The current electoral system actually favours One Nation

Dr Klaas Woldring writes that the analysis suggests Australia’s electoral system unintentionally enhances One Nation’s chances while revealing flaws in the country’s democratic representation.

CURRENT ELECTION SYSTEM single zone systemsHe is actually in favor of One Nation, at least in all lower house elections.

For now, this situation particularly disadvantages the Liberal and National parties. DemosAUwhich one George Hasanakos is the research director. Their latest research is based on the 2025 Federal Election. The research body also noted that growing support for One Nation was not just based on growth in Queensland.

Hasanakos writes:

Another notable feature of the current One Nation surge is how consistent it is across state lines.

While the party remains strongest in Queensland, its numbers in other states and territories are not far behind. Only in the ACT does it fall below double digits.

The MRP model shows that the party is competitive in at least one lower house seat in every state; but its strongest performance is in regional and urban Qld and NSW, where most of the projected seat gains are concentrated. However, if the vote share in this poll is replicated in the upper house, the party will win Senate Seats in all six states.

Political election expert Antony Green there is more story to be told:

Despite the denials, I find it hard to believe that the split in the Coalition this week is not due to a reported increase in support for One Nation. Maybe this week is not just about One Nation, but what has been building for months is about One Nation.

Voting intentions in this week’s News Poll recorded One Nation receiving 22% of the national vote in the poll for the first time, ahead of the Coalition’s 21%. Labor’s support fell to 32 percent, while the Greens’ support remained at 12 percent and the Others at 13 percent.

We need to remember what the outcome of the 2025 election means for the ALP.

As I mentioned to the ALP Senator Don Farrell Lately:

‘Consider the results of the 2025 federal elections. The ALP won 34.6% of the vote and 62.7% of the total seats (94 out of 150 seats). It’s not fair or democratic! The Greens won just one seat, with 12.2 percent of the vote. From a democratic perspective, this number should have been 18.’

The necessity of reform is, of course, clear. The Senator previously responded to my 2025 submission. Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters Your house (number 219). In this presentation, I stated the necessity of promotion. proportional representation. However, the very polite response did not mention the essence of the presentation. This Standing Committee represents the interests of the “two big” parties and, it should be understood, is by no means a major reform commission.

Frequent claims that Australia has an excellent electoral system, claims made and restated recently on an otherwise credible ABC TV programme, are simply not realistic. The electoral system, although it has some excellent qualities in terms of mechanism and management, is clearly undemocratic and the Government needs to examine and correct this.

This multicultural society needs a democratic electoral system. The ALP made significant improvements in 1918 and again in 1948. Now is the time to reform the Senate again.

Green added:

Similar results published by lesser-known pollsters since early January have been rejected. But as Newspoll begins reporting a surge in One Nation support, the political classes become even more interested.

Newspoll also reported that the two-party preferred figure for Labor was 55%, compared to 45% for the Coalition. But with primary vote support on the conservative side so fragmented, does a national two-party preferred figure make sense?

And not just for the conservative side of politics.

Green continued:

The 2025 Elections finished with a record 35 seats in a contest that was not a traditional Labor Coalition race. If the News Poll number were repeated in the general election, the number of non-traditional contests would skyrocket.

And everything we know from past elections tells us that One Nation’s support is strongest outside the nation’s capitals, precisely where the Coalition’s remaining representation after last year’s defeat is concentrated. One Nation is now polling strongly enough to further advance Coalition representation, particularly National Party representation.

But Green knows that I have long campaigned for proportional representation, but I don’t think he has ever suggested that system as an improvement. He was an excellent reporter on what was going on under the current system, election after election, but I don’t remember him saying Australia could do any better than that.

It seems to me that that moment has clearly arrived. Will the ALP eventually come to this conclusion? Will Australian political scientists take up this case, which they appeared to be examining seriously in the late 1990s, without any final reform proposals that I can recall?

Green continued:

‘A rise in One Nation support may hurt some Labor seats, but the record of elections over decades shows that a rise in One Nation support tends to hurt the Coalition. It’s too early to make predictions for the next election, but if the trend in this week’s Newspaper Poll continues, Labor could easily be re-elected and the biggest change could be the Coalition losing seats to One Nation.’

I think the ALP could do much better for Australia. To introduce party list proportional representation and eliminate single-member districts. This is not new. Ninety countries in the world use it. Northern countries are the best example of this.

In this case, it could result in One Nation forming the government with 34.6% of the votes. But is the ALP ready for this? Seriously, I doubt it.