WI One Nation take government in Queensland?

[BlackMage]

EDIT: Incidently, I feel I should explain for non-Aussies that One Nation are (were) a racist, nationalist, protectionist far-right party that espoused reactionary conservatism. Think the French National Front, or check Wiki.

On 13 June 1998, the One Nation Party took 23% of the vote in the Queensland state election, and 11 out of 89 seats. The Labor government of Peter Beattie took power from the National/Liberal coalition government of Rob Borbidge, but only with the support of an independent.

So my question is, what if One Nation won that election, or if not that taken part in a coalition government?

There are a few avenues by which this could take place.

1. They could simply win more seats under the present voting system. Of course, they're still way short of a majority, but they were the third biggest party in the legislature, after all; if they were to win, say, 17 more seats off Labor, they would have a plurality and might be able to form a coalition government. Of course, a swing of this magnitude would be probably out of the question.
2. Queensland could have formed a proportional voting system after the end of the Johrymander, to make sure 'one vote one value' actually happened. There were actually proposals to this effect at the time. If so, they could either gain a plurality through a more modest swing than in the previous proposal, or at least gain enough seats to block any government against them. With 23% of the seats, they could form a coalition with anyone.
3. Under the present system, the two independents could lose their seats, thus forcing Labor or the Coalition to form an accord or a coalition with One Nation. Understandably, the Coalition are more likely. With One Nation holding so many seats, they would be almost certain to demand cabinet positions.

So, from the above options, it's more likely that One Nation will form part of a coalition government, albeit a very major part, than take government in their own right. My next question is: what would the effects of this be? Could this prolong the One Nation movement, seeing as they can actually achieve their 'dreams' (had I said hallucinations, I might get attacked)?

 

[BlackMage]

I'm reviving this very old thread for the purposes of gaining ideas for what will probably be my next timeline, 700 Days, about One Nation taking power in Queensland. Half-story half-TL with a lot inbetween, it'll retread my basic themes (far-right politics, fear as a political force, disillusionment, and, of course, shots to the face) but I hope in a reasonably interesting way.

So, what if One Nation had taken government in Queensland? It was much closer than was often acknowledged at the time; One Nation came first or second in 34 seats, 38% of the total, and polled very strongly in the hinterland. A collapse in the National Party vote, or perhaps if Goss had stayed as Labor Party leader (as he first intended), could have led to a spill of support. But my main idea, so far, is that Hanson, convinced her position in Federal Parliament was untenable, switches to state politics, giving One Nation the popular, media-savvy (of a sort: more an anti-politician, really) that might have taken it much further in state politics otherwise. Who, after all, remembers Bill Feldman today?

So what if?

 

[ColeMercury]

...I don't want to even contemplate it. And I'm a Melbournian.

 

[Fardell]

It would certainly affect Queensland's relations with the rest of Australia, including the Howard Government...

Would we still have Rudd in 2007? (I guess that there would be too many butterfiles)

 

[BlackMage]

...I don't want to even contemplate it. And I'm a Melbournian.

Well...I'm an infernal optimist (very different from eternal optimist; I'm optimistic just to irritate people), and so I don't think it would necessary be all our worst nightmares come to life. It'd be pretty bad, sure, but consider:

• It's just state politics. They can't reduce immigration, they can't overturn Mabo, they can't cancel foreign aid, and I think they can't bring back capital punishment (although I'm not sure about this). They can, admittedly, overturn state anti-discrimination laws and native title legislation, but I understand that to be reasonably limited in Queensland anyway.
• Economically, One Nation were a mess -- a mixture of flat-taxing anti-government types and Old Labor socialists, in the Calwell mode. The One Nation platform from 1998, which I happen to possess, plans for new government investment in roads, railways and ports. It's possible they could buy back state government assets, increase public expenditures, and end up being further left wing than Beattie turned out to be.
• Socially, of course, they would be abominable, but what can they really do, except as a bully pulpit? They can change the curriculum, but they'd get laughed off the stage for doing so. They can liberalise state firearms legislation, but it'd be overruled by Howard's laws. In terms of homosexual and minority rights they could do real damage, but the extent to which they can be really retrograde is limited, again, by state jurisdiction.

It's possible, albeit unlikely, that One Nation would end up being considerably left-wing in state government in economic terms -- 'agrarian socialism' in the Joh mold or somewhat like the 1950s Labor governments in NSW or Tasmania. Of course, it's more likely that they would just end up being hopelessly incompetent, factionally screwed, tilting at endless windmills and finally dismissed as an evil joke, but...well, you'll have to read the story. (Working subtitle: A Romance of Race and Revolution)

 

[BlackMage]

It would certainly affect Queensland's relations with the rest of Australia, including the Howard Government...

