Queensland Election 2004

Executive Summary

The 2004 Queensland state election was held on 7 February 2004.

During the campaign no matter what was promised by the National-Liberal Coalition, the polls remained firmly the Premiers way, suggesting that his partys majority would remain healthy after the counting was completed. Despite this, there were three areas of policy that might harm the Government: sugar industry issues, land clearing and the long-delayed Tugun bypass.

The Labor campaign had two parts to it. On the one hand, there was a heavy focus upon Premier Beattie who followed a well-trodden path around the State. The second part of the Labor campaign focussed on local efforts to hold seats that the party had surprisingly won in 2001.

The Nationals and the Liberal Party were united as rarely before, agreeing to reject nominations that would produce three-cornered contests. The early stages of campaigning saw the two party leaders, Lawrence Springborg (NPA) and Bob Quinn (LP), campaigning together. This was criticised, largely because it tended to take Quinn away from those areas where his party needed to win seats if it were to restore its parliamentary presence to a more respectable level. The parties proffered a full set of policies, but despite this the Opposition campaign was unusually defensive. Rather than portraying himself as an alternative premier, Springborg soon began to speak of the election being an opportunity [for voters] to be able to restore the balance in the Parliament, rather than actually bringing about the defeat of the Government.

With ALP first preference votes rising in nearly two-fifths of its seats, the Labor Partys first preference tally fell by just 1.9 per cent. This result produced a nett loss of three seats, leaving it with 63 of the 89 Legislative Assembly seatsa parliamentary majority of 37 seats. Labors comfortable victory reflected the high standing of the Premier and his government during the years since the previous election. The Coalition parties proved unable to make any major dents in popular support for the Beattie team, despite a rise in the votes for each party. Although many voters apparently liked what they saw of Springborg, this appreciation did not show up in a sufficiently large increase for the Coalition to win a large parcel of seats. Much of the Coalition increase came from One Nations loss of votes, combined with the collapse of the City Country Alliance.

Despite some confusion in their campaigning, the Greens proportion of the vote rose from 2.5 per cent to 6.8 per cent, suggesting that the increase in their support in the southern states was being seen in Queensland as well.

Although One Nation contested twelve more seats than in 2001, their vote tumbled to 4.9 per cent, 17.8 per cent behind its 1998 high point. The party managed to retain one of its two seats but lost its leader, Bill Flynn.

For the immediate future:

the Queensland Parliament will remain dominated by the Labor Party holding 63 of 89 seats

the Nationals vote of 17 per cent in 2004 remains its third-lowest vote in twenty elections since 1950, causing some observers to speak of the party gradually slipping into oblivionor more correctly, into the position of a rump party whose strength is found in the seats of western Queensland. The party will have 15 seats in the Legislative Assembly

for the Liberal Party, this election saw a small step back from the near-oblivion suffered in 2001 with its three seats being increased by two. For the party to regain any strength in state elections, it has to build on its Gold Coast and Sunshine Coast seats and break back into Brisbane. The problem for the party is working out how to regain the support of many people who vote for it in Commonwealth electionsthe so-called Beattie Liberals

the Liberal performance in recent elections is a reminder of how parties may not do well in a state election, yet may do very well in that state in a Commonwealth election held close to the time of the state elections

the Greens are positioned well for the next Senate poll

several strong independents occupy seats that will be difficult for the major parties to regain, and

the 2004 state election may well have been the last hurrah for One Nation in a Queensland election.

Introduction

The 2004 Queensland election saw the Labor Government of Peter Beattie returned with just the loss of three Legislative Assembly seats, leaving it with 63 of 89 seats. This result confirms the widely-held view that if a state government appears to be well in control of the states administration and services, it can be difficult to defeat. After barely winning office in 1998, Beattie swept to a clear victory in 2001 and has now retained office with a still-comfortable parliamentary majority. At the same time, the Coalition parties combined votes rose by an amount sufficient for them to feel that they will be well within reach of office at the time of the next election, something that Nationals leader, Lawrence Springborg has emphasised in the period since the polling day.

