I am very pleased to see the amount of attention and commentary on the proposed changes to the electoral boundaries going on in the region.

We need to be mindful of how we frame our objections, primarily on size, the proposed Traeger Electorate is 70 000 km2 smaller than what the electorate currently is, Traeger will still be more than three times the size of England.

My objection centres on inequitable representation on state issues.

The boundary review focussed on population and therefore more populated areas get greater representation.

A couple of quick facts, I believe highlights that population should not be the primary focus.

The biggest Electorate is almost 500,000km2 the smallest 12km2.

Traeger will contribute approximately $310 Million in royalties to the state whilst the smallest electorate contributes $0 royalties. Furthermore the smallest electorate is literally a few kilometres from all the centralised State Government services; Traeger will see senior Government staff sporadically.

The reduction in State Government Services in the area means by default, more enquiries are directed to the State MP about State issues in a 12km2 area (a couple of suburbs) the issues are relatively contained, however the issues coming from the Gulf, cities and towns across 490,000km2 are as diverse as the landscape.

The voice of Regional Queensland should be growing in parliament, proportionally to the economic growth the areas provide through Mining, Agriculture, Transport and Tourism.

Please have your voice heard and check out an online petition at https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/we-need-3-state-electoral-boundaries-not-1 to show we demand a greater number of MP’s