Would we still have Rudd in 2007? (I guess that there would be too many butterfiles)

Yep. Too many butterflies. The real effect is on the 1998 election: if One Nation is a proven, powerful political force and not simply a declining protest movement, they could take Senate seats around the country, maybe even some House seats in Queensland, and most importantly take a giant chunk out of the Liberal primary vote. Not all their preferences would necessarily go back to the Liberals, and with the election as close as it turned out being it could be, irony of ironies, that One Nation would result in a Beazley government.

Which, of course, would result in even worse relations with Queensland.

EDIT: Just discovered from Wiki: One Nation preferences only slightly favoured the Coalition, with 53.66% of second preferences. That means a One Nation primary vote of, say, 14% more or less guarantees a Labor government, given that they already won the two-party preferred in OTL. I am, of course, oversimplifying massively, but that's the gist of it.

 

[Flocculencio]

It won't do anything to help Austraia's relations with Asia. For example, even in OTL, one of the stereotypes that Singaporeans have of Australians is that they're racist.

 

[ColeMercury]

one of the stereotypes that Singaporeans have of Australians is that they're racist.

Ah, irony...

 

[BlackMage]

Ah, irony...

Ooh, don't provoke him, Lorry. You're just one post away from 1000: I wouldn't want you spirited away in the night before you join us '1000 or more' posters.

(Mind you, it's not a particularly exclusive club, given the devotion of some here to the board. It's madness, I tells you...)

 

[mtg999]

EDIT: Incidently, I feel I should explain for non-Aussies that One Nation are (were) a racist, nationalist, protectionist far-right party that espoused reactionary conservatism. Think the French National Front, or check Wiki.

On 13 June 1998, the One Nation Party took 23% of the vote in the Queensland state election, and 11 out of 89 seats. The Labor government of Peter Beattie took power from the National/Liberal coalition government of Rob Borbidge, but only with the support of an independent.

So my question is, what if One Nation won that election, or if not that taken part in a coalition government?

There are a few avenues by which this could take place.

1. They could simply win more seats under the present voting system. Of course, they're still way short of a majority, but they were the third biggest party in the legislature, after all; if they were to win, say, 17 more seats off Labor, they would have a plurality and might be able to form a coalition government. Of course, a swing of this magnitude would be probably out of the question.
2. Queensland could have formed a proportional voting system after the end of the Johrymander, to make sure 'one vote one value' actually happened. There were actually proposals to this effect at the time. If so, they could either gain a plurality through a more modest swing than in the previous proposal, or at least gain enough seats to block any government against them. With 23% of the seats, they could form a coalition with anyone.
3. Under the present system, the two independents could lose their seats, thus forcing Labor or the Coalition to form an accord or a coalition with One Nation. Understandably, the Coalition are more likely. With One Nation holding so many seats, they would be almost certain to demand cabinet positions.

So, from the above options, it's more likely that One Nation will form part of a coalition government, albeit a very major part, than take government in their own right. My next question is: what would the effects of this be? Could this prolong the One Nation movement, seeing as they can actually achieve their 'dreams' (had I said hallucinations, I might get attacked)?

It's a very interesting scenario, however I can't see it happening. If (as I assume) it would be a coalition arrangment without a majority for One Nation, I can't see the major parties allowing it. Together they would have enought seats to form a majority, so I think that we would see a sort of 'grand coalition' as they're called in Europe of the 2 major parties, in order to prevent One Nation taking office.

Similarly but on the completely other side of the spectrum, I can never see the Greens taking office. Although they've been in power with Labor in Tasmania, this was with them as only a very small component in the parliament. If they ever held a significant number of seats and therefore could demand too much of Labor, I think many in the ALP (well at least many in the Right faction) would be more comfortable with going into a temporary coalition with the Liberals rather than acceding to some of the more extreme demands of the Greens.

 

[Cavendish]

I skimmed through a book on ON and Pauline Hanson last year, and frankly she seemed rather non-event. Any control over the state legislature would be marred by internal bickering a failure to implement many policies that were balanced between the ON ideology and pragmatism.
I'll have another look tomorrow, when I'm at the library.

The biggest damage that would be done, aside from a completely awful tenure in control of the assembly, would be to that of Australia's reputation. The influx of Kiwis to Brisbane and the Gold Coast might be slower than OTL, and more might go to other places, such as Newcastle or Wollongong.

Relations with Asia would be even more affected, and tourism may be affected. I don't know how this would affect the recent (albeit ongoing) property boom in parts of Queensland.

 

[MarkA]

I cannot see under any circumstances the Liberals agreeing to enter a coalition with One Nation. Even some of the Nats will be against the idea. If Labor is the largest party it may turn out to be supported in the House by the coalition under very limited conditions.

This will soon be intolerable and a growing chorus of concern will lead to a new election. If in the interim, the major parties can make One Nation look like the nuts they are and get their spokespeople making conflicting statements about every policy, they will be reduced to two or three members in the following election.

 

[ColeMercury]

Ooh, don't provoke him, Lorry. You're just one post away from 1000: I wouldn't want you spirited away in the night before you join us '1000 or more' posters.

(Mind you, it's not a particularly exclusive club, given the devotion of some here to the board. It's madness, I tells you...)

