basis should Mr Brown and his whacky ideas be forced onto the 98% of the population he doesn't represent. Even if we accepted his argument that he represents 10% of the total population, why should 90% of the population who wouldn't vote for him in a pink fit have to watch him force his ideas on us so legislation can get passed.

No thanks. Keep the system the way it is and I'll be a much happier bunny. Having to watch governments beg or bribe votes from whacky minor parties is the real affront to real democracy.

Team Beattie is not doing its job. They have Sun Water working day & night 24/7 to pipe water from the Burdekin to the numerous Bowen Basin Mines, to wash coal. As for the residents of Moranbah, west of Mackay, message to new developments in the town, find your own! This includes a proposed, 2000 mine worker persons camp.

Number one, Mr Beattie himself, does not see fit to visit the townships serving the Central Queensland Coal Fields to help sort thing out, he sends in the Public Servants.

The CQ News at http://www.cqnews.com.au/ does not see fit to publish this information on line, but in Friday’s print issue 13/10/06 page one headlines & continued on page three. What can you do?

Thank heaven we have enough sense to not let a minor mob of radical rat bag rabble get control of the balance of power, in Queensland.
Rule by minority has no attraction for me.

Hasbeen, the majority of green preference votes went to Team Beattie.
Like the religious groups that are conscious objectors they don't vote for them, but they are neither against them. More so when the preferences go to Team Beattie.

ELIDA

Crikey ! we just had an election and 1,032,617 people voted for Team Beatie. 173,243 people voted for the greens.

What seats were decided by green preferences?

Anna Bligh won South Brisbane with over 51% of the primary vote.

59 - 25 Get used to it. What part of 34 seat majority don't you understand?

I think a few people are missing the point of the article.

Wether you love them or hate, the Greens polled quite well in some parts of Queensland, just as they do in Tasmania, New South Wales ect... Simply because you don't like the politics or antics of a party does not erase the fact that a sizable proportion voted for them. A representative democracy should be just that. Representative.

As Harry pointed out, One Nation received 0.6% of the vote, yet thanks to the system, they are represented in the Queensland parilament. 8 %, last time I checked, was greater than 0.6%. Why should 0.6% of the populus with "whacky" policies, be represented while 8% are not? I would support the move to proportional representation, to ensure that sizeable minorities be represented, and are given the chance to grow into sizeable majorities.

As for the role of minor parties, or "rule by minority" is far overstated, since the minor parties rarely get to say anything more than yay or nay to legislation, and even more rarely get a chance to pose their own.

I have seen some behind the curtain behaviour of the Greens from such as Juanita Wheeler and believe me, this is one party you do NOT want in government.

Her time at the helm of the Student Guild at the QUT was short for a very good reason.

So why did the QLD bannanas rebublic of Beattie et al block the secret deal to extradite Dr Death through the office of Lavarch?

Seems that unhealth in the bannanas republic has become politicised. It seems apparatchiks of all persuasions are in on this one; and dont expect it to be corrected. Even green bannanas are staying away in droves from this political sewer. How can it be, that in the sunshine state, people met their darkness, and still the rogue left got re-elected?

No need for a Nth/Sth Sunshine policy here; the party has all the answers for the ill in Beattieland!

I agree with ChrisC (and the aticle author). Whether people love or hate the Greens, nearly 8% of the Qld electorate voted for them as their first preference. Less than 1% voted for One Nation - yet they achieved parliamentary representation where the Greens did not.

Contra Steve Madden, 51% is hardly a decisive vote. It means that nearly half the electorate doesn't want to be represented by the elected candidate. The proportion is worse when no candidate secures 50% of the primary vote - although preferential voting addresses this anomaly to some extent (at least when it's not optional),

Some form of proportional representation would have to be more equitable, democratic and representative than the system we currently have in Qld. The fact that there is no upper house only compounds the inequity.

For 8 years, I was a lower house member of parliament in WA. Green MPs were in the upper house, in fact, they had the balance of power for four years during my second term of parliament. My experience was that nothing changed just because Green MPs were present. Most issues they ran with were not related to the environment and neither the last term of the Richard Court government nor the first term of the Geoff Gallop government did much to 'buy' their support: the environment today has just as many problems as before, even more in the case of our forests which were supposed to be protected by Gallop's ban on logging of old growth forests.

Overall, the Greens in WA were and still are a big disappointment, using the environment to try and stop development rather than going out to protect and enhance the state's many environmental values. In a one chamber parliament as in Queensland, having the balance of power held by Green MPs may actually make a difference. But Green MPs in the upper house, as in the federal senate, is about as useful as an ashtray on a motor bike.

There are two interesting separate issues embedded in Harry Throssell's interesting essay:

1. Why a party that received 1 vote in 12 got no seats in the Queensland Parliament - this is an issue of equity in voting systems in a democracy. It has been well-argued already here by others.

2. The embedded determination of media in Queensland (mostly News Limited owned) to ignore news about the Greens. That is an issue of the threat to Australian democracy through powerful media bias.

Declaration - I am an ACT Greens member.

I am glad that Harry Throssell has exposed both these problems so well to OLO readers.

These two problems won't stop more and more Australians voting for the Greens in the next federal election around Australia, because - far from being a "whacky" party - we represent the voice of reason and concern for the future of our country and world

As a voter in Indooroopilly I can assure you that the only reason I put the Green candidate first was out of a perverse desire to create work for Returning Officers and Scrutineers. The candidate whom I wanted to win I put second. Had I thought there was even the remotest chance the Green candidate would have got up I would not have put them first.

I wonder how many other cynical Australian voters play similar games?

CJ

One nation have one candidate elected because Ms Rosa Lee Long also got more than 50% of the primary vote in Tablelands, maybe she is a capable local candidate.

Did it ever occur to you that to get elected in Qld you must win a seat in an election.

One Nation can do it, independants can do it why can't The Greens?

2,027,637 people did not vote for the Greens yet you think that they should be represented because 173,243 did.

This is the same reason no Green candidate came close to winning a senate seat in Qld either.

I believe that a proportional representtaion system would be a better system for Queensland.

So the question is: how could we, the citizens, bring this about?

Is it possible that the entrenched parties would ever permit this?

lastword.

I suggest proportional representation would be chaotic. I have done a crude extrapolation of the 2006 results.

Dividing the total number of formal votes by the number of seats and excluding independants because none of them have reached the quota to gain a seat.

The results would be:

Labor: 41
Liberal: 18
National: 16
Greens: 7
Family First: 2

Leaving Family First with the balance of power even though they only recived 39,683 votes.

I do note that Bruce Flegg would be leader of the opposition.

Tony as we all know the ACT Govt is an overblown local council. But even so except for the first assembly when anti self government candidates skewed the result it has always had a Labor or Liberal Chief Minister.