Premier Anna Bligh has called a snap election for Saturday 21st March.
ALP hold 58 of the 89 seat Queensland State Parliament. An 8.3% swing will be needed for a change of Government.
13 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Thank Goodness the waiting game is over. I will preference the LNP if they can publicly commit to fixed three year parliamentary terms, compulsory full preferential voting, committing a further round of funds for Daintree buyback of lands. This funding is for land that has already been degraded and Rainforest Rescue have committed to revegetating these blocks and therefore bypassing any taxpayers funds for reveg work and False Cape given back to Traditional Owners. Other items on my wish list are mandatory apprenticeships within state government departments and a cap on political party donations. Over to you LNP, strut your stuff..
Im with you Steven regarding fixed parliamentary terms. 3 years would be more ideal than 4. Im undecided on compulsory full preferential voting. Convince me why it is fairer than what we have?
Best idea yet is capping political donations. I am not sure though that this is constitutional. I would be interested to see a legal argument to say that it is constitutional. The donations system has become obscene, and our elections should be won based on talent and ideas, not budgets.
Oh, and I am trying to look surprised that the election was called early. I think the only unknown was what would Anna cite as the reason to go early?
I think she should have just said "its my party and ill call an election if i want to". The spiel about the economy and needing a "mandate" was simply ridiculous.
Mike, we need a "porky-meter" to properly document the number of lies we are get told from all sides during this campaign.
Chalk Anna up for one on the election date.
*Disclaimer* Oh, as an LNP member I am obliged to say that the LNP dont tell lies ... ok? Good.
Thank you JKR for publishing your political allegiance. I’m a member of the Greens and I have never been more in favour of supporting the Liberal & National (LNP) than now (as a preference after voting Greens 1). The ALP has had such a huge majority to do some remarkable things but they’re short-sightedness and blind vision for this state has been misguided and amateurish. In some respects the political donations they receive from coal companies have blinded their judgment.
In terms of my support for compulsory full preferential voting, I believe it is vital for a democracy. Voters have to fill in all the boxes from 1 – 6 or whatever. Otherwise we could end up with a minority government. For example the election results could be: ALP 37% LNP 35% GNS 27% ONP 15% IND 10%
If there are no preferences and everyone just voted one which is what the ALP promote to do every year, then the ALP would be elected with only 37% of Qld’ers voting for them. This is not a majority.
Yes I know who you are of course! I am not ashamed of my political allegiances, although I think that they mean less than they once did. The major parties are both climbing over each other to take the middle ground.
I will reserve judgment of compulsory preferencing.
I was told that at the last State election, when Labor's State-wide policy was 'Vote 1 Labor' (with no preferences allocated), a special deal was arranged at the local level in FNQ. In Barron River, for instance, if my information is accurate, Labor agreed to a preference swap with the Greens.
But on election day, Labor's How to Vote cards in Barron River said 'Vote 1 Labor'. No second preference was recommended. In other words, Labor reneged on the deal. A printer's error was blamed. :-)
Is that story true? If so, I presume printers will be more carefully scrutinized this time round?
If I was part of the Greens decision-making process, i wouldn't consider preferencing a party this time round that didn't return the favour (and gurantee to fulfil its promise!) Especially with Optional Preferential Voting.
Hi Syd, You are spot on. In actual fact the Labor hacks even went one step further. They organised dummy volunteers to look a little greenie like and hand out 'How to Vote' cards that were printed in the colour green. The cards recommended voting 1 Green and 2nd to Labor and then exhausting after 2. Their volunteers were saying at the booths to voters 'are you voting green, if so take this card?' I suppose this was helping the Greens to improve their primary vote but very deceptive politics by the ALP. I think there is a big push by the Greens in this state election for each branch to decide preferences as the Greens are sick of being a preference machine for the ALP. I know there is a big push for a Just Vote 1 policy by the Greens even though this is undemocratic but this will stuff the majors and then they will have to re-think preferential voting rules.
I'll stick my two bob's worth in. The ALP regularly forgets that it seeks power to govern in the interests of social justice, and this requires it to be responsive and accountable to what the citizens want.
Right now we're at the trough of that cycle where the Premier, Anna Blahblahblah, her chief of staff, Mike Kaiser, and ALL our local members think voters are best treated with contempt.
I'll be voting one for the Greens, and I'll be giving an effective preference vote to the LNP - not because I think the LNP has all the answers, but because the ALP needs booting out.
I expect that in the short term we'll get more of a hearing from the LNP on environmental issues than we'll get from Labor. I expect that any Labor promises now will be hollow lies.
Eventually I want to see Green members of parliament.
Lawrence's National Party supporting Green principles? You must be be dreaming! It's never happened in the past with the Nats and once Lawrence starts looking for money for his new hospitals and his own hollow lies it won't happen in the future. This mob has worse form than the current apology for a Labor government.
