The independent experiment in federal parliament is hitting a wall, and Zali Steggall knows it. For months, the member for Warringah has been holding private briefings with fellow crossbenchers and community organizers, laying out a pitch that would have been heresy during the 2022 federal election. She wants to form a political party.
It sounds like a betrayal of the hyper-local brand that swept the teal independents into power. The whole appeal of the movement was that these politicians weren't bound by party bosses or forced to vote along a strict factional line. But the rules of the game have shifted dramatically, and standing alone in the schoolyard is getting dangerous. Steggall's push for a structured teal party isn't a rejection of her roots. It's a survival strategy. You might also find this similar story insightful: The Red Phone in the Dark.
The Electoral Reforms Forcing Steggall's Hand
Independent MPs exist at a massive structural disadvantage because of new campaign finance laws pushed through by the Labor government and the Coalition. These changes introduce strict spending limits and donation caps that, on paper, apply to everyone. In practice, they heavily favor established major parties.
Major parties can aggregate their spending across the country. They can shift funds from safe seats to marginal ones, while a single independent is legally trapped within the borders of their own electorate. If a wealthy donor wants to back the broader movement, they can't simply write one large check to fund a dozen independent campaigns under the new system. As discussed in detailed reports by Associated Press, the results are worth noting.
By forming a formal party structure, the teals can legally pool resources, coordinate national campaigns, and exploit the same legislative loopholes that Labor and the Liberals carved out for themselves. It turns a fragmented group of local champions into a unified machine capable of running candidates in multiple states, particularly for the Senate, where winning as an ungrouped independent is nearly impossible.
The Rightward Lurch and the Rise of One Nation
The legislative squeeze isn't the only threat driving these secret talks. Recent polling data from RedBridge Group and Accent Research sent shockwaves through Canberra, showing an unprecedented surge in support for Pauline Hanson's One Nation. The numbers suggest that if an election were held tomorrow, One Nation could capitalize on deep voter anger, decimating the traditional Liberal base and positioning themselves as the official opposition.
Former Liberal Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull pointed out the glaring vacuum in the center of Australian politics. As the Coalition moves further to the right to chase populist votes, moderate voters in wealthy urban electorates are left politically homeless.
The teals won their seats by appealing to these exact voters—traditional liberals who wanted action on climate change and integrity in government but didn't want to vote for Labor. If One Nation continues to rise, a loose alliance of independents won't have the institutional muscle to project a stable, alternative centrist platform nationwide. A formalized party provides a distinct brand that can pitch itself as a safe, economically responsible middle ground.
A Fractured Crossbench
Steggall's pitch has split the crossbench wide open. While Allegra Spender, Sophie Scamps, and Nicolette Boele are reportedly open to finding new ways to collaborate, others want nothing to do with it. Helen Haines and Dr. Monique Ryan have already publicly distanced themselves from the idea, arguing that their loyalty belongs strictly to their local communities, not a centralized executive. Other independents like Rebekah Sharkie and Andrew Gee have also flatly rejected the proposal.
The resistance makes sense. The moment you put a party label next to your name on a ballot paper, you lose the purity of the independent tag. Opponents will immediately weaponize it, accusing the teals of becoming the exact thing they promised to destroy.
But Steggall and Spender aren't talking about creating a traditional top-down party with rigid caucus rules where MPs are expelled for voting against the leadership. The proposed model looks more like a modern political franchise—a shared brand with a unified national platform on core issues like climate, integrity, and tax reform, but with explicit freedom for members to vote their conscience on local matters.
The Looming Decision
Steggall is poised to announce the first iteration of this new political venture very soon. Even if she launches it as a party of one initially, the foundations are being laid for something much bigger.
The major parties tried to use electoral reform to kill off the independent threat and protect their duopoly. Instead, they might have forced their most dangerous competitors to grow up, organize, and build an permanent center-party alternative that could hold the balance of power for a generation. The era of the isolated community independent is evolving, and the teals must adapt or risk getting squeezed out of existence.
