Don Farrell, newly elevated to cabinet within the ALP, is leading a charge for structural reforms. His aim is to get more like-minded parliamentarians elected across the country in Australia. Farrell is a somewhat secretive figure with a largely invisible but overwhelming hold on the party. Lately, he’s been leading the charge on reforms of a different sort—political funding. His new legislative proposal would address the stranglehold of parliamentary terms. It tackles the size of the legislature in general, making a more democratic state legislature larger and more representative.
Farrell, one of the more right wing leading figures of the Labor party, has a deep conviction. He believes that we ought to be able to set a default date for the present three-year parliamentary term, just by legislation. He admits that making a longer term would require a public vote. Through his lens, increasing voter access to their neighborhood representatives fosters a more dynamic democracy.
Farrell is fighting for reform from the inside by hoping to do so by knocking the House of Representatives up an estimated 28-32 districts. This proposed amendment would increase their current lower house from 150 members. He has proposed that this expansion wouldn’t go into effect until the 2031 referendum. He has diligently fought against every amendment that would raise the number of available senators from 14 per state to something higher. This proposal was first made by the former Labor senator Bob McMullan.
“The most valuable resource for any Labor government. The asset every progressive leader in every positive and ambitious government wishes they had more of: time.” – Anthony Albanese
While Farrell’s ambitions are certainly admirable — and in keeping with a broader vision of a more equitable democratic process — his plan is not without its challenges. That said, the proposal to increase the number of politicians would likely face considerable political challenges. Many on the outside — including the now-retired Senator for Regional Development Richard Colbeck — ridiculed this proposal and questioned public appetite for additional politicians.
“It’s up to the government to make a case. I’m not sure the Australian people are hanging out for more politicians,” – Richard Colbeck
Though he may face stiff opposition, Farrell says he’s optimistic his proposal will attract bipartisan support. And he has a tremendous record of working with the other side. His historic reform of electoral donations and expenditure saw the Liberals unite with the Labor party to oust him. Such a collaborative spirit drives Nhi’s optimism that the opposition could be amenable to negotiations about expanding parliament.
Farrell’s vision of deepening democracy struck a chord with many of the reformist elements in Parliament. Greens’ representative Steph Hodgins-May said the Green party would be open to discussing such legislation. Their goal is to advance equity through democracy.
“If something will make our democracy fairer we would consider legislation favourably,” – Steph Hodgins-May
Farrell’s vision runs deeper still, setting out to ensure representation for minor parties under fire too, like the Greens and One Nation. He argues that a larger enlarged parliament would allow populist parties and independents—including figures like Jacqui Lambie—more room to enter and hold seats. He warns that it won’t necessarily increase their chances of winning more seats in the Senate.
The timing of these proposed reforms can’t be understated. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was clear, for example, that Australia’s elections happen on a far faster cycle than in other democracies. Though recently re-elected to his third term, he was adamant about this point.
“To give you some sense of that, in Australia, my colleagues and I were re-elected less than five months ago. And yet our next election is due before yours,” – Anthony Albanese
Political analyst George Brandis noted that an increase in the number of politicians would hardly be popular with voters. Albanese could reap electoral rewards that more than cancel out any short-term backlash. That legislation would likely be introduced in the second half of next year. If so, it’s quite possible that public sentiment will have turned enough by 2028 that it becomes politically palatable.
“Although any increase in the number of politicians would be hugely unpopular, Albanese may well calculate that the electoral advantage to Labor would be worth the short-term political pain which, were he to legislate in the second half of next year, would largely have died down by 2028,” – George Brandis
