An assault on the foundations of our free and fair voting process
In the aftermath of Australia's 2025 federal election, a parliamentary committee has raised a question as old as democracy itself: where does vigorous participation end and intimidation begin? The inquiry, led by a Labor-chaired joint committee, found that organized third-party campaigning — particularly by the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church and the conservative lobby group Advance — created environments at polling booths that felt unsafe and coercive to voters and officials alike. Fourteen recommendations now seek to draw clearer boundaries around the sacred act of casting a ballot, even as those accused reject the inquiry's legitimacy and the Coalition frames the entire exercise as partisan overreach.
- Dozens of complaints described polling booths in marginal seats transformed into scenes of overwhelming, coordinated pressure — a voting environment that felt anything but free.
- The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church and Advance sit at the center of the storm, accused of concentrated, targeted campaigning that the committee links to a 'significant proportion' of reported antisocial behavior.
- The Coalition has fired back hard, calling the inquiry a 'hyper-partisan witch-hunt' and framing scrutiny of the church as religious persecution — turning an electoral dispute into a culture-war flashpoint.
- Both groups declined three separate invitations to testify, forcing the committee to take the rare step of seeking to compel their appearance — a move described as extraordinary even by those pursuing it.
- Fourteen recommendations, anchored by a mandatory code of conduct and restricted campaign zones around polling booths, chart a path toward reform — though a final report won't land until November 2026.
A Labor-led parliamentary committee has delivered an interim verdict on Australia's 2025 federal election: democracy came under assault, and new laws are needed to prevent it happening again. The joint standing committee on electoral matters, chaired by Jerome Laxale, tabled its findings this week, placing the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church and conservative lobby group Advance at the heart of what it describes as a fundamental disruption to the country's free and fair voting process.
The committee received a wave of complaints about Plymouth Brethren members appearing in large numbers at polling places in marginal seats, predominantly backing Liberal candidates. The church acknowledges some members campaigned but insists the effort was not institutionally organized. Advance faced parallel scrutiny for its own polling booth activities. Together, the two groups were connected to a 'significant proportion' of reports documenting antisocial and intimidatory behavior — particularly acute in the electorates where their presence was most concentrated.
The inquiry's 14 recommendations center on a mandatory code of conduct for all polling place participants, enforced within designated campaign zones where the number of campaigners and signs would be tightly controlled. The committee also called for a review of the legal threshold defining 'significant third parties' and a broader examination of electoral laws to guard against what it terms domestic interference — any conduct designed to discourage people from voting.
The political fallout has been sharp. The Coalition has dismissed the inquiry as a witch-hunt and accused Labor of using parliament to persecute religious Australians for exercising democratic rights. Meanwhile, the committee last week moved to compel both the church and Advance to testify after each declined three separate invitations to appear. The church, which submitted written requests to give evidence five times, says scheduling conflicts prevented earlier attendance. Advance has been less conciliatory, with a spokesperson dismissing the committee chair and declaring the group owes no one an explanation for its participation in elections. The final report is due in November 2026, but the battle lines are already drawn.
A parliamentary inquiry into Australia's 2025 federal election has concluded that democracy faced a serious threat from organized third-party campaigning at polling booths, and the committee is now pushing for new laws to prevent a repeat. The interim report, tabled on Tuesday by a Labor-led joint standing committee on electoral matters, names the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church and the rightwing lobby group Advance as central to what the committee chair, Jerome Laxale, described as an "assault" on the voting process.
The committee received dozens of complaints about the conduct of Plymouth Brethren members, who appeared in large numbers at polling places in marginal seats across the country, predominantly supporting Liberal candidates. The church has acknowledged some members participated in campaigning but insists the effort was not organized by the institution itself. Advance, a conservative advocacy group, faced similar scrutiny for its polling booth activities. The committee's report noted that a "significant proportion" of reports documenting antisocial behavior at voting locations were connected to these third parties.
In his parliamentary address, Laxale painted a stark picture of what election officials and voters experienced. "Many described this assault by third parties as a fundamental disruption to the foundations of our free and fair voting process," he said, emphasizing that in a system where voting is compulsory, the electoral environment must feel safe and welcoming to all participants. The committee received accounts of overwhelming, unsafe, and intimidatory experiences, particularly in targeted electorates where the campaigning was most concentrated.
