4-year terms estimated to deliver $60 billion in benefits

Analysis by Mandala Partners undertaken for the Susan McKinnon Foundation has found that moving from three to four-year fixed Federal terms would deliver potential gains of $59 - $71 billion over 20 years. This includes:

• Policy reform benefits: governments are far more likely to pursue difficult but necessary reforms in non-election years. With fewer elections, reform opportunities expand - worth an estimated $14–26 billion in GDP gains .

• Direct savings: running fewer elections would save around $4.6 billion over 20 years. That includes the cost of conducting elections (over $1.6b), the opportunity cost of voters’ time ($1.5b), and campaign spending by political parties ($1.5b).

• Indirect economic benefits: elections unsettle business investment. The report finds investment is 2.4% lower in election years. Smoothing that out would unlock $40.7 billion over two decades, mainly from avoided delays or cancellations of projects .

Increased uncertainty during election periods results in deferred and in some instances permanently lost business investment. In addition, added time for policy-making with an extended term allows for greater opportunities to enact reforms that deliver economic benefits.

The report acknowledges that not everything can be measured. Election day generates community activity — from P&C fundraisers to the famous “democracy sausage.” But these modest positives, it argues, are dwarfed by the broader costs of constant campaigning 

You can find the full report here.