Now the Australian Parliament is on the verge of these powerful and fundamental reforms. Don Farrell, the new Minister for Trade and Tourism, has requested that a joint parliamentary committee examine ways to make the body larger and adopt fixed four-year terms. This national initiative is an important response to Australia’s booming population. It has already grown to 27 million and is projected to reach 29 million before the next federal election in 2028.
Farrell highlighted that any future changes should be made with a goal of keeping the new parliament effective and representative. He stated, “Whatever changes are brought to the next parliament, they will be just as good.” He went on to explain that an increase in the number of parliamentarians wouldn’t occur before the next election. In doing so, this statement exemplifies an inclusive and forward-thinking approach to governance.
The Case for Expansion
Farrell is open to enlargement of the parliament’s membership. This decision is a positive step forward, given the mounting pressures seen by Members of Parliament (MPs) and their staff, whose increased workload now makes them less equipped to best support their constituents. Each electorate now represents at least 120,000 voters on average—in many cases far more—which has led to legitimate worries of underrepresentation.
As Australia’s population soars, Farrell argued that the moment has come to seriously consider expanding the size of our parliament. “The Australian people might say we don’t want a bar of this; we’re happy with the existing numbers of MPs, and that could be the end of it,” he noted, acknowledging that public opinion will play a crucial role in any potential changes.
The joint inquiry is expected to begin public hearings as soon as next week. An interim report should come out by the middle of 2026. This inquiry follows Farrell’s previous efforts last term to review regulations concerning political donations, which ultimately led to successful reforms.
Debates Over Terms
In addition to maybe making expansion of parliament permanent, the conversation around fixed four-year terms has recently gained momentum. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has always been a strong advocate of this change. He hopes it will help bring federal terminology in line with what’s being used in the states. Farrell similarly supported this line of thinking, asserting that longer terms would contribute to more stable governance.
From the beginning, the Coalition has voiced deep concerns about these proposals. James McGrath criticized the government’s priorities, stating, “I find it extraordinary that we are wasting taxpayer resources and time on this when the government should be focused on fixing the healthcare crisis, the cost-of-living crisis, and the self-made housing crisis currently crippling our economy and Australians.”
The Coalition continues to openly oppose the idea, but the speculation continues to mount. The government could adopt fixed terms by just maintaining the status quo of three years, which does not require a referendum. This would allow them to make iterative improvements without needing to go through a lengthy public process.
The Process Ahead
As previously mentioned by Commissioner Jeff Pope, the inquiry into expanding parliament is expected to be a major effort. Perhaps most importantly, he pointed out that if the process looks like other normal redistributions, it would take a lot of time and money to plan. The obvious retort is that it would all depend on what the magic number might be for a new parliament. Pope explained that we would have to quibble over resources to be redistributed from the six mainland states. Here’s hoping that this occurs before we adopt these changes permanently.
As the special committee gets ready to dive into its investigation, advocates and opponents alike will be watching closely to see what happens. Depending on how these discussions play out, they have the potential to greatly reconfigure Australian parliamentary representation.
