Analysis suggests Australias electoral system may be unintentionally boosting One Nations chances while exposing flaws in the nations democratic representation, writes DrKlaas Woldring.

THE CURRENT electoral system, based onsingle-district systems, in all lower house elections at least, actually favours One Nation.

For the moment, this is especially at the expense of the Liberal and National parties, according toDemosAU, of whichGeorge Hasanakosis the director of research.Their recent research is based on the 2025 Federal Election. Significantly, the research unit also pointed out that the growing support for One Nation is not just based on growth in Queensland.

Hasanakoswrites:

Meta and News Corp spread fake news to promote Pauline Hanson and provide an overblown impression of her party's polling. FounderDavid Donovanexposes a dangerous deception.

Political elections specialistAntony Greenhas a furtherstory to tell:

We should just remember what kind of result the 2025 election meant for the ALP.

As I pointed out to ALP SenatorDon Farrellrecently:

The case for reform surely is obvious. The Senator earlier responded to my 2025 submission to theJoint Standing Committee on Electoral Mattersof the House (number 219). In that submission, I made the case for the introduction ofproportional representation. The very polite answer did not mention the essence of the submission, however.This Standing Committee represents the interests of the two major parties and, it should be realised, is definitely not a commission for major reform at all.

As artificial intelligence fuels viral political fiction, Australias democratic debate risks being steered by outrage rather than truth.

The frequent claims that Australia has a brilliant electoral system, recently stated and restated on an otherwise credible ABC TV program, are just not realistic. While the electoral system has some excellent qualities in terms of machinery and administration, it is plainly not democratic and the Government has to examine this and correct it.

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

Greenadded:

And not just for the conservative side of politics.

Green continued:

Once defined by dissent and solidarity, Generation X is now fuelling Pauline Hansons resurgence driven less by conviction than by disillusionment, fear and misplaced anger.

However, Green knows that I have long campaigned for proportional representation, but I dont think that he has ever suggested that system as an improvement himself. He was an excellent reporter of what happened in the existing system, election after election, but I do not recall that he has ever suggested that Australia could do much better than this.

It would seem to me that that very moment has now clearly arrived. Will the ALP finally come to that conclusion? Will Australian political scientists take up that case, which they seemed to examine seriously in the late 1990s, without any final reform proposals to follow that I can recall?

Green continued:

I suggest that the ALP can do much better for Australia. Introduceparty-list proportional representationand do away with single-member districts. It is not new. Ninety countries in the world use it. The Nordic countries are the best example.

As it stands, we may end up with One Nation forming government with 34.6% of the vote. However, is the ALP up to it? Seriously, I doubt it.

DrKlaas Woldringis a former associate professor atSouthern Cross Universityand former convenor of ABC Friends (Central Coast).

Related Articles

• One Nations immigration policies: Confusion, copycats and costly myths
• Pauline's ON in polls but can't PHON a friend... at the AEC
• Trumpism, but make it Australian: One Nations migration fantasy
• EDITORIAL: EXCLUSIVE One Nation only wants to control womens bodies some of the time
• Pauline Hanson launches Ashbygate James towards the Keppel wrecks