Among other outcomes:

despite retaining one of its two Members of Parliament, the One Nation partys vote fell to a point where it was barely a factor in the election. One Nations sole MP, Rosa Lee Long, has not ruled out a move to becoming an independent

along with the near-collapse of One Nation, the disappearance of the City Country Alliance played a part in the increase in Coalition votes

the election saw the first significant performance by Green candidates in a Queensland election, with some Brisbane seats returning Green votes that matched some of the highest votes in the most recent Victorian and New South Wales elections. The Green performance across the state suggested that a Green Senate seat is within reach at the next Commonwealth election, and

five of the six independents in the Parliament regained their seats; four increased their primary vote, and all seem well-entrenched.

Background to the election

The 2004 Queensland state election was held on 7 February 2004. Although the election was early, it was only ten days short of the anniversary of the 2001 poll.

The electoral boundaries were those used for the previous election.

The dissolution of Parliament saw several well-known Coalition Members leaving the Legislative Assembly: former Liberal leader and Deputy Premier, Joan Sheldon, (Caloundra, MP since 1990), former Member of the House of Representatives (Forde) and state Liberal leader David Watson (Moggill, 1989), and former National Party minister Vince Lester (Keppel, 1974). Labor ministers leaving the Parliament included Minister for Employment, Training and Youth, Matt Foley (Yeerongpilly, 1989), Minister for Health Wendy Edmond (Mount Coot-tha, 1989) and Minister for Transport and Main Roads, Steve Bredhauer (Cook, 1989). The ALP Member for Thuringowa, Anita Phillips (2001), left the Parliament to seek pre-selection for the Commonwealth seat of Herbert.

New rules of the game

The 2004 election was conducted under revised electoral legislation. The Electoral and Other Acts Amendment Act 2002(Qld) was passed to implement electoral reforms that had been discussed in Premier Beatties Good Government Plan released in January 2001. This part of the plan had flowed from recommendations made in the previous year by the Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee of the Queensland Parliament.⁽¹⁾ The changes included:

new registration requirements for political parties

more detail required in party constitutions including procedures for amending party constitutions, how parties manage their internal affairs, and rules for election of office bearers and party candidates

party preselection ballots to satisfy general principles of free and democratic elections

how-to-vote cards to be lodged in advance of elections, and to be made public to voters

public disclosure of loans and gifts to candidates

tougher penalties for electoral offences, and

funding and disclosure provisions written so as to achieve greater consistency with Commonwealth arrangements.⁽²⁾

The standing of the parties

Opinion poll findings made it clear that the opposition parties were unlikely to defeat the Beattie Labor Government. Newspoll figures since the 2001 Queensland election indicated a remarkable stability in the public standing of the three major players. In three years of polls, the intended ALP vote figure varied between 45 and 53 per cent, with an average of 47.8 per cent; their opponents combined vote ranged from 31 to 38 per cent, with an average of 34.7 per cent. The average margin between them was 13 per cent, with the closest figure being seven per cent in a poll taken in AprilJune 2003. Significantly, though, the gap widened from that poll until election day, with a margin of 14 per cent on the eve of the election.⁽³⁾

These poll findings suggest that enough voters were satisfied with Peter Beattie and his government to make their return to the government benches virtually certain. This was despite some problems such as the future of the sugar industry, and the costly failure of the Australian Magnesium Corporation to start a light metals industry near Rockhampton. The number of major problems was small, however, with one Courier-Mail journalist in fact speaking of the Governments relatively good record on keeping its election pledges.⁽⁴⁾ Observers referred approvingly to Beatties leadership skills,⁽⁵⁾ his relatively benign rule,⁽⁶⁾ and his personal rapport with the Queensland electorate.⁽⁷⁾ Even in the final year of his second term, Newspoll was suggesting that the Premiers approval rating remained remarkably constant, from a high of 69 per cent to just eight percentage points lower. Never more than 25 per cent of those polled expressed themselves to be dissatisfied with his performance over this period.⁽⁸⁾

If a state government remains popular, there is little traction that an opposition can make. As noted above, the Coalition never managed to reduce the margin between the parties to less than seven percentage points in the three years between the two elections. Any improvement in the Coalitions standing could largely be explained by a shift away from various minor parties rather than a marked drop in support for Labor. Coalition support therefore was up, but Labors support had barely slipped.

