Australia weighs a potential expansion of Parliament and a shift to fixed terms
Australia is considering whether its parliament should grow for the first time in four decades and whether elections should move to fixed cycles or four-year terms. A joint committee on electoral matters has been tasked by Special Minister of State Don Farrell to examine two core ideas: increasing the number of MPs in the House of Representatives and Senate, and moving to more predictable, fixed election timing. The inquiry also looks at whether four-year terms should replace the current three-year system, a change the government has signalled interest in pursuing.
Don Farrell has framed the discussion as a reflection of population growth and the evolving demands on MPs and their staff. He notes that the working load of representatives has increased, prompting questions about whether more politicians are needed to adequately service constituents. “We’ve raised the issue for consideration, it’s a worthy issue to consider and we’ve sent it off to the body that always examines this,” Farrell told Senate estimates. He was careful to say there is no fixed number in mind and that any change would not necessarily occur before the next election.
The push to potentially expand Parliament comes as Australia’s population continues its rapid growth. The 1984 increase in the number of MPs occurred when the population was about 16 million. Today, the country is around 27 million and is projected to approach 29 million ahead of the 2028 federal election. With electorates housing roughly 120,000 voters, advocates argue that the current structure is increasingly strained by day‑to‑day responsibilities and the volume of policy issues MPs must contend with.
Under the constitution, increasing the number of MPs must be considered alongside the so‑called “nexus” provision. This mechanism requires the number of MPs in the House to be nearly twice the number of senators, while ensuring each state retains five MPs. Any significant expansion would thus demand carefully crafted allocations across states and territories, balancing representation and the practicalities of administration.
The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) signalled cautious preparation for change. AEC officials told senators that redrawing electoral boundaries and potentially reconfiguring electorates would be a significant undertaking, particularly if a new parliament number is chosen. The commission stressed that any redistribution prior to implementation would need to be considered in light of the proposed population-based numbers and the political map across the six mainland states.
On the question of fixed or four-year terms, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has expressed support for fixed terms, mirroring practices in the states. However, a constitutional referendum would typically be required to enact such a change. After facing a failed Voice referendum, the prime minister has indicated caution about pushing a referendum during this term. There is, however, talk of pursuing fixed terms through other constitutional means, contingent on expert advice and potentially without a referendum, though experts’ opinions are expected to be pivotal in the inquiry’s direction and recommendations, which are due by mid‑2026 for an interim report.
The political debate is already heated. While the government signals a long‑term reform agenda, the opposition has questioned the priority of digit‑driven or structural reforms amid other policy challenges. Shadow Special Minister of State James McGrath argued that attention should instead focus on immediate economic and social issues, such as healthcare, cost of living, and housing. Critics worry that parliamentary reforms could become a distraction from pressing welfare and economic concerns.
The inquiry is expected to begin hearings soon, with submissions and evidence shaping the committee’s interim findings in the coming months. If the inquiry supports expansion and fixed terms, a broader path through legislation and potentially subsequent referenda would be required. For now, Australians will watch how this proposal progresses, and whether the parliament’s size and electoral cycle could indeed change for the first time since the 1980s.
What happens next?
As hearings begin next week, policy observers will be watching closely for how the nexus constraint, boundary redistributions, and constitutional implications interact. Any move to grow Parliament would likely unfold gradually, balancing representation, administrative costs, and the political climate before the 2028 election.
