Key issues
- Democracies
around the world are currently facing a range of significant challenges. Research
suggests that, at the global level, there has been a net decline in the
quality of democratic governance in recent years.
- However,
democratic performance varies significantly by region and country, and Australia’s
democracy ranks highly when compared to other nations.
- Nevertheless,
Australia’s democratic institutions do face their own complex problems, which
parliamentarians will need to consider, including declining trust and
engagement, ideological extremism, external interference and misinformation,
and electoral inclusivity and diversity.
Introduction
In recent years, concerns have increased about various
challenges being faced by democracies around the world, including declining
trust and engagement and threats to electoral integrity. This article explores
these challenges, the extent to which they affect Australia’s democratic institutions,
and possible reforms that might address them.
Australian democracy in the global context
Approximately 3 billion people voted in national elections
in 2024, an unusually large number created through coinciding election cycles. Analysis
of these elections and of governance more broadly (p. 9) suggests that, at
a global level, improvements in the quality of democracy in some countries have
been outweighed by declines elsewhere, with a trend of net decline in global democratic
quality that can
be traced back to 2017 (p. 13). Additional long-term declines in average
turnout at elections and increased election-related
protests are also evident. While these trends are concerning, democratic
performance varies significantly by region (p. 9) and country, and
potential solutions must be tailored to each nation’s specific circumstances.
Australia
ranks as a ‘relatively high-performing liberal democracy’ (p. 578) in
democratic indices, with its precise ranking varying depending on the
methodology. Despite expressing low levels of trust in government, Australians
remain strongly supportive of fundamental democratic values, including free
and fair elections, the rule of law and representative democracy. Some
characteristics of Australian democracy may help moderate problems that have
become acute in other countries – for example, Australia’s use of compulsory
voting, frequent elections, different electoral systems for the House of
Representatives and the Senate, and professional and apolitical electoral
administration. These factors have contributed to high voter turnout rates, minor
party representation and relatively
low levels of affective polarisation (p. 18) (negative feelings
towards opposing political parties). In contrast, polarisation has become a particular
concern in the US and Latin
America. Similarly, while social media platforms and unmoderated online
communications are
concerns in Australia, they likely pose
greater challenges in highly contested or polarised democracies. Despite
this positive record, Australia’s democratic institutions are not entirely free
from threats, as outlined in the following sections.
Declining trust and engagement
Australia’s system of compulsory voting (first legislated in
1924) creates world-leading rates of voter participation and remains
extremely popular. It incorporates preferential voting for the House of
Representatives (shown to boost
voter participation) and proportional
representation for the Senate (which works to avoid
election ‘winners’ and ‘losers’). By mandating participation from even
those self-described as ‘uninterested’ in politics, compulsory
voting can build widespread trust in Australia’s democratic system.
Some commentators
have noted that voter turnout has fallen slightly at recent elections. However,
Australia’s electoral roll has also increased (above the general population
growth rate), partly due to legislation
passed in 2012 allowing the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) to directly
enrol eligible citizens. Figure 1 shows changes in enrolment and turnout
over recent Australian federal elections as a proportion of the total estimated
population eligible to vote. There appears to be no imminent threat of turnout in
Australia declining to the significantly lower levels seen in other democracies
such as the US or UK.
It is also notable that long-term
declines in voter turnout have either reversed or stabilised in many
democracies.
Figure 1 National
enrolment and turnout rates, federal elections 2010 to 2022
Source: Australian Electoral Commission, ‘National
enrolment figures by state/territory’.
The number of informal votes cast
can also be a measure of engagement. However, determining the intent behind
informal votes is more problematic and it has been almost a decade since the AEC
published an analysis on this issue. Informal voting is related to ballot
paper length and complexity, and some commentators have called for greater
restrictions on who can be listed on a ballot paper. However, such reforms
would constrain challengers to incumbent members and parties. Likewise reforms
allowing party logos on ballot papers were intended to reduce confusion but may
disproportionately bias party candidates. The ‘simplifying’ removal
of group ticket voting in 2016 amplified differences between the House of
Representatives and Senate voting systems and increased potential confusion.
Declining
participation in political parties is a long-term trend, observed both in Australia
and internationally, as (particularly
young) people increasingly choose
other means to express their political views. This decline is mutually
reinforced by the ‘cartelisation’ of political parties, marked by a smaller
membership base, centralised
decision-making (such as ‘head
office’ pre-selections), and a shift to paid employees over volunteer
campaigners. The long-term impact of these changes remains unknown.
Trust in politicians and politics generally has also
declined in the past 2 decades. The
Australian Election Study has found (p. 99) that between 2007 and 2022:
- respondents
who believe politicians ‘know what ordinary people think’ has fallen from 23%
to 14%
- those
saying that government is run for ‘a few big interests’ has increased from 38% to
54%
- general
satisfaction with democracy has fallen from 86% to 70%.