Well, here we go - my 1000th counted post on AH.com is explaining a joke. I was pointing out that the Singaporean stereotype that Australians are prejudiced is itself prejudiced against Australians.

 

[BlackMage]

Well, here we go - my 1000th counted post on AH.com is explaining a joke. I was pointing out that the Singaporean stereotype that Australians are prejudiced is itself prejudiced against Australians.

Yes, I know. But even so: when you're on the verge of joining The Club, best to play it safe. (There are, I think, somewhere in the area of 200 1000 or more posters, most of whom I've never heard of, so...not that exclusive.)

Anyway, with the One Nation thing, there's been support for the notion that the government would very rapidly collapse into warring factions and be ostracised by the other parliamentary parties. That certainly happened in OTL with One Nation everywhere, but that derived, to a certain extent, from their marginalisation. If you're on the margins then only extremists will join you, and if only extremists join you you get marginalised.

If One Nation has, or has a coalition adding up to, 45 seats in Parliament, however, they need a much broader base. Not all the 45 will be extremists: they will be policemen, small business owners, farmers, and labourers. Certainly they'll be disparate, and have different ideas of what One Nation means, but the limited scope of state government could serve to provide some unity. I mean, essentially state government comes down to education, health, and transport. A fiercely ideological agenda is going to be very hard to sustain in those areas: Liberal state governments (notable exceptions Greiner and Kennett) tend to trend to the left in terms of public expenditure, while Labor state governments (notable exceptions Cain and Dunstan) tend to trend to the right in terms of fiscal conservatism. There are rails you have to run, and I don't think One Nation would necessarily jump the tracks at the first instance.

Mind you, the story will be called 700 Days, and there are over 1000 in a parliamentary term, so...

 

[Riain]

I don't think they'd last long if they did gain power. I could imagine them coming to power as a bit of a mistake and just going mental with their platforms, at which point a lot of their supporters would find out about the negatives of ON. I think tourism would decline as Qld would be seen as a bit Jackboot by the rest of us, and I think all other state and federal govts would gang up on Qld.

A couple of by-elections, may see them lose govt before the next election, and the rednecks may be suitably chastened.

 

[Flocculencio]

Ah, irony...

Well, it's always the case with any stereotype, no?

 

[Kevin in Indy]

It would be interesting to see how a "third party" focused on legislative gains plays out. My observation here is that the third parties in the US tend to go after the executive positions. The only prominent third party executive I can recall - Ventura in Minnesota - accomplished very little of his own platform because the legislature - Republicans and Democrats - wanted little to do with his proposals.

 

[DMA]

It would be interesting to see how a "third party" focused on legislative gains plays out. My observation here is that the third parties in the US tend to go after the executive positions. The only prominent third party executive I can recall - Ventura in Minnesota - accomplished very little of his own platform because the legislature - Republicans and Democrats - wanted little to do with his proposals.

The thing is in Australia, in realpolitik terms, there's little difference between the Legislative & the Executive. In fact any party, in order to form government (the Executive) here, has to be able to control the majority of seats in Parliament (the Legislature) first. So if One Nation did win government (ie they gained the majority of seats in the House), & considering Queensland only has one House, then they should have little problem in passing whatever legislation they want. The only two challenges, which comes to mind, is if the Federal government steps in, & passes legislation to the contrary of Queensland law, &/or One Nation government is taken to the High Court, for being challenged on individual pieces of legislation, as being unconstitutonal.

About the only other thing is that the Queensland Govenor sacks the government & calls for new elections. But that's really drastic to say the least. Not to mention the Governor would need a really good reason to do such a thing.

 

[sprite]

It's a very interesting scenario, however I can't see it happening. If (as I assume) it would be a coalition arrangment without a majority for One Nation, I can't see the major parties allowing it. Together they would have enought seats to form a majority, so I think that we would see a sort of 'grand coalition' as they're called in Europe of the 2 major parties, in order to prevent One Nation taking office.

Similarly but on the completely other side of the spectrum, I can never see the Greens taking office. Although they've been in power with Labor in Tasmania, this was with them as only a very small component in the parliament. If they ever held a significant number of seats and therefore could demand too much of Labor, I think many in the ALP (well at least many in the Right faction) would be more comfortable with going into a temporary coalition with the Liberals rather than acceding to some of the more extreme demands of the Greens.

I totally agree with this, both parties have a vested interest in denying any third party power. They simply will not deal with One Nation, so the only way or ON to take government would be getting a majority of seats.

Also, I doubt a grand coalition in the German mould would be formed, there's too much bad blood there, but there'd be support for a minority government.

 

[Joseph Solis in Australia]

As we know, Queensland is the most homogeneous and rural state in Australia (except Tasmania). More racism will happened in Queensland. Less Asian immigrants Queensland than in OTL. The result is, Laborites in Queenland will oppose firmly the One Nation government especially Asian immigrants who arrive in Queenland before One Nation gain the state government.