Australia’s three-year federal election cycle encourages short-term politics and uncertainty. Fixed four-year terms could improve policymaking, investment and democratic fairness – if voters can be persuaded to back reform.

In January this year, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced the New Zealand election would be held on 7 November.

He is not required to give voters and political opponents nearly this much notice, but it is a Kiwi convention for the prime minister to set the election date at the start of the year. The convention started in 2011 to prevent election speculation interfering with the nation’s arguably more important duty of hosting the Rugby World Cup.

Australia’s prime ministers are not quite so magnanimous, calling elections with minimal notice to maximise their political advantage. The public endures months of election-date speculation, while the public service and businesses pause big decisions as a result.

Australia’s short election cycle is holding us back

The impact of early elections is particularly acute in Australia and New Zealand, being two of only three liberal democracies globally with an election cycle of three years or less. Any uncertainty reduces the already short window our governments have to actually govern.

Australia has the added complexity that all our state, territory and local governments have four-year terms. All except Tasmania have a fixed election date. With our federal government as an outlier, election timetables clash and intergovernmental programmes are frequently delayed.

Unlike New........

© Pearls and Irritations