Additionally, the
belief that people in government can be trusted has declined from 48% in 1996
to 30% in 2022.
While these results are concerning on their face, the
possible consequences of declining trust levels remain contested
among experts. Some contend
that declining trust in politicians and political institutions can
precipitate declining trust in broader society and impact social cohesion. Other researchers have noted that although
survey respondents consistently report low trust in democratic politics and
politicians, incumbent
governments are being returned globally at similar rates in recent decades;
if trust were irreversibly low, we might expect clear electoral repudiation of
people in power. However, these
findings may need to be reconsidered in light of 2024 election results,
which saw many incumbent national governments either defeated or reduced to
minority status.
Just as there are various causes of declining political engagement, there is no single solution.
Accordingly, political scientists and commentators have identified multiple
evidence-backed reforms to help rebuild trust and engagement in Australian
democracy. For example, increased opportunities to participate in politics
outside of elections has been shown to increase
trust and efficacy among participants (the belief that they
can influence political outcomes). Examples include citizens’
assemblies, submissions to parliamentary
committees, or engaging
directly with parliamentarians. However, it is unclear whether the benefits
occur only among citizens who are already politically engaged or also improve
the engagement of those who do not currently participate.
Australian
Public Service Commission survey results indicate (p. 15) that a large
proportion of those who are dissatisfied with how democracy works in Australia
believe that corruption is widespread in democratic institutions and processes.
Further, perceived
corruption is associated with reductions in the perceived legitimacy (p.
16) of public officials. Integrity reforms may go some way to addressing these
perceptions. Experts have suggested that recent reforms, such as the National Anti-Corruption Commission (established
in mid-2023), have contributed to Australia’s improved performance in the most
recent global corruption perceptions index. Reforms
to the regime governing political donations were passed in early 2025, which
experts suggest will
improve integrity and transparency in some areas, but leave other areas unaddressed.
Further integrity reforms may include reform
of lobbying regulation and greater
protection for whistleblowers (including through proposed reforms to Public
Interest Disclosure legislation).
Ideological extremism
While engagement and trust have declined among Australians
generally, there has also been an
apparent increase in ideological extremism among a very small minority. The
Australian Security Intelligence Organisation has stated that acts of
politically motivated violence have become more common recently, and that this
trend is expected to continue. While the prevalence of extremist views is hard
to quantify, it is a pressing policy problem. A more detailed discussion of the
relevant tensions is provided in the Issues & insights article, ‘Navigating a world more prone to conflict’. For Australia’s democratic institutions, ideological extremism poses 2 key
threats: undermining election administration and disrupting parliamentarians’
work.
Running federal elections in Australia already poses
significant logistical challenges due to geographic vastness, the wide range of
languages used other than English, and an expectation that voting is
convenient and quick, as a condition of compulsory voting. The AEC has been
remarkably successful in delivering
elections that meet or exceed community expectations, with serious mistakes,
such as the
2013 WA Senate election, few
and far between. This record is underpinned
by a temporary workforce of more than 100,000 employees who participate in the
country’s ‘largest
peacetime logistical exercise’.
However, the
AEC has warned (p. 2) of a ‘marked increase in those questioning
elements of democracy, legitimacy of government agencies and electoral
processes and in turn undermining trust in electoral officials and workers’. This
could hamper future AEC recruitment, making it difficult to raise such a large
election workforce in circumstances where employees may be exposed to threats
and harassment.
The
Australian Federal Police has also reported increasing levels of
harassment, abuse, and threats against parliamentarians. Some parliamentarians’
offices have recently
been damaged in politically motivated acts of vandalism. These developments
may threaten parliamentarians’
ability to interact freely with their constituents.
While the threat of extremist ideology cannot be completely
removed, some additional measures have been proposed, particularly to mitigate
its effects on electoral integrity. Recent
reforms to the Criminal Code strengthened protections for frontline
Commonwealth employees (including election workers and electorate office staff). Recent
changes to electoral law clarified that unauthorised filming inside a
polling place without permission may be unlawful misconduct, but acknowledge
the need
to balance worker protections with transparency and accountability.
Foreign interference and misinformation
Alongside challenges from ideological extremists, ‘bad
actors’ seek to undermine democracies for geopolitical reasons. The
internet and social media provide these actors with pervasive channels for
interfering in democratic elections. For example, calls
to ban TikTok are often predicated on the
threat of foreign actors spreading misinformation or disinformation that
threatens Australia’s political and democratic systems.
