Four-year terms have support right across the aisle

I'm proud and pleased that Labor has a policy of fixed four-year terms, and I will continue to argue for them and raise them as a policy at every opportunity, because I am fervently of the belief that fixed four-year terms would benefit our democracy and, therefore, benefit the people that we are here to represent.

Peta MurphyLabor Member for Dunkley 2019–2023

It is simply not long enough. Parliamentary terms should be much longer. However, whilst my view is that terms should be for four years, I'm fully cognisant of failed attempts in the past to change federal parliamentary terms and the complicated House of Representatives and Senate relationship, not to mention the difficulty in changing the Constitution.

Tony ZappiaLabor Member for Makin 2007–present

If we are serious about preserving the stability of our political system, however, and encouraging better governance, then four-year parliamentary terms should be our goal. With three-year terms, a federal election is always just around the corner. The steady drip of opinion polls and a relentless media cycle accelerates this. Good policies often do not have the time to yield visible results, and political survival takes precedence. All state parliaments now have four-year terms, as do most benchmark international parliaments. Constitutional change would be required to effect this and I don't underestimate the difficulty in doing this, but, as part of a broader set of constitutional reforms, I believe it is worth considering.

Dave SharmaLiberal MP for Wentworth 2019–2022

Next, people would like to see fixed four-year terms. I'm also personally a supporter of this. Four years would align with local and state government election cycles and give governments time to get more done. I know there are quite a large number of people against a fixed election date, but I am in the camp of a fixed date.

Terry YoungLNP Member for Longman 2019–present

Tonight I would like to take this opportunity to put forward a case for four-year parliamentary terms at the federal level. The Australian national parliamentary term has become an oddity in our nation. Over the last 25 years all states and territories have adopted four-year terms, with all but Tasmania also moving to fixed terms. Clearly this sky has not fallen in, and it raises the question: if they can all do it why can't the national parliament?

Rowan RamseyLiberal Member for Grey 2007–2025

The Committee could further consider the implementation of fixed four-year terms for the House of Representatives and eight-year terms for Senators. This would achieve greater alignment with many State Parliaments, provide greater certainty around the timing and cost of elections, and better allow for appropriate planning by and resourcing of the AEC. It would also limit the strategic and tactical advantages available to an incumbent Government in choosing when to call a federal election.

Rebekha SharkieMember for Mayo

In particular, the Bill provides for the present three-year term for the House of Representatives to be increased to four years and for the new four-year electoral cycle to be fixed. There is general agreement within the community that the present electoral arrangements have resulted in Australia having far too frequent elections.

Andrew MurrayAustralian Democrats Senator for Western Australia 1996–2008

That this House: (1) notes that: … (b) three years is an insufficient period for any government to effect meaningful change as the business of the House is curtailed, being sandwiched between post-election organisation and planning, and pre-election campaigning; … (d) Australian states and territories have already moved to four-year terms; (2) acknowledges that extending the parliamentary term has in principle bipartisan support; and (3) calls on the 48th Parliament to immediately put this to a referendum.

Kylea TinkIndependent Member for North Sydney 2022–2025

To create the right conditions for fully effective Federation reform, we need to move to a harmonised election cycle. Firstly, immediately move to four year fixed terms at Federal level. This gives them more time on reforming and less time on campaigning. Secondly, we need continuity at a State level, so the States and Territories should move to four year fixed terms, held within six months of the midpoint of the Federal electoral term. This will allow State Premiers and Treasurers to work together and collaborate across party lines over a four year period to improve financial and service delivery arrangements, driving prosperity.

Dominic PerrottetPremier of New South Wales 2021–2023

A move to fixed, four-year parliamentary terms has been a recurring proposal with widespread and cross-party support. The arguments in favor are compelling: a four-year term would allow for better long-term policy planning, increase business confidence, and reduce the frequency and cost of elections. It would also remove the Prime Minister's unilateral power to call an election at a politically advantageous time.

Australian Democracy NetworkSource

VoD supports a shift from three-year terms to four-terms [sic]. Although it means voters engage in our democracy less frequently, it would provide greater opportunity for policy and programs to be implemented and have a chance of achieving the intended outcome for the people, and the country would not spend one out of the three years in election mode – be it speculation about the date or active campaigning.

Voices of DeakinSource

Finally, bring in 4-year fixed terms so that a) Policy and programs can actually be implemented and have a chance to run. b) The country doesn't spend a third of the parliamentary cycle in constant election anticipation mode waiting for a date announcement - it's a waste of good parliamentary policy time - actual governing for the best outcome for the people parliamentarians represent. c) A date isn't chosen opportunistically that will benefit the incumbent government.

Voices of WannonSource

RECOMMENDATION No.1: The Real Republic Australia recommends that the Joint Select Committee on Electoral Matters recognises that the adoption of fixed four-year terms for both the House of Representatives and the Senate offers real and measurable benefit to Australians including considerable future cost savings to taxpayers as well as answering longstanding calls from the business community for more certainty in their own forward planning and investment decisions as well as better quality government decision-making.

