While state electoral commissions manage immediate operational pressures, federal government possesses unique coordination capabilities for addressing AI-enabled threats across Australian democracy. My Churchill Fellowship research across the world suggests what comprehensive national approaches might entail.

The evidence points toward questions about the need for permanent coordination mechanisms supporting all Australian electoral jurisdictions. Many successful international democracies invest in permanent infrastructure, recognising that information threats don’t align with electoral timetables. Australia does not have anything like this.

Countries with higher democratic trust levels also demonstrate notably different approaches to public broadcasting investment, treating it as democratic infrastructure rather than discretionary spending. While some democracies strengthen public broadcasting as a counterweight to algorithm-driven information silos, Australia’s approach to ABC and SBS funding raises questions about strategic priorities in an AI-influenced media landscape.

My research also highlights significant gaps in digital literacy education, particularly for demographics showing vulnerability to disinformation, including older adults and people with lower educational attainment. Current approaches appear fragmented across agencies, raising questions about effectiveness against increasingly sophisticated AI-enabled campaigns.

My upcoming Churchill report examines how federal coordination might enhance rather than duplicate state efforts. The model isn’t centralised control but strategic coordination—shared intelligence, developed best practices, and rapid response capabilities that individual jurisdictions cannot achieve independently.

International evidence suggests that effective national approaches require sustained investment across multiple domains: technical infrastructure, educational programs, community engagement, and cross-jurisdictional coordination. Single election events provide insufficient testing grounds for such systems—they require continuous refinement across Australia’s complex electoral landscape and in between elections.

Federal leadership appears particularly relevant as AI threats extend beyond traditional campaign periods. Australia’s continuous electoral activity across jurisdictions creates persistent pressure on democratic institutions, raising questions about responses that transcend partisan political cycles.

What opportunity exists for positioning Australia as a leader in democratic resilience? The question remains whether federal government will invest in comprehensive infrastructure for effective response, or await outcomes that might affect public confidence in democratic institutions.