About twelve months before the election, the Nationals had replaced Mike Horan with Lawrence Springborg as party leader. Springborgs poll standing gradually climbed from FebruaryMarch 2003 where about one-third of those polled expressed satisfaction with his performance, to nearly half saying so on the eve of the election. Most tellingly, however, the uncommitted figure, which was presumably made up largely of people who were unaware of his having the position, remained at about one-third of those polled, a typical figure for state leaders of the Opposition.

The electoral battle

A week from polling day, the competing electoral juggernauts of Premier Peter Beattie and Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg continue on their way, stirring up apathy the length and breadth of Queensland. For many people, its too hot, too humid and too hectic with the back-to-school rush to focus on policy debates, such as they are in this lacklustre campaign.⁽⁹⁾

Such a comment from a journalist presumably reflected the widely-expressed view that the Governments return was certain. No matter what was promised by the National-Liberal Coalition, the polls remained firmly in favour of the Premier during the campaign, suggesting that his partys majority would remain healthy. Despite this, there were three areas of policy that were regarded as dangerous for the Government:

in the seats in which sugar was a major industry, efforts were made, particularly by Commonwealth MP, Bob Katter, to produce a field of sugar independents. These non-party candidates nominated in an effort to reduce sitting members votes and to draw attention to the strength of opposition to such matters as deregulation, the level of government assistance, the question of mandated ethanol content in fuel and the declining number of sugar growers⁽¹⁰⁾

land clearing in Queensland has been an issue since the days of the Bjelke-Petersen coalition government. Successive governments have been loath to promise to stop this agricultural clearing for fear of antagonising the farm lobby. In this election, however, Premier Beattie promised to end land clearing by 2006, throwing the Green party off-guard and antagonising the farmers spokespeople at Agforce who described the promise as an appalling political act.⁽¹¹⁾ It remained to be seen what this might do to the Governments rural vote, and

a long-mootedand long-delayedbypass in the Gold Coast suburb of Tugun gained a great deal of publicity, most of it critical of the Governments failure to deliver on an old promise to build the freeway. Would this adversely affect Labors recently-gained vote in the South-East?

Labor

The Labor campaign had two parts to it. It has now become part and parcel of Australian electioneering that a focus on leaders is the preferred party tactic. This gives parties much more control over what they are attempting to do. It also is designed to lessen the danger of damaging mistakes being made during the campaign. It was therefore inevitable that the Labor Government would base its campaign upon the Premierthe only other minister to be heard regularly was the Deputy Premier and Treasurer, Terry Mackenroth.

When announcing an early election, the Premier began the campaign in an apparently odd fashion. In the previous week, the Crime and Misconduct Commission handed down a damning report into questions associated with child protection. The Commission found serious long-term problems with the way in which claims of abuse against children in care were handled by government. In his announcement, Beattie justified the calling of an early election by stating that it was important to have a new government in place quickly to implement child protection reforms. The early election was, he claimed, all about putting children first.⁽¹²⁾ A journalist was cynical:

since when has a margin of 66-15 over the Opposition (with another eight seats held by independents and minor parties), and no upper house to worry about, not been sufficient authority for a government to act?⁽¹³⁾

After this unusual beginning, Beatties was a steady campaign which delivered the party to voters in much the same shape as it had been when the election was announced. If there were any doubts within the party headquarters, they would probably have been caused by uncertainty over the partys likely performance in the sugar seats and on the Gold and Sunshine Coasts, areas where the party made some surprise gains in 2001. This uncertainty may well have caused the Premier on election-eve to promisefor the third consecutive campaignthat the Tugun bypass would actually be built. The promise was made without confirmation that necessary Commonwealth money would be forthcoming. This produced unwelcome photographs in the press, featuring householders at Bilinga whose houses would be resumed for the bypass construction: theres no way theyre bloody getting us out of here, unless its in a box, claimed a 40-year resident of doomed Adina Avenue.⁽¹⁴⁾

