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.