It’s probably apparent to almost everyone by now that President-elect Trump is appointing some ‘interesting’ people to his administration. It’s not likely to take long to list what Robert F Kennedy Junior knows about the management of the USA’s Health Department, or wonder if Elon Musk managing the newly established Department of Government Efficiency is pushing an agenda rather than an effort to determine if the US Government can become more efficient? The list goes on to include a potential Defence Secretary with qualifications including some military service and a weekend gig on a conservative cable television outlet.

In some ways, the USA deserves what it got. Around 90 million eligible voters in the USA just didn’t bother voting. Those that did vote are far more intelligent than most observers have generally given them credit for. While Trump won the popular vote for President, a lot of the conservative attempts to wind back ‘progressive’ reforms over recent years in different parts of the USA were soundly defeated. This rather long analysis piece from The Guardian USA discusses some of the wins and losses and makes the point that the Republican ‘Make America Great Again’ movement won the day by introducing a different style of campaigning. 

Rather than the candidate or one of their supporters door knocking in the weeks leading up to the election in an effort to convince the homeowner of the worth of their candidacy, the conservative Republicans have been establishing and supporting community services for those that either genuinely or perceive themselves to be struggling. Trump’s often repeated question ‘are you better off now than you were four years ago’ feeds into the ability of the conservative church, social group or community organisation to gradually convince the vulnerable that they care. It’s suggested to those that have benefited from the programs they should get out to vote on election day. The conservative candidate, who has probably made themselves available over the past few years at the service providing aid and shown they (apparently) understand and care, then has the head start for the vulnerable’s vote.

The Australian electoral system does have some significant differences to the system in the USA. For a start voting is compulsory so the political parties can assume that their target audience is anyone over 18 rather than convincing people not only vote – but vote for them. Concerningly (to the major political parties in Australia), the number of votes for the major parties is trending down. This is despite the attempts by conservative media outlets such as News Corp and others such as popularist conservative radio announcers (and before you utter a word here or elsewhere about a recently retired announcer that has recently been in the news – read this) to convince all of us to support the Coalition, or the efforts of ALP affiliated organisations to build support for their side of politics. The 2022 election saw about a one third of us supporting the ALP, another third the Liberal/National Coalition (in its various forms) and small parties/independents picking up the remaining third. And while the ALP under Anthony Albanese obtained a majority of the seats in the House of Representatives there is a historically large number of independents and representatives of minor parties in both houses of Parliament which has caused some difficulty for the ALP in passing legislation.

That is a ongoing problem for both of the major political party grouping in Australia. A lot of the independents in the Australian Parliament are there because they were supported by groups of disaffected voters in their local communities to run for Parliament. In Australia, typically once a seat in any Parliament has been won by an independent, it is extremely difficult or one of the major parties to regain the seat – despite all the protestations and mutterings about the seat ‘belonging’ to a major party. Arguably, this trend will continue and the major parties will find it increasingly difficult to easily gain a majority of seats in the respective lower houses, thus ‘earning’ the title of Government rather than having to enter into often protracted and messy negotiations.

Long time political observer (and AFL tragic) George Megalogenis has recently put the virtual pen to paper in The Guardian discussing the potential for minority government in the Australian Parliament. According to Megalogenis, neither of the major parties seems to have the capacity to convince voters from the ‘other side’ to change their vote while more and more voters are being disillusioned by the system. Railing against the ‘perils of a minority government’ just are not cutting through – regardless of their validity. While the ‘chaotic’ Gillard minority government was supported by a small number of older male independents representing regional electorates, the current independents generally represent urban areas, are very well educated and almost all female. In short – they represent their communities rather than the political operatives in the ALP and Coalition ‘National Offices’. Providing they can keep up with the community interaction and the life on Capital Hill all of them could be there for some time. Probably more of a worry to the major parties is that there seems to be a pathway for active community groups in other electorates to follow which will only increase the number of MPs that call the cross bench home.

Megalogenis wrote a book proving his theory that there is an inverse relationship between the health of the AFL and the health of Australian politics in 2018, he’s talking about it on this episode of ABC Radio’s ‘Conversation Hour’. The theory was that when the AFL was in the doldrums suffering financial woes and a general lack of interest, we had politicians like Bob Hawke and John Howard at the top of their games. Now that the AFL is a financial powerhouse, we have had (until recently) a revolving door in the Prime Minster’s suite in Parliament House. There is some logic to the claims made.

Megalogenis could well be right again. One serious advantage that the Australian political system has over the US system is that you can’t legally ‘sit it out’ if you don’t want to vote. In addition, say a future Prime Minister wanted to establish a Department of Government Efficiency he couldn’t appoint a mate to run it unless the mate had stood for and been elected to Parliament (with all the restrictions that could cause ethical concerns to a ‘highly successful’ business person). Rightly or wrongly there is a large sector of the Australian population that feels they are unappreciated, misunderstood and doing it tough. Based on the example of the USA 2024 election the political group that can resonate with those that feel they are not represented should win the day come the next election. At the moment, neither of the major political parties in Australia seem to have the skills or abilities to represent themselves to disaffected members of individual communities. Community based independents have shown they can successfully acquire these skills and the subsequent votes.

Assuming the percentage of the vote for the two major parties continues to decline, sooner or later members of a smaller party or a group of independents will ask for a cabinet position as part of a power sharing arrangement. There is a lot of merit if this were to occur. While it might be a surprise to the operatives in the ALP or Coalition HQs, others go into Parliament with good ideas for their local community and the nation as a whole. They deserve the right to be heard. Who knows, it might not be orderly but we might get better outcomes if people with different world views sat around the table and come to an agreed position. Arguably that’s what happened when Julia Gillard was Prime Minister.