The second part of the Labor campaign focussed on the need to hold individual seats. According to former ALP Queensland state secretary, Mike Kaiser, the party sought to avoid the debacle of 1995 when the loss of several marginal seats saw the partys comfortable parliamentary majority reduced to a single seat. The party had made a considerable break-through in many seats in 2001 and needed to hold on to these seats if it were to keep its position secure23 Labor MPs were facing their first re-election. Assuming that it is harder for voters to cast a protest ballot against a government when they know and relate to their local member, Labor worked at building up a positive profile of their more vulnerable MPs.⁽¹⁵⁾

Unsurprisingly, Labor sought to take advantage of the optional preferential voting system by calling on voters to Just vote 1, just as it had done in 2001.⁽¹⁶⁾

This policy was designed to:

lessen the impact of the exchange of preferences between the Liberals and the Nationals

encourage One Nation voters not to allocate second preferences which might flow disproportionately against Labor, and

reduce any possible leverage that the Greens might gain in negotiation over the possible exchange of preferences.

The Coalition

The Nationals and the Liberal Party were united as rarely before, agreeing to reject nominations that would produce three-cornered contests. This was a policy effectively forced on the parties by optional preferential voting and the likelihood that many voters would not vote for a full slate of candidates. There was some dispute between the parties over the allocation of candidates to some seats, particularly the running of National rather than Liberal candidates in areas that might have been more supportive of a Liberal candidate. Why were the Liberals not contesting Southport, Broadwater or Burleigh on the Gold Coast, asked one journalist. He went on to question the decision to keep the Liberal Party out of the Brisbane seats of Kurwongbah, Logan, Springwood or Redlands, making the point that such areas were far more likely to be sympathetic to Liberal than to National policies.⁽¹⁷⁾

The early stages of campaigning saw the two party leaders, Lawrence Springborg (NPA) and Bob Quinn (LP), campaigning togetherthe modern-day odd couple, as they were described.⁽¹⁸⁾ This was criticised, partly because photographs seemed always to place the leaders in a rural setting, but largely because it tended to take Quinn away from those areas where his party needed to win seats if it were to rebuild its parliamentary presence. Media criticism also spoke of the Liberals being unable to stake out a different policy stance to that of the Nationals.⁽¹⁹⁾

The parties ran a full complement of policies, as state Oppositions tend to do.⁽²⁰⁾ Some policies were designed to attract particular voters. Some were wide-ranging, such as the reduction of stamp duty for first home buyers, or the creation of enterprise zones for business. Law and order promises were highlighted: mandatory sentencing, tougher penalties for home invasions and public drunkenness, and improvements to general law and order. School principals were to be empowered to remove disruptive people from school grounds and ban them for 24 hours. There were also many locally-targetted policies, such as the money promised for Hervey Bays proposed Fishing Hall of Fame. Rural areas received special attention, most notably the promise of a great deal more money to be spent on rural roads as well as a commitment to sugar growers to guarantee a mandated ten per cent ethanol content in fuel sold in Brisbane. The Nationals made a concerted effort to remind rural voters of how the Beattie Government was too city-centric⁽²¹⁾ in its policies: its schools were anti-farmer according to the Deputy Prime Minister,⁽²²⁾ there was a need to make them [i.e. the Government] hear you all the time, according to Springborg.⁽²³⁾