Forms of interference such as manipulating election results
or electronic voting systems, or directly funding candidates, have
an obvious impact. The Australian
Electoral Integrity Assurance Taskforce works to mitigate such direct
threats, while foreign political
donations were banned in 2018. Other threats, such as sowing distrust or
spreading partisan misinformation, are less direct, and distrust and
partisanship exist to some extent in Australia (and in all democracies) without
external interference. The taskforce’s recent Election
security environment overview (p. 3) notes that, while it expects
voters to face an increase in mis- and disinformation during elections, ‘most disinformation
does not involve a foreign power’. Strong democratic institutions (free and
fair elections, stable political parties, and compulsory voting, for example) help
mitigate threats from bad actors, while media
literacy and civics
education are also often cited as reducing the impact of mis- and
disinformation.
The proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (AI)
will arguably compound exposure to dubious
information, from both malicious and non-malicious sources. Similarly,
social media engagement is becoming an increasingly
unreliable source of information. In seeking to counter these developments, the
AEC’s ‘Stop and Consider’ campaign aims to give voters tools to recognise misleading
information, including AI-generated content.
The AEC also
maintains a ‘disinformation register’ of common and widely distributed
misinformation about the electoral process. The AEC uses a
‘prebunking’ strategy for these sorts of claims, preparing videos and
statements in advance of misinformation taking hold, and trying to debunk
specific claims as they emerge. Prebunking
is increasingly popular for its ‘inoculation’ effects: once someone hears
the ‘prebunked’ information, they are arguably less likely to subsequently
believe the untrue claim. However, evidence for its effectiveness is still
limited and it should
not be considered a panacea.
While the AEC remains the centre of electoral information,
when it comes to truth in political advertising, the AEC
has warned that requiring it to adjudicate ‘truth in political advertising’
would damage perceptions of its neutrality and electoral integrity. In 2024, government
legislation proposed measures to address misleading electoral
communications, including a requirement to label AI-generated electoral material.
However, other proposed measures are contentious, since adjudicating the
accuracy of claims made by election candidates, parties, and third parties can
be subject to interpretation. The South Australian Electoral Commission has
overseen the
state’s truth in advertising laws since 1985 and reports ‘no
obvious harm’. However, it is not clear that election campaigns in South
Australia are any more ‘honest’, nor that the laws would scale easily to the
Commonwealth level.
Inclusivity and diversity in elections
While Australian elections have broadly high rates of voter
participation, some aspects of the electoral system can make voting difficult
for minority and marginalised communities. The combination of single-member
House of Representatives electorates and multi-member Senate electorates balances
stability and diverse representation and is well-regarded
by democracy researchers. However, these differing systems for each chamber
(both more complicated than in most other democracies) is a challenge for many
voters and compounded by compulsory voting. Areas with high
rates of newly nationalised Australians and low
rates of English literacy consistently
show (p. 53) lower voter turnout and more informal ballots.
Electoral participation by Indigenous Australians is a
related challenge. The electoral division with the highest proportion of
Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander residents, Lingiari, consistently
reports comparatively low turnout rates. In 2022, only
67% of those enrolled in Lingiari voted (down from 73%
in 2019), compared to a
national rate of 90%. Two explanations are offered for low Indigenous voter
participation rates. First, remote and rural voters face greater obstacles to
enrolling and voting. To address this, the AEC’s Indigenous Electoral
Participation Program provides educational information and employs local
staff to engage with Indigenous communities, facilitating enrolments
and understanding of the electoral process. During elections, the remote voter service conducts
mobile polling in many remote Indigenous communities to reduce the need to
travel to larger towns. However, the process has been criticised for a
lack of publicity and under-resourcing.
Secondly, low national engagement and trust is likely to be exacerbated
among Indigenous voters. This was seen in the 2023 referendum on Indigenous
representation, where, despite unprecedented remote and
rural voter assistance, turnout among Lingiari voters further
declined.
Conclusion
Australia’s democracy ranks highly when compared to other
nations and the challenges faced by its democratic institutions do not appear
to be as acute as those experienced elsewhere. However, despite this generally
good performance, in the areas discussed above – declining trust and
engagement, ideological extremism, external interference and misinformation,
and electoral inclusivity and diversity – Australia faces challenges that will require
the ongoing attention of parliamentarians if they are to be mitigated or
resolved.
Further reading
- Holly Ann Garnett, Toby S. James and Sofia Caal-Lam, Electoral Integrity Global Report 2024, (Electoral Integrity Project, July 2024).
- Mark Evans, Patrick Dunleavy and John
Phillimore (eds), Australia’s Evolving Democracy: A New
Democratic Audit (London: LSE Press, 2024).
- Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs,
Nationhood, National Identity and Democracy, ‘Chapter 5 – Australia’s Democracy: Trust, Satisfaction and Belief’
(Canberra: Senate, 2021).
- Joint Standing Committee on
Electoral Matters, From Classroom to Community: Civics Education and Political
Participation in Australia (Canberra: Parliament of Australia,
January 2025).