The interim report contains 14 recommendations, with the most significant being a mandatory code of conduct for all participants at polling places. The code would be enforced within designated "campaign zones" immediately surrounding the booths, where the number of campaigners and signage would be strictly limited. The committee also called for a review of the threshold that determines which entities qualify as "significant third parties" under federal electoral law and therefore face regulation. Beyond these immediate measures, the inquiry recommends a broader review of electoral laws to protect the voting process from what it terms "domestic interference"—defined as any behavior intended to discourage people from voting.
The investigation has become deeply contentious. The Coalition has rejected the inquiry's findings as a "hyper-partisan witch-hunt," with Liberal senator Jess Collins arguing that the treatment of Plymouth Brethren members amounts to persecution of a religious group for exercising their democratic rights. Ben Small, a Liberal MP, used nearly identical language, calling the inquiry "one-eyed" and accusing Labor of using parliament to target religious Australians. Collins reportedly defended the church at a closed-door Coalition party room meeting on Tuesday morning, though she declined to discuss her remarks.
The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church has repeatedly offered to testify before the committee, submitting written requests to appear five times. The church's director, Lloyd Grimshaw, indicated his willingness to give evidence to "state the facts," and a church spokesperson reiterated on Tuesday that the institution "did not support, coordinate or otherwise participate in the 2025 election." The church claimed it was unable to attend an earlier hearing due to scheduling conflicts. However, the committee last week announced it would seek to compel witnesses from both the church and Advance to attend public hearings, describing the step as "extraordinary" but necessary, after both groups declined invitations to appear in November 2025, March, and May.
Advance has shown no interest in cooperating. A spokesperson dismissed Laxale as "a sook" conducting a witch-hunt and declared the group would not accept lectures about who is permitted to participate in elections. The committee will now pursue its other terms of reference, including the possibility of fixed four-year parliamentary terms and expanding the number of MPs, before releasing its final report in November. The clash between the inquiry's findings and the Coalition's defense of the groups involved suggests electoral reform will be a flashpoint in Australian politics heading into the next election cycle.
Notable Quotes
Many described this assault by third parties as a fundamental disruption to the foundations of our free and fair voting process— Jerome Laxale, parliamentary committee chair
The way that they have been treated by Labor for exercising their right to participate in our political process is a stain on our democracy— Liberal senator Jess Collins
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
What exactly happened at these polling booths that prompted such strong language from the committee chair?
The committee received dozens of reports describing overwhelming numbers of campaigners from these groups appearing in marginal seats, creating what voters and officials characterized as intimidatory atmospheres. It wasn't necessarily violence—it was the sheer coordinated presence and intensity of the campaigning that made people feel unsafe or unwelcome.
Why does the Coalition see this as persecution rather than legitimate electoral concern?
Because the church members were exercising what they see as their constitutional right to campaign. The Coalition argues that Labor is singling out a religious group for doing what any political organization does—mobilizing supporters. From their perspective, the inquiry is weaponizing the electoral process.
But the church says it didn't organize the campaigning. If that's true, how can you regulate it?
That's the central tension. The committee is proposing rules about behavior at polling places themselves—restricting numbers, limiting signage, creating codes of conduct—rather than targeting the groups directly. But if the church members were acting independently, those rules might not address the real problem.
What does "domestic interference" mean in this context?
The committee is proposing that any behavior designed to discourage people from voting could be considered interference. It's a broad definition that would capture intimidation, overwhelming presence, or anything that makes voting feel unsafe or unwelcome.
Why won't Advance cooperate with the inquiry?
They're rejecting the entire premise—that their presence at polling booths was problematic. By refusing to testify, they're making a political statement: we don't accept your authority to judge our participation in democracy.
What happens if the church and Advance continue to refuse the summons?
The committee can compel them to appear. But that escalates the conflict significantly. It turns an electoral inquiry into what looks like a legal confrontation, which reinforces the Coalition's narrative that this is persecution rather than legitimate oversight.