The Opposition campaign was unusually defensive. Rather than portraying himself as an alternative Premier, Springborg soon began to speak of the election being an opportunity [for voters] to be able to restore the balance in the Parliament, rather than actually bringing about the defeat of the Government. In fact, restoring the balance became the Coalitions campaign slogan. Springborg referred continually to the election providing an opportunity to build a platform from which an office-seeking campaign could be run in 2007. Such an approach no doubt showed a high degree of realism about the Coalitions chances, but it also encouraged the media to quickly write off the Coalitions effort.⁽²⁴⁾ One journalist criticised a strategy which let the Premier dictate each days main media story, with the Coalition being left to respond to Beattie rather than set the days issue themselves. Another journalist criticised Springborgs desire to avoid confrontation, preferring to be a media prop and respond to the news of the week, not create it.⁽²⁵⁾

Ironically, when Springborg drew attention to the violence and addiction problems at the Aboriginal settlement of Cherbourg, he forced a response from the Premier. Beattie said he had been to the community in the past and did not need to go back. He later was forced to admit that this visit had not been since 1995, well before he became Premier.⁽²⁶⁾

The Coalition strategy was said to be two-fold. In the first instance there was an effort to identify Springborg in voters minds. His personal attributes were highlighted and the promise was made that he would lead a united team were the Coalition to be returned to power. Once the Nationals leaders persona was clearly differentiated in the electoral marketplace, the effort would then be to translate his (hopefully) high standing into votes. As referred to above, opinion polls showed a clear improvement in voters awareness of, and support for, Springborg as time went by, but figures for the Coalition remained quite unimpressive. As one headline put it: Springborg: strong leader of a shambles.⁽²⁷⁾ Springborg was not without critics, however. While running a photograph of the Nationals leader feeding dolphins at Tin Can Bay, the Courier-Mail drew attention to his propensity to engage in photographic opportunities that have very little to do with the election or policy issues, the most regular of which were the many pictures of him jogging in the early morning.⁽²⁸⁾

The Greens

The Greens ran a campaign that was dominated by confusion over what should be done about the direction of their preferences. With Labor not engaging in any discussion on the exchange of preferences, the Greens were left isolatedone Green candidate indicated the resulting frustration when claiming that the Governments Just Vote 1 policy was damaging to the electoral process.⁽²⁹⁾ To an important degree, the Greens position was weakened by the Premiers promise to end wholesale land clearing, as well as his governments intention to protect the future of wild rivers. Inexplicably, the Green support for these proposals seemed far more lukewarm than the keenness with which the Wilderness Society had supported them.⁽³⁰⁾ Eventually the Greens allocated preferences to the ALP in 18 seats, including the marginal seats of Clayfield, Burleigh and Broadwater, and to four independents. No Coalition candidate received Green preferences.⁽³¹⁾

One Nation

Before the election, the One Nation leader, Bill Flynn, had spoken of his party contesting up to seventy seats. Flynn said that he recognised the impossibility of disturbing the Government, but he saw this election as the opportunity for One Nation to become the new Opposition party in the Queensland Parliament. He had also stated that the party would welcome Pauline Hanson, whether as candidate or campaigner.⁽³²⁾ In the event, One Nation nominated 51 candidates, twelve more than in 2001. Lacking the support and presence of the media-friendly Hanson, the party had difficulty getting any consistent coverage, particularly as Flynn rarely left Brisbane.⁽³³⁾

Distractions

This was an election remarkable for the number of distractions that occurred, the political impact of which was difficult to calculate:

In the seats in which sugar was a major industry, efforts were made, particularly by Commonwealth MP, Bob Katter, to produce a field of sugar independents. These non-party candidates nominated in an effort to reduce sitting members votes and draw attention to the strength of opposition to policies of Commonwealth and state governments.

