The Albanese Governments landslide win was built on just a third of the vote, reminding us that Australias electoral system is broken and overdue for reform, writes DrKlaas Woldring.

AN IMPORTANT DISCUSSION onproportional representationwas heard on the ABC when the former leader of the Greens was interviewed recently byPaul Barclayof theAustralia Institute. MsChristine Milne, stressing the need forone vote, one value, gave an outstanding explanation of the widespread use of proportional representation, particularly in European countries.

The Greens in Australia have been denied this essential value of democracy in the lower houses of Parliament. Although they are in a relatively strong position in the Senate, if the major parties combine to block Green policies in that Chamber, the future doesnt look good. There is going to be a major ALP conference in August about critical policy positions like tax and housing, but no mention was made thus far about the electoral system, theConstitutionand the republic.

Surely, the time has come for bold reforms and action. Advocates of alternative options should be invited to speak at this conference. If the ALP is to significantly renew its policy program, it should invite speakers, including non-members like Christine Milne, rather than members only.

Australias outdated electoral system is failing voters and its time we made every vote count.

However, the 2025 Election and its immediate aftermath suggest that the first major decisions are a continuation of the ultra-cautious approach by theAlbaneseteam adopted before that election. Actually, even worse than that, if one listened to the defence of theWoodside decisionby Minister for Climate Change and EnergyChris Bowenon a recent ABC program. Several candid major articles in theSydney Morning Heraldfor example, byRoss Gittinsand, earlier,Ross Garnaut, as well as several letters to the editor expressed disbelief about this decision.

The election win was in part due to the weak performance of the former Liberal Party leader and the electoral system, which turned the 34.5 per cent for the ALP into a 94-seat (62.7 per cent) comfortable majority. That was plainly a very lucky outcome for the ALP and, potentially, Australia. However, it demonstrated, if evidence was still required, that Australias electoral system is plainly not at all democratic and that such a result could go the other way next time.

Given this luck, the ALP is now in a great position to bring about major policy and system changes. Thus far, asGittens suggested, Albanese has only revealed a do-nothing plan.Chris Bowen defended the Woodside decision and suggested we could still achieve net zero by 2050 (instead of 2070) if we could manage to achieve several other measures nationally. There was no view expressed on what the effect of the export of the gas would be in other countries.

A major underlying problem is the electoral system, which doesnt give the Greens a fair go at all in the House of Representatives. The need for major electoral system change is urgent. The current system is usually somewhat doctored after every federal election by the ParliamentaryJoint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters. That committee is always entirely dominatedby the major parties. It is certainly not an electoral system reform committee, in reality, far from it.

Also, the adversarial bickering by these major parties can hardly be described anymore as a debate. Most of the voters have had enough of it; that is reflected in the outcome of the last five or six federal elections. Younger people, especially, want serious reform. The Westminster heritage of thesingle-member electoral district, which is the very origin of the two-party system, no longer delivers a healthy democracy, if it ever did.

If the ALP hopes to win the upcoming Election, it's vital to introduce electoral system reform and improve Australia's democracy.

The idea that thesingle transferable votesystem that is what we have in Australia is a democratic system is plainly wrong. This was shown again with the outcome of the 2025 Federal Election. Instead of single-member districts, Australia should move to multi-member districts. Possibly even use state-wide districts or, possibly, with some special provisions for country districts, given the very high percentage of voters living in large cities. Parties can offer party lists of candidates, but every voter has just one vote for one party.

What we don't see in the printed media are assessments about alternative electoral systems, none at all. Sadly, our universities also have failed society in this respect, with the exception of a small number of progressive academics. Very few journalists seem to consider it worthwhile to ask the obvious question: Why is it so and what can and needs to be done about it?

The major parties themselves certainly are the last to raise such questions. One of the reasons why the knowledge of alternative voting systems is so very inadequate is that Civics education in high schools has been increasingly inadequate. At universities, politics courses have also declined, sometimes entirely disappeared, following the commercialisation of tertiary education, from the mid-1990s onwards.

It is not just the pork-barrelling and the lack of effective alternatives in the lower houses of parliaments that block fair and effective representation, therefore democratic government. It is the virtual impossibility for the governing party to introduce bold alternative legislation, major renewals and daring longer-term projects. When the voting system discourages risk-taking in parliaments, Australia stands to lose great opportunities. This has gone on for far too long already.

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