Former Liberal MP Jason Falinski’s latest attack on the so-called ‘teal’ independents has drawn criticism, with political observers suggesting his dismissal of their independence misses the fundamental driver of their success. Far from being a monolithic movement, commentators argue the teals demonstrate considerable individual agency, a characteristic Falinski himself may have underestimated.
Falinski, who lost his own seat of Mackellar to independent Dr Sophie Scamps in the 2022 federal election, has been a vocal critic of the crossbench, often portraying them as a homogenous bloc covertly aligned with the Labor Party. However, this narrative, Crikey reported, fails to acknowledge a crucial distinction: the teals are not a nascent political party, but rather a collection of individually endorsed candidates, each with their own platform, albeit often sharing common themes around climate action, integrity in politics, and gender equality.
More Than a Party-in-Waiting
The most telling evidence of the independents' agency, according to Crikey, is the scant number who have officially joined the 'teal' political party formed after the last election. Despite the widespread use of the 'teal' label, only two federal MPs have formally aligned with the Teal Independents Party. This statistic, often overlooked in broader political commentary, underscores that the vast majority of these crossbenchers operate independently of a party structure, accountable primarily to their electorates and their stated policy positions.
Their electoral success was not predicated on party allegiance but on a grassroots appeal that resonated with voters disillusioned with major parties. These independents campaigned on local issues informed by community consultation, offering a distinct alternative to traditional party politics. Their campaigns were often volunteer-driven and locally funded, contrasting sharply with the well-oiled machinery of major parties.
Falinski's Frustration: A Projection?
Crikey’s analysis suggested that Falinski’s frustration might stem from a personal failure to grasp, or indeed, utilise the very agency he now appears to deny the teals. During his time in Parliament, Falinski was often perceived as a loyal Liberal Party member, adhering closely to party lines. The suggestion is that he perhaps never considered leveraging his own platform to champion genuinely independent or community-driven issues outside of the established party framework.
This isn't to say major parties lack their own internal debates or individual voices, but the structure inherently demands a degree of conformity. The independents, by contrast, are defined by their ability to operate outside such constraints, forging direct connections with constituents without the filter of party directives or national campaign messaging.
A New Era of Political Independence?
The rise of the teals represents a significant shift in Australian politics, challenging the long-held dominance of the two-party system. Their continued presence in Canberra, and their influence on policy debates, highlights a growing voter appetite for independent representation. While critics like Falinski may attempt to diminish their autonomy by lumping them into a single, party-like entity, the reality on the ground, and in the parliamentary chamber, paints a different picture.
These independents are not merely dissenters from a new party; they are, by and large, distinct political actors. Their success lies in their ability to articulate a clear vision for their communities, unburdened by the complexities and compromises inherent in major party platforms. As they continue to carve out their space in Australian politics, understanding their genuine independence, rather than dismissing it, will be crucial for both established parties and the electorate alike.