Labor Minister for Tourism and Racing and Minister for Fair Trading, Merri Rose, stepped down from office on the second day of the campaign. This followed a ruling in a workers compensation case which supported claims that she had bullied a former employee. Rose had earlier embarrassed the Government when it was revealed that her son had been using her government car and fuel card to travel to work. She later repaid money improperly charged by her son to the card during a return trip to Sydney for a football match. Her departure from office so close to polling day left the Labor Party worried about whether she could hold her Gold Coast seat of Currumbin in a region so recently controlled by its opponents. The Premier had been criticised for not requiring that Rose step down much sooner.⁽³⁴⁾

Pauline Hanson and David Etteridge chose to use the election campaign as a means to publicise their claims against the Government in relation to their gaoling between August and November 2003. Hanson spoke of seeking $2 million in compensation⁽³⁵⁾

the Nationals candidate for Maryborough was dropped by his party, for failing to reveal that he had been subject to a domestic violence order two years previously⁽³⁶⁾

the Nationals candidate for Cook gained publicity for calling his party colleagues a bunch of dickheads. He retained his endorsement⁽³⁷⁾

the Nationals candidate in Whitsunday was disendorsed after being found to have an apparent Nazi Party background from many years before. He claimed that he had been working in an undercover role at a time a photo showing him with a Nazi armband appeared in the press in 1966⁽³⁸⁾

the Liberal candidate for Ashgrove was reported as being investigated for an alleged assault⁽³⁹⁾

the Labor Party ruled out disendorsing their candidate for Gregory despite bullying a co-worker three years before⁽⁴⁰⁾

when it was revealed that the One Nation candidate for Toowoomba North faced assault charges, he resigned from the party to run as an independent rather than damage the party⁽⁴¹⁾

the Coalition aired an advertisement early in the campaign which featured a woman stating she would not vote for Premier Beattie. When it was revealed that the actor involved was not on the Queensland electoral roll, a Nationals spokesperson was criticised for stating that the matter was private. One editor asked, Is it not right to expect a level of truth in political advertising which extends to the actors used in party promotions?⁽⁴²⁾

the fact Lawrence Springborg allowed the media to take and publish a photograph of him clad only in a towel while he did his ironing was criticised or ridiculed in the press. Linda Springborg also gained media coverage for her assurance to newspaper readers that there was more to her ruro-sexual husband than his good looks and toned muscles,⁽⁴³⁾ and

a press article that seemed to criticise Linda Springborg for avoiding the election trail prompted the Nationals leader to be photographed by the media with his family (including his wife). It was difficult to see how the Nationals leader had anything to gain by allowing himself to be distracted from the campaign in this way.⁽⁴⁴⁾ One journalist did attempt to turn the story back on the ALP, suggesting that the criticism of Linda Springborg was made by city-dwelling, latte-sipping critics, who, by implication, were Labor supporters.⁽⁴⁵⁾

The result

In the book Australian State Politics published nearly twenty years ago, it was observed that two related questions play a part in all state elections held in this countryleadership and administrative competence. Of great importance to this is the standing of the Premier. As head of the states administration and the most visible member of the governing party, the Premier is usually seen as crucial to a governments chances of re-election. Aligned with this, is the electorates view of the Premiers government. If the trains run on time and it seems clear that the incumbent government is better-equipped to handle the states administration than their opponents, it can be very hard for an Opposition to gain power, even when the image of that Opposition may be a positive one.⁽⁴⁶⁾

In the 2004 Queensland election, it seems that an analyst need not go past these words to explain the election result. As mentioned earlier, the standing of the Premier and his government had remained consistently high in the polls, with the Coalition parties unable to make any long-term dents in their popular support. The change in the leadership of the Nationals certainly saw the standing of the Leader of the Opposition rise in the polls (see above). Although many voters apparently liked what they saw of Lawrence Springborg, this appreciation did not flow on to either of the Coalition partners in sufficient measure for them to succeed.

