Australia and the World Past and Present

Queensland has had long periods of conservative dominance, particularly in the mid–late 20th century.

That history can be explained by a mix of structural, economic and cultural factors.

Queensland is a rather decentralised state. Unlike South Australia which is dominated by 1 city, Queensland is highly decentralised with multiple population centers. The state has 8 urban centers with more than 100,000 people. The Greater Brisbane area holds 2.7 million people (including Ipswich and Logan City). The Gold Coast is home to some 750,000 and the Sunshine Coast has around 370,000. Townsville has has approximately 190,000, Cairns 170,000 and Toowoomba close to 140,000. While Ipswich (with around a quarter of a million) and Logan City (350,000) are part of Greater Brisbane, they are often counted separately.

Historically, the state has had strong rural and mining communities. Queensland has weaker metropolitan dominance compared to Victoria or News South Wales.

This strengthened agrarian political interests and reduced the influence of urban liberal reform movements.

Then there is the electoral system. For decades Queensland had a heavily malapportioned electoral system, sometimes called the “Bjelkemander”. It overweighted rural electorates and underweighted urban electorates in Brisbane. The phenomenon favoured the Country/National Party.

This allowed conservative governments to retain power with a minority of the statewide vote. The system entrenched long-term rule under Joh Bjelke-Petersen (1968-1987).

His government restricted protest rights and used an aggressive policing of demonstrations. It also suppressed civil liberties and fostered a strongly anti-union political culture.

This period cemented Queensland’s reputation as socially and politically conservative.

Queensland’s economy historically relied on agriculture (sugar and beef), mining and later, property development and tourism.

These sectors often aligned with pro-development politics, anti-regulatory stances and a skepticism toward union and environmental movements.

In contrast, reformist politics elsewhere were often driven by strong urban middle classes, universities, and large industrial union bases.

Queensland abolished its Legislative Council in 1922 and never replaced it. The result was that there was no upper house review. There was strong executive dominance and fewer institutional checks.

Queensland developed a distinct political identity. There is a suspicion of “southern elites”. Populist rhetoric holds sway. There is an anti-Canberra sentiment and an emphasis on law-and-order.

One can point to cultural conservatism, and populist anti-establishment politics.

Queensland’s rapid population growth (especially post-1970s) brought interstate migrants seeking lifestyle and lower taxes. They were often retirees from southern states. Along with this came property-driven development politics.

Queensland politics have been relatively conservative compared to other states, but there is an important caveat. Queensland has also produced some strong Labor governments and progressive reforms in recent times.

During the Bjelke-Petersen era, Queensland diverged sharply from social reform trends occurring in places like South Australia under Don Dunstan.

Queensland’s divergence was driven by rural-weighted electoral structures, economic reliance on primary industries and the abolition of the upper house.

There was also the decentralised population, a populist political culture and long conservative incumbency.