Electoral (Improving Representation) and Another Act Amendment Bill 2015

Introduced the bill to increase the Legislative Assembly from 89 to 93 seats to preserve rural and regional representation, arguing that without action the next redistribution would further erode country seats and leave vital industries unrepresented.

“Unless this bill is passed, the next redistribution, which is due in 2016, will most likely result in more rural and regional seats being lost to South-East Queensland.”— 2015-12-02View Hansard

Opposed the bill on behalf of the government, arguing no compelling evidence-based case had been made for more seats, the demography qualification was unduly restrictive, and the bipartisan appointment requirement could frustrate the upcoming redistribution.

“When I travel around the state and I talk to people about growing jobs in this state to deliver a high-skilled workforce and innovation, not a single person has suggested that what they want is more politicians.”— 2015-12-02View Hansard

Supported the bill on behalf of the opposition, arguing that without action the five large rural seats would shrink to four and then fewer, and that additional resources and technology cannot substitute for adequate parliamentary representation.

“The view of this side of the House is that the measure proposed by the member for Mount Isa is in the category of doing something is better than doing nothing at all.”— 2015-12-02View Hansard

Opposed the bill, arguing there was no public demand for more state politicians, the costs could not be justified, and Professor Orr's evidence showed the increase of four seats would have minimal impact on the stated aims.

“My constituents are aware that the costs of wages and expenses for state members are considerable and to increase the number of state members of the Legislative Assembly by four members is a cost that could not possibly be justified.”— 2015-12-02View Hansard

Supported the bill as essential to maintaining the status quo for rural representation, arguing that without additional seats the already vast electorates of Mount Isa, Gregory and Dalrymple would expand further and make it impossible for members to serve their constituents.

“Do other members know what it is like to wake up in the morning and know that you have to get in your car and drive to your electoral office and it is 570 kilometres of driving—and that after this redistribution it is going to be 770 kilometres?”— 2015-12-02View Hansard

Opposed the bill for three reasons: no public demand to increase parliament's size, no evidence the bill would significantly improve representation, and the bill's amendments to appointment processes could delay or legally jeopardise the upcoming redistribution.

“If one of the stated purposes is to improve representation, there is no evidence to say that this bill will achieve that. In fact, there is some evidence which was produced by witnesses to the committee that suggests that it will not achieve that purpose at all.”— 2015-12-02View Hansard

Opposed the bill, acknowledging geographic challenges facing regional MPs but arguing that extra resources, the North Queensland office, and innovation are better responses than creating more electorates.

“The reality is that the last thing Queenslanders want is more politicians. They just want us as politicians to get on with our jobs, to serve the people of Queensland and to work hard for our constituents.”— 2015-12-02View Hansard

Opposed the bill as committee chair, noting that expert evidence described the four extra seats as only a stopgap measure with no defined relief for the five large regional seats, and that the committee received very few public submissions.

“So there you have an expert who appears before the committee on a regular basis indicating that providing four extra seats, as provided for in this bill, would only be a stopgap exercise.”— 2015-12-02View Hansard

Opposed the bill, arguing there was no community demand for extra politicians and that the existing seat weighting system perversely creates unwieldy large electorates by making it easier for redistribution commissions to add real estate rather than voters.

“The party opposite is about extra jobs for politicians.”— 2015-12-02View Hansard