I explored the path of independents and looked at, can you go into Canberra as an independent without the machinery behind you? And I said no.
In the rural electorate of Farrer, a byelection has surfaced something older than any single campaign: the restless human search for political belonging. David Farley, now standing as One Nation's candidate, spent years moving between Labor sympathies, independent overtures, and finally the party he now represents — a journey documented in texts, emails, and event tickets that his opponents have made central to their case against him. His story raises a question the electorate must quietly answer: is a shifting political history evidence of inauthenticity, or of a citizen genuinely trying to find where his convictions fit in a fractured democracy?
- Documents obtained by Guardian Australia reveal that Farley actively courted the Voices of Farrer independent movement in 2023–2024, buying event tickets and discussing preference strategy before the group chose his current rival instead.
- His political trail — from Labor association to independent exploration to One Nation — has given opponents potent ammunition, with the Nationals circulating images of him in a Labor T-shirt and framing him as a political chameleon.
- One Nation, meanwhile, is attacking Milthorpe as a 'fake independent' backed by Climate 200, even as the party cannot dispute the records showing Farley's sustained engagement with the very movement now supporting her.
- Farley has not retreated from his history, telling a candidate forum he found One Nation's 'courage and tenacity' after concluding that running without party machinery was unviable — though some of his stated positions appear to diverge from One Nation orthodoxy.
- With polling suggesting Farley is likely to defeat Milthorpe on Saturday, the byelection is landing as a test of whether voters in Farrer weigh political consistency as heavily as his opponents are betting they will.
David Farley's path to the One Nation ticket in the Farrer byelection has not been a straight line. In late 2023 and into 2024, while still unaffiliated, he was actively engaging with Voices of Farrer — the grassroots independent network organizing to challenge Liberal member Sussan Ley. He attended their events, texted coordinators about building a shared platform, and drafted emails on preference management strategy. He was, by every indication, auditioning for a role in their movement.
The movement chose Michelle Milthorpe instead. Ley held the seat at the 2024 election, and Farley, having found the independent path closed to him, eventually joined One Nation. Now, in May 2026, with Ley's resignation triggering a byelection, he faces Milthorpe as her opponent — a reversal his rivals have seized upon with visible relish.
The Nationals have circulated corflutes showing Farley in a Labor T-shirt from years past. One Nation, for its part, has attacked Milthorpe as a 'fake independent' with Climate 200 ties — while declining to dispute the documents Guardian Australia obtained showing Farley's own history with the movement now backing her. A party spokesperson reframed his journey as ordinary democratic evolution: many Australians, they said, move between parties before finding values alignment.
Farley himself has been candid. At a Charles Sturt University forum, he acknowledged exploring the independent path, said he culturally didn't fit in Labor, and described finding in One Nation the conviction he had been looking for. Yet in the same forum, he appeared to endorse Labor's current migration figures — a position at odds with One Nation's harder line — and spoke of democracy as something alive and active, requiring constant engagement. These are not the words of a man who has stopped searching.
The Farrer byelection has quietly become a referendum on what political authenticity means. Farley is expected to win on Saturday. But the documents leave open a larger question: whether his arrival at One Nation is a destination, or simply the latest waypoint in a journey still underway.
David Farley has spent the last few years searching for a political home, and the documents tell that story in real time. In early 2024, while still unaffiliated with any party, he was actively courting the Voices of Farrer movement—the grassroots independent network that had already begun organizing to challenge the sitting Liberal member, Sussan Ley. He bought a ticket to one of their events in September 2023. He texted coordinators about sharing ideas for a "Farrer platform" that could work for both a Senate and House campaign. He drafted emails discussing preference management strategy, the kind of tactical thinking that suggests he saw himself as a serious contender in their process.
But the Voices movement chose Michelle Milthorpe instead. By the time the 2024 election arrived, Milthorpe had their endorsement and their backing. Ley held the seat with a 56-44 margin. And Farley, having explored the independent path and apparently concluded it lacked the machinery to win, eventually landed at One Nation. Now, in May 2026, he is the One Nation candidate for the Farrer byelection triggered by Ley's resignation, and he is expected to defeat Milthorpe on Saturday.
The irony is sharp enough that opponents have made it central to their campaign messaging. The Nationals have circulated corflutes showing Farley in a Labor T-shirt from years past. Videos portray him as a political chameleon. One Nation itself, meanwhile, has attacked Milthorpe as a "fake independent" with ties to Climate 200, the same funding network that has supported other successful independent candidates across the country. What they have not disputed are the documents Guardian Australia obtained—the texts, emails, and ticketing records showing Farley's sustained engagement with the very movement now backing his rival.
When asked about this history, a One Nation spokesperson did not deny the record. Instead, they reframed it as a normal part of democratic life. "Most Australians have a history of voting or supporting other political parties throughout their life," the statement read. They positioned Farley as one of many voters who had grown disillusioned with Labor and the Coalition and found a new political home with One Nation. The party welcomed people "who put Australia first," the spokesperson said, and saw Farley's journey as evidence that he had found values alignment at last.
Farley himself has been more candid about the shifts. At a candidate forum at Charles Sturt University last week, he did not shy away from his changing affiliations. He explained that he had explored the independent path but concluded that running without party machinery was not viable. He said he "culturally didn't fit" in Labor and left. He claimed to have found in One Nation the "courage and tenacity" he was looking for. In a Facebook post on April 27, he wrote that like many Australians, he had explored his options before finding a political home that reflected his values, and he made no apology for that.
Yet there are moments where his stated positions seem to diverge from One Nation orthodoxy. In the same CSU forum, he appeared to endorse Labor's current net overseas migration number, a position at odds with One Nation's harder immigration stance. He spoke about democracy as something active, something that lives in a gymnasium rather than a museum, requiring constant engagement and energy. These are not the words of someone who has simply settled into a fixed ideological position. They are the words of someone still thinking, still testing ideas.
The Farrer byelection has become a referendum on political consistency and authenticity. Milthorpe represents the independent movement that Farley once courted. Ley, before her resignation, represented the Liberal establishment. And Farley represents One Nation—a party he joined after exploring multiple other options. The documents show that his exploration was genuine and sustained. What they do not show is whether his current commitment is final, or whether it too might prove to be another waypoint on a longer journey.
Citas Notables
Like many Australians, I explored my options before finding a political home that actually reflects my values, and I make no apology for that.— David Farley, Facebook post, April 27
Most Australians have a history of voting or supporting other political parties throughout their life.— One Nation spokesperson
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does it matter that Farley approached the Voices movement before joining One Nