Candidates and ballot positions for State election

State electorates in the Redlands

State electorates in the Redlands (click to enlarge)

At the Queensland Parliament elections on 31 January there will be 12 candidates for the three seats in the Redlands.

The deadline for nominations was noon today. Following the close of nominations the order of candidates on the ballot papers was determined by drawing names from a hat.

Candidates for each Redlands seat and their position on the ballot paper are shown below

PAYNE, Erin     The Greens
DAVIES, Steve     LNP
BROWN, Don     Australian Labor Party

Mark Robinson (left) Tracey Huges (right) and Returning officer Harold Guy (centre)

Mark Robinson (left) Tracey Huges (right) and Returning Officer Harold Guy (centre)

HUGES, Tracey     Australian Labor Party
WHITE, Amanda     The Greens

FERRANDO, Carolyn     Family First
KELLIE, Deborah     Australian Labor Party
BYLETT, Susan     Palmer United Party
KEOGH, David     The Greens

For further information about candidates check out the

Electoral Commission Queensland website


Election matter is authorised by Steve MacDonald of 104 Channel St, Cleveland

Please note: Offensive or off-topic comments will be deleted. If offended by any published comment please email

7 thoughts on “Candidates and ballot positions for State election

  1. With 6 candidates running in Redlands, I suspect preference votes and 3 cornered contest will play a very important role . I have asked the lnp split who will get their preferences with no reply ….. I want to be sure that a certain party is last on my vote and so knowing the preference votes of others will be crucial to how I place all others on my ballot paper … very careful where you place you other candidates on your ballot

    • Preferences flow how you want them. People seem to think that the parties have some sort of control on preferences. THIS IS NOT THE CASE (except in the Senate). You number your ballot paper how you want, and your preferences will flow how you allocate them.

      The deals that are done are for the How To Vote (HTV) cards. Party A agrees to put Party B above Party C on their HTV card if Party B puts Party A above Party C (or D or E) on their HTV card. This benefits them where voters pick up the HTV cards and number them exactly as directed. Some people do this, which is why HTV cards continue to exist.

      It’s your vote so you should allocate your preferences however you wish. You can also just vote [1] and not allocate preferences. The downside to this is that if your selected candidate doesn’t win, your vote doesn’t count any further. If you do number all the boxes, your 2nd, 3rd, 4th preferences are taken into consideration.

      This election the LNP are using Vote [1] because it means that ALP won’t get as many votes from preferences. This was a ploy the ALP used to use when the NAT and LIB parties were separate for the same reason.

      Number the boxes on your ballot paper how you wish. No party controls your vote – only you.

  2. Why does the Redlands have 6 candidates, twice as many as Cleveland and Capalabar ? Actually, seeing as Cleveland and Capalabar actually come under the Redlands City Council, you’ve got to admit we are really overgoverned in the Qld State Govt!

    • Yes I agree we r over governed Cleavland n Capabala shoud b one hole area!!! Less candidates ,less of our money goimg to waist!!!

      • totally agree theres no need for this small area to be 3 seats . A remnant of the Gerrymander from National Party days ? I don’t know but I’m going to suggest that Cleveland is amalgamated to one of the others . There are apprx. only 2000 people and fewer voters on Nth Stradbroke Is where i live .

      • It is determined independently by the Electoral Commission of Queensland. It is done on a regular basis – approx every 8 years (see

        It is to make sure that the number of voters in each electorate is about the same. Capalaba and Cleveland are both populous areas while the Redlands electorate is larger because of lower population density.

        This system is in place to ensure that no government can set the boundaries to benefit them and was a direct response to the Bjelke-Petersen gerrymander that existed for many years.

        Please at least get your facts right before going off half-cocked.

    • Nick Perkins , you must be a ECQ apologist or employee . Your reference ” people seem to think ” is a little disturbing , condescending maybe ? There’s one good thing though , your top- down attitude still only entitles you to one vote .

Comments are closed.