It has been commonplace for a number of years, if not decades, to read of the increasing individualisation of politics and the concomitant decline of party. One of the symptoms of these developments has been, in some cases, the increasing independence of MPs. However, in most of these cases MPs remained tied to parties.
This has been slowly changing in the last few years, as in a number of Anglo-American democracies independents have been elected to parliament for the first time since the Second World War.
This is an important development because party is perhaps the key defining characteristic that shapes much of the behaviour of MPs. It shapes their ambitions and so on. The (re-)emergence of the independent MP then is not just about the decline of party, but it constitutes the (re-)emergence of a parliamentary role previously thought redundant.
In this paper the role of the independent MP in Westminster democracy is examined using the two cases – Ireland and Australia –where independents have been most prevalent. Original interview and survey data is used to assess the goals and behaviour of independent MPs at the national level in Ireland and the state and federal level in Australia. Data on their parliamentary activities (including voting records and legislative behaviour) is also used.
Given the centrality of parties to the functioning and stability of parliamentary life, the emphasis is on the behaviour of independent MPs. Aspects examined include the rationale for their presence, their actions in parliament, and their overall role as an MP. Ultimately, a core argument is that being independent is a genuine parliamentary role, distinct from that of trustee, delegate, politico, constituency member, policy advocate, and so on, as defined by others in the field. Being independent is not just a label; it is a raison d’etre.