Actually Francis you will find the LNP has some well thought out green policies that are both good for business and good for the environment. Granted these predominantly fall in the "clean energy" category, such as the solar tariff feed-in policy, and the ethanol policy.
Of course, people on the left are now divided on whether ethanol is a green policy these days. Perhaps Steven you might elaborate on what the Greens actually think of ethanol these days? Id be interested to hear it.
Bryan, it sounds to me like what you are suggesting is a sound strategy. If it does nothing else, it will scare the living daylights out of Wettenhall and Boyle that is for certain.
Hi JKR, You say the LNP has some good Green Policies. I'm having trouble finding any of the LNP policies via the web. Do they exist?
In terms of ethanol production and use I personally believe that it is a good form of fuel when derived as a by-product from an agricultural crop. If we have to start planting agricultural crops on good agricultural land so we can manufacture fuel then we have gone too far. Additionally, if forests have to be cleared to manufacture ethanol then it defeats the purpose. Either way, there is no way we can manufacture enough ethanol to replace traditional petrol or diesel. Ethanol will only be a small part of the solution to the huge fuel crisis that we will face in the upcoming years.
I agree with Steve. Can't find the LNP environment polices.
Ethanol is a thorny issue. I don't care what agricultural industries we have as long as they are sustainable. But the sugar industry, as a whole, is a notorious polluter. The rivers and reef bear the brunt of its excessive use of chemicals. Anything that props it up through more public susbsidy is a retrograde step, IMO.
Now if only there was a crop that could be grown easily, broadscale and organically... come to think of it, there is. Pity it's (mainly) illegal.
The environmental hypocrisy of the mainstream farming lobby is almost as bad as the coal industry. I've had it up to here with people who should known better rorting the meaning of the words 'sustainability' and 'environmentally-freindly' for their own ends.
Rural Australians and greens are natural allies, but the rural folk need to get real. They can't keep cheating on the environment. They need to stop trying to evade environmental controls and start embracing them fully. They may well need help doing that. That's where the green movement comes in. We can push, not only for tighter controls on degrading the environment, but for generous practical help to make this possible.
If we worked at it from both ends, we could win that debate, instead of letting the big end of town have its way all the time. Beats me why it doesn't happen.
13 comments:
Thank Goodness the waiting game is over. I will preference the LNP if they can publicly commit to fixed three year parliamentary terms, compulsory full preferential voting, committing a further round of funds for Daintree buyback of lands. This funding is for land that has already been degraded and Rainforest Rescue have committed to revegetating these blocks and therefore bypassing any taxpayers funds for reveg work and False Cape given back to Traditional Owners. Other items on my wish list are mandatory apprenticeships within state government departments and a cap on political party donations. Over to you LNP, strut your stuff..
Im with you Steven regarding fixed parliamentary terms. 3 years would be more ideal than 4. Im undecided on compulsory full preferential voting. Convince me why it is fairer than what we have?
Best idea yet is capping political donations. I am not sure though that this is constitutional. I would be interested to see a legal argument to say that it is constitutional. The donations system has become obscene, and our elections should be won based on talent and ideas, not budgets.
Oh, and I am trying to look surprised that the election was called early. I think the only unknown was what would Anna cite as the reason to go early?
I think she should have just said "its my party and ill call an election if i want to". The spiel about the economy and needing a "mandate" was simply ridiculous.
Mike, we need a "porky-meter" to properly document the number of lies we are get told from all sides during this campaign.
Chalk Anna up for one on the election date.
*Disclaimer*
Oh, as an LNP member I am obliged to say that the LNP dont tell lies ... ok? Good.
Thank you JKR for publishing your political allegiance. I’m a member of the Greens and I have never been more in favour of supporting the Liberal & National (LNP) than now (as a preference after voting Greens 1). The ALP has had such a huge majority to do some remarkable things but they’re short-sightedness and blind vision for this state has been misguided and amateurish. In some respects the political donations they receive from coal companies have blinded their judgment.
In terms of my support for compulsory full preferential voting, I believe it is vital for a democracy. Voters have to fill in all the boxes from 1 – 6 or whatever. Otherwise we could end up with a minority government. For example the election results could be:
ALP 37%
LNP 35%
GNS 27%
ONP 15%
IND 10%
If there are no preferences and everyone just voted one which is what the ALP promote to do every year, then the ALP would be elected with only 37% of Qld’ers voting for them. This is not a majority.
Gday Steven.
Yes I know who you are of course! I am not ashamed of my political allegiances, although I think that they mean less than they once did. The major parties are both climbing over each other to take the middle ground.
I will reserve judgment of compulsory preferencing.
