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.