Yes, the so called Labor gerrymander. It was, and still is, Labor’s ability to manage marginal seats that got them through, and when you do it that way, the 2 party preferred stats get out of whack.
We have an independent electoral commission that redraws boundaries in an attempt to make them as fair as possible but Labor were and are still able to work around that.
Jimmy and I actually had this discussion in your absence, dedja (see link below). As you say, it was Labor's superiority (or the Liberals' incompetence?) in marginal seat campaigns which kept delivering Labor government, rather than 'gerrymandering', noting that an independent commission sets the boundaries well ahead of the election, all parties have the ability to challenge their decision, and Labor essentially tries for a majority of seats, by focusing on the key ones, rather than trying for a statewide 2PP majority, as soon as the 'starter's gun' is fired (i.e. the boundaries are set).
http://safooty.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=31005&start=2420
I think the next question is whether our system of preferential voting has serviced us well, and I honestly don’t know the answer, or rather, don’t know what system is best to replace it.
I wouldn’t be looking to Tasmania or New Zealand for answers.
I'm a strong believer in the way we go about things in elections in Australia, particularly the preferential voting system. I think it's the best system, although there are benefits to the Tasmanian system (not a fan of the NZ system personally).