I was told that at the last State election, when Labor's State-wide policy was 'Vote 1 Labor' (with no preferences allocated), a special deal was arranged at the local level in FNQ. In Barron River, for instance, if my information is accurate, Labor agreed to a preference swap with the Greens.
But on election day, Labor's How to Vote cards in Barron River said 'Vote 1 Labor'. No second preference was recommended. In other words, Labor reneged on the deal. A printer's error was blamed. :-)
Is that story true? If so, I presume printers will be more carefully scrutinized this time round?
If I was part of the Greens decision-making process, i wouldn't consider preferencing a party this time round that didn't return the favour (and gurantee to fulfil its promise!) Especially with Optional Preferential Voting.
Hi Syd,
You are spot on. In actual fact the Labor hacks even went one step further. They organised dummy volunteers to look a little greenie like and hand out 'How to Vote' cards that were printed in the colour green. The cards recommended voting 1 Green and 2nd to Labor and then exhausting after 2. Their volunteers were saying at the booths to voters 'are you voting green, if so take this card?' I suppose this was helping the Greens to improve their primary vote but very deceptive politics by the ALP. I think there is a big push by the Greens in this state election for each branch to decide preferences as the Greens are sick of being a preference machine for the ALP. I know there is a big push for a Just Vote 1 policy by the Greens even though this is undemocratic but this will stuff the majors and then they will have to re-think preferential voting rules.
I'll stick my two bob's worth in. The ALP regularly forgets that it seeks power to govern in the interests of social justice, and this requires it to be responsive and accountable to what the citizens want.
Right now we're at the trough of that cycle where the Premier, Anna Blahblahblah, her chief of staff, Mike Kaiser, and ALL our local members think voters are best treated with contempt.
I'll be voting one for the Greens, and I'll be giving an effective preference vote to the LNP - not because I think the LNP has all the answers, but because the ALP needs booting out.
I expect that in the short term we'll get more of a hearing from the LNP on environmental issues than we'll get from Labor. I expect that any Labor promises now will be hollow lies.
Eventually I want to see Green members of parliament.
Lawrence's National Party supporting Green principles? You must be be dreaming! It's never happened in the past with the Nats and once Lawrence starts looking for money for his new hospitals and his own hollow lies it won't happen in the future. This mob has worse form than the current apology for a Labor government.
Actually Francis you will find the LNP has some well thought out green policies that are both good for business and good for the environment. Granted these predominantly fall in the "clean energy" category, such as the solar tariff feed-in policy, and the ethanol policy.
Of course, people on the left are now divided on whether ethanol is a green policy these days. Perhaps Steven you might elaborate on what the Greens actually think of ethanol these days? Id be interested to hear it.
Bryan, it sounds to me like what you are suggesting is a sound strategy. If it does nothing else, it will scare the living daylights out of Wettenhall and Boyle that is for certain.
Hi JKR,
You say the LNP has some good Green Policies. I'm having trouble finding any of the LNP policies via the web. Do they exist?
In terms of ethanol production and use I personally believe that it is a good form of fuel when derived as a by-product from an agricultural crop. If we have to start planting agricultural crops on good agricultural land so we can manufacture fuel then we have gone too far. Additionally, if forests have to be cleared to manufacture ethanol then it defeats the purpose. Either way, there is no way we can manufacture enough ethanol to replace traditional petrol or diesel. Ethanol will only be a small part of the solution to the huge fuel crisis that we will face in the upcoming years.
I agree with Steve. Can't find the LNP environment polices.
Ethanol is a thorny issue. I don't care what agricultural industries we have as long as they are sustainable. But the sugar industry, as a whole, is a notorious polluter. The rivers and reef bear the brunt of its excessive use of chemicals. Anything that props it up through more public susbsidy is a retrograde step, IMO.
Now if only there was a crop that could be grown easily, broadscale and organically... come to think of it, there is. Pity it's (mainly) illegal.
The environmental hypocrisy of the mainstream farming lobby is almost as bad as the coal industry. I've had it up to here with people who should known better rorting the meaning of the words 'sustainability' and 'environmentally-freindly' for their own ends.
Rural Australians and greens are natural allies, but the rural folk need to get real. They can't keep cheating on the environment. They need to stop trying to evade environmental controls and start embracing them fully. They may well need help doing that. That's where the green movement comes in. We can push, not only for tighter controls on degrading the environment, but for generous practical help to make this possible.
If we worked at it from both ends, we could win that debate, instead of letting the big end of town have its way all the time. Beats me why it doesn't happen.
Hey Steve -
A few links for you.
http://www.springborg.com/policy/policy-page/clean-energy-capital-of-australia.html
http://www.springborg.com/policy/policy-page/climate-proof.html
http://www.springborg.com/policy/policy-page/clean-fuel-ethanol.html
Hope they help.
I think the environment policies of the LNP are far better than those of Labor.
Post a Comment