The kaleidoscopic politics of Queensland become even more confusing as election approaches. A record number of minor parties and candidates have emerged in the State’s political landscape. The Queensland parliament has 93 seats. There are 342 minor party candidates and 69 without party endorsement or running as independents seeking to get a share of the spoils.
A robust democracy is certainly a healthy one, but it is not enhanced by single-issue parties who don’t possess broad ideological based programs.
However, this phenomenon has been gathering pace for a number of years as disillusion and frustration with major political parties and their offspring seems to have found a significant foothold within our electoral system. In the last Federal election (2019) we saw 1 in 4 voters decline to vote for a major party, in the last State election (2017) we witnessed more than 30% of primary votes directed away from the major parties. However we can only speculate whether there will be a reversal of that drift in the current “pandemic” conditions. Maybe it is these conditions that partially explain the move towards presidential campaigning as well as Palaszczuk’s desire to make electoral use of her personal popularity.
Cutting to the chase, the Queensland political paradox emerges as a battle of the Cs – coal and climate. There are, of course, many lesser issues bearing on the election but the elephant in the electoral office is clearly coal mines and climate change. As much as Labor and the LNP endeavour to mask these cleavages, both parties face significant challenges appealing to voters in the city as well as those in the regions. These city voters differ not only in terms of geography and income but more importantly they differ in their worldview from their brothers and sisters in the north. Which make attempts to “walk both sides of the road” doomed – as Bill Shorten found out to his misfortune.
Our marketing specialist PM ‘Scomo’ loves regional Queensland and why not, it was there that he found his ‘miracle’ win in the recent Federal election. While the rest of us endeavour to generate an economic recovery, he is finding plenty of time to hold Deb Frecklington’s hand in north Qld. Will Federal issues spill over into a State election? Perhaps we should be content with that, at least he is not dabbling ineptly in gas deals under the guise of recovery economics in Canberra or on a beach in Hawaii! Anyway, it appears that the LNP is prepared to write down metropolitan seats for the Libs greater ‘Canberra’ good.
Perhaps a more significant issue is the decision by the LNP state executive to institute a “put Labor last” preference strategy. Such a strategy carries major implications. The major beneficiary, of course, will be the Greens – they can expect to now win at least two perhaps three seats. They will hold Maiwar and may defeat Jackie Trad in South Brisbane if she can’t raise her primary vote a couple of points. Maybe even another in McConnel.
Robbie Katter with his merry men of the Katter Australia Party are also availing themselves of this dilemma while the LNP and Labor wander between the two worlds of coal and climate, unsure whether they will find themselves in Toowong or Townsville. Now of course, Katter is finalising a preference deal with One Nation.
Meanwhile, the two Cs are wreaking havoc in the resources sector with both BHP and Origin suspending membership of the Qld Resources Council following asinine and bewildering statements from Council re Greens preferencing.
Clearly, this is a kaleidoscopic election dominated by micro messaging – both major parties attempting to implement a “horses for courses” policy strategy.
As a consequence, we have:
- LNP putting the ALP last. Effectively preferencing the Greens over Labor (including anti-vaxxers, far-right groups, any fringe dweller)
- LNP using Scomo in the north hoping to encourage more ‘miracles’
- ALP jettisoning Shorten’s failed ‘macro’ policy and recognising diverse constituencies eg now supporting Adani under the ‘motherhood’ rubric of “jobs, jobs, jobs” in an effort to give some cohesion in managing the divide
- Katter Party extracting as much as possible from the two Cs – with no concerns for any city backlash
- Greens are in similar situation but embracing different constituencies.
- Greens also portray themselves as having broader political concerns than the environment. Yet we find difficulty in getting answers to questions of social importance. e.g. given the inevitable obsolescence of fossil fuels, what support is proposed for the economic survival of such communities. ALP take note!
- Palmer’s United Australia party has again emerged from the swamp with its deeply clever message “give Labor the boot”. Will not win a seat but operate as a Labor spoiler in conjunction with the LNP
Not only have the two Cs dominated this election, we could justifiably add “hi-vis and hard-hats”. It would seem that the Premier and Deb Frecklington, as they roam the State campaigning, have picked up where the recent Federal budget left off. The bulk of their investment announcements are directed towards the blokey stuff. Mining, energy, construction etc certainly provide photo ops in orange vests, yet they rank nowhere near Queensland’s biggest job-creating sectors. According to research provided by The Australia Institute, every $1m invested generates 1 job in mining; 15 jobs in education and training; 12 in health care; 10 in hospitality. Plainly,
the ‘hi-vis and hard-hat’ industry sectors can’t compete in job-creation except in terms of colourful photo ops. Unfortunately, what we are witnessing is both parties ignoring the employment-intense sectors and preferring photo opportunities.
And we are actually paying these people?
In a recent book by Chris Wallace, he proffered advice that to win an election leaders must do both the “substance and theatre of politics well”. Sound advice. The purpose of theatre is to get attention – you can’t communicate a message if nobody is listening. So far in this campaign we have an excess of attention-seeking behaviour but have been exposed to little of policy substance. One has to wonder as Peggy Lee did in the ‘60s with those immortal words “Is that all there is?”.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.