Labor

The Governments win was almost as comfortable as that of 2001. With ALP primary votes rising in nearly two-fifths of its seats, the partys first preference tally fell by only 1.9 per cent. This result produced a nett loss of three seats, leaving it with 63 of the 89 Legislative Assembly seatsa parliamentary majority of 37.⁽⁴⁷⁾ Labor lost three seats to the Nationals (Burdekin, Burnett and Charters Towers), lost Merri Roses Currumbin to the Liberal Party, and picked up Vince Lesters seat of Keppel from the Nationals. Burdekin and Burnett were both sugar seats, but the Governments vote actually rose in Burdekin, as it did in the sugar seats of Hervey Bay and Whitsunday, suggesting that the sugar independents presence did not do a great deal of damage to the Government (or the Opposition). Queensland Country Life referred to survey figures that suggested the ALP would receive only five per cent of the bush vote, but Labors 2001 regional and rural vote was still 39.1 per cent, a fall of only 2.2 per cent.⁽⁴⁸⁾

Labors determination to see the re-election of its 2001 MPs bore fruit. Sixteen of the 23 who were seeking their second term saw an increase in their primary vote; only three of the new MPs were defeated. Essentially, Labor lost votes where it could afford to do so. Among the most spectacular examples were Cook (-21.8%), Bundaberg (-13.7%) and Bulimba (-12.5%), yet Labor retained these seats. It seems that those seats in which the party lost most votes were largely affected by local factors such as the sugar issue (Burnett and Bundaberg), a controversial local member (Currumbin and Townsville) or the retirement of a Minister (Cook, Mt Coot-tha and Yeerongpilly). Thirteen of Labors 20 most marginal seats saw a pro-Labor shift:

Labor marginal seatsfirst preference votes (* seats lost)

Seat	Swing to Labor	Swing from Labor
Noosa	6.4
Burnett*		4.3
Burleigh	3.0
Toowoomba Nth	8.0
Charters Towers*		0.2
Broadwater		3.1
Kawana	1.8
Indooroopilly	2.2
Thuringowa	3.8
Aspley		4.4
Burdekin*	0.1
Mudgeeraba	3.2
Redlands	4.9
Barron River		0.7
Ipswich West	3.1
Gaven	0.9
Hervey Bay	2.3
Mansfield	0.5
Mt Ommaney	3.4
Townsville		9.5
Totals (ave swing)	13 (3.4%)	7 (3.2%)

Source: Electoral Commission of Queensland

One of the ALPs major concerns was whether the party could retain the striking 2001 gains on the Gold and Sunshine Coasts. Although there was overall slippage of the Labor vote in Brisbane and the rural and regional seats, the partys share of the vote did not move at all on the Gold or Sunshine Coasts. Currumbin was the only Labor seat lost:

Labors regional vote 19982001

	Brisbane	Gold and Sunshine Coasts	Regional and Rural
1998	46.9	29.2	33.5
2001	57.9	43.1	41.3
2004	55.5	43.1	39.1

Source: Gerard Newman, 1998 Queensland Election, Current Issues Brief, no. 2, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 199899; Scott Bennett and Gerard Newman, Queensland Election 2001, Current Issues Brief, no. 15, 2000‑01, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 200001; and Electoral Commission Queensland.

The Coalition

The Coalitions nett gain was five seats, giving it 20 of 89 seats.

The Nationals won Burdekin, Burnett and Charters Towers from Labor, and Lockyer from One Nation, but lost Vince Lesters seat of Keppel to Labor. In the new Parliament, it would have fifteen seats.

The Liberal Party won Currumbin from Labor and Surfers Paradise from an independent, giving it five seats in the Parliament.

The Greens

Despite the confusions in their campaigning (see above), the Green proportion of the vote rose from 2.5 per cent to 6.8 per cent, suggesting that the increase in their support in the southern states was being seen in Queensland as well. As in the most recent New South Wales and Victorian elections, some Brisbane seats saw the Greens challenging the Liberal Party. In Mt Coot-tha their vote was 23.6 per cent (Liberal Party 30.1%), and in South Brisbane their vote was 20 per cent (Liberal Party 24.1%). The Green vote topped ten per cent in 14 other seats, including Townsville where their candidate managed a first preference vote of 13 per cent.

One Nation

By the time of the election, One Nation held just two Legislative Assembly seats. Despite contesting 12 more seats than in 2001 the partys vote tumbled to 4.9 per cent, 17.8 per cent behind its 1998 high point:

One Nation 19982004

Election	Candidates	Seats won	Votes	%	Swing
1998	79	11	439 121	22.7	+22.7
2001	39	3	179 076	8.7	-14.0
2004	51	1	104 980	4.9	-3.8

In the South-Eastern seat of Lockyer, the party leader, Bill Flynn, gained only 20.5 per cent of First Preferences (-7.8%) and was defeated comfortably on preferences by the Nationals Ian Rickuss. By contrast, the party managed to retain the Far North Queensland seat of Tablelands, where Rosa Lee Long showed that a steady performance by a One Nation sitting member could secure an electoral reward. She gained a remarkable 47 per cent of First Preferences (+11%), and became the first One Nation MP anywhere in Australia to achieve re-election. It is uncertain whether she will remain a party MP or will shift to the independent benchesshe has said that such a move will depend on what future directions we take.⁽⁴⁹⁾

One Nations state director, Rod Evans, blamed the lack of money and Hansons absence for the partys poor performance. Griffith Universitys John Wanna pronounced the partys end, suggesting that it was unlikely to secure the re-election of Senator Len Harris in the forthcoming national election.⁽⁵⁰⁾

Independents

At the time of the election, independents held six seats. One of these, Lex Bell, lost Surfers Paradise to the Liberal Party. The remaining five all seem to be well-entrenched. The longest-serving members, Liz Cunningham (Gladstone, 55.3%, +4.7%) and Peter Wellington (Nicklin, 59.5%, +13.2%) both increased their personal vote to very healthy levels. In Maryborough, the absence of a National candidate (see above) enabled Chris Foley, elected in a September 2003 by-election, to almost double his vote (64.9%, +31.6%). The two independents who had originally been elected as One Nation MPs also consolidated their positions. In Gympie, Elisa Roberts only managed one-third of First Preferences, though that was an increase of 7.7 per cent, and she won comfortably on preferences. Only Dolly Pratt in Nanango saw her vote fall (-0.5%), but with a first preference tally of 45.7 per cent her position was hardly in doubt.

The next Parliament

The Governments position

The Government is still apparently impregnable, for it would take the loss of nineteen seats to see its majority disappear. It has lost votes in many seats, but has also begun to cement itself into seats won as recently as 2001. Labor has an important presence in all regions except the western portion of the State, which gives it a strength that (barring governmental disasters) will make it difficult to defeat.

The Nationals

It was once usual for the Liberal Party to gain more votes but fewer seats than the Country/National Party. This was reversed between the 1977 and 1995 elections, with the National Party managing nearly 40 per cent of the vote in 1986. Since that election however, the Nationals vote has declined to the point where it managed only 14.2 per cent in 2001. The slight increase to 17 per cent in 2004 remains its third-lowest vote in twenty elections since 1950. In a reminder of earlier times, the last three elections have also seen the party winning fewer votes than the Liberal Party.

Probably a key aspect of the Nationals declining electoral health is the concentration of its support in just one region of the state. Using Electoral Commission of Queensland classifications, we find that seven of their fifteen Legislative Assembly seats are today held in Western Queensland. Of the eight others, three are in the rural South East, two are in each of Central Queensland and North Queensland, and there is a single seat on the Sunshine Coast. The party has been hurt by the resurgence of the ALP during the 1990s, as well as the number and strength of the independents elected in the last three elections (see above). The Nationals have also been badly wounded by the drop in their vote in Gold and Sunshine Coast electorates, symbolised by their loss in 2001 of Surfers Paradise, the seat (from 1980) of former party leader, Rob Borbidge. In 1995 the party won seven of the thirteen seats in these areas; in 2004 it held just Maroochydore of the fifteen Gold or Sunshine Coast seats:

Nationals vote 19952001

	Statewide	Gold and Sunshine Coasts
1995	26.3	29.9
1998	15.2	22.6
2001	14.2	17.1
2004	17.0	12.9

Current Issues Brief Index

Current Issues Brief no.8 2003-04