The Real Republic AustraliaSource

Fixed terms have many advantages. They're fairer because they take away the discretion of the Prime Minister to choose to hold the election at whatever time most benefits the government. They also remove from the hands of the Prime Minister a weapon that they can use against their own party. If the party is behaving in a way the Prime Minister doesn't like, the Prime Minister can threaten to hold an election which would put the members of the party's seats at risk.

From the 1967 Parliament proposal, which was felled by the cry of 'no more politicians', to the Republic referendum, which was killed off by the claim that it was the 'politicians' republic', Australians have consistently voted No when they believe a proposal is motivated by politicians' self-interest. This reflects a well-known undercurrent of distrust of Australian politicians.

One of the real benefits of fixed terms is in the policy-making process and what government departments experience. The policy-making environment changes fairly dramatically in the lead-up to and after an election… The uncertainty around an election casts a shadow on that process, and it casts a shadow much earlier than if you have a fixed term.

We're one of the few countries which has a non-fixed-date election. We're one of the few election management bodies, therefore, that necessarily has full-time resources that are required throughout the entire electoral cycle. As soon as one election finishes, we start preparing for the next election…

Jeff PopeAustralian Electoral Commissioner

I really do think that you have to look at the volume of activity and wonder whether it's going to affect the quality of what is produced… It would be a real shame if what is the most effective scrutiny and accountability tool that we've got in the parliament became undermined by its inability to keep up with the demand that is made for its services.

Richard PyeClerk of the Senate

Short parliamentary terms reduce the certainty and stability of the environment in which the APS operates. This can undermine policy development. It has been claimed, for example, that governments struggle to take "more responsible, long-term views" because the next election is often likely to be less than two years away.

There is a strong case for fixed parliamentary terms to provide greater stability and predictability. There is also a reasonable case for longer (four-year) terms, to allow more time for long-term policy work between election cycles. But both reforms require changing the Constitution, which can be a serious hurdle, especially if public support is ambivalent.

Grattan InstitutePublic policy think tank, Melbourne

Recommendation 26: The Committee recommends that the Government consider asking the Committee to inquire into the length of Parliamentary terms with a view to introducing non-fixed four year terms for the House of Representatives (and consequently eight year terms for the Senate) to bring the Commonwealth Parliament into line with State Parliaments.

The AICD's Blueprint sets out a plan for long-term growth with recommendations in six areas: Reforming national governance – calling for fixed, four-year terms for the federal government, reforms to the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) process and leadership from Australian directors in governance standards and practice.

Australian Institute of Company DirectorsSource

We are currently advocating and getting some support for four year fixed terms – some might say it should be longer but four years is a hell of a lot better than two and a half, and each of the state governments has done it and generally has a fixed date every four years so there can't be any gaming of the system.

Elizabeth ProustChairman, Australian Institute of Company Directors 2015–2019

Could extending parliamentary terms to four years improve the quality of political and policy debate? The states and territories have already done it. At the very least it could help the Budget if we pay for fewer elections. Importantly I think it could improve political productivity, giving politicians more time to focus on policy and less on securing re-election.

Diane Smith-GanderChair, Committee for Economic Development of Australia

On the question of fixed terms, I think the main issue is the annoying period of speculation as we wait for the Prime Minister to announce the date. They generally go for a predictable date close to three years after the last election, but hold their cards close to the chest. It produces a tedious media speculation window, but it also creates significant uncertainty for political campaigners and policy-makers.

The Centre for Public Integrity supports the active consideration of fixed terms. There are a number of compelling in principle reasons for supporting fixed terms. The most important of these is reducing the political 'incumbency' advantage of the government, which can call elections at the most politically convenient time.

Centre for Public IntegritySource

Allowing the incumbent government to set the date hands them a significant advantage against the other parties, and an even larger advantage against challenger candidates running for the first time. It is in the public interest for incumbency advantages to be removed and the system made more fair. We recommend that fixed terms are implemented.

Voices of BeanSource

Running an election is a mammoth task for the AEC, made all the harder because at the federal level we don't have fixed terms—something every mainland state in Australia has. Imagine if the AEC were able to plan for the leasing of its counting centres, the booking of school halls for election day and the employment of its large temporary workforce. The budget would be saved millions, although, of course, this only hints at the democratic and practical benefits that would flow to the community from such a change.

Andrew GilesLabor Member for Scullin 2013–present

Fixed 3-year terms can be legislated in an enforceable way... When the Prime Minister recommends to the Governor General that an election be called, the Governor General can and should only accept the Prime Minister's advice if it is lawful... laws concerning fixed terms should be able to be presumed to have meaningful effect.

I really do think we need to look at fixed terms. I personally would be supportive of an inquiry that could look at either option—a fixed date in the three-year cycle or, indeed, extending it to a four-year cycle. I think that would assist the AEC greatly. I think it would give voters more confidence, and we could have a much more orderly approach to this.

Helen HainesIndependent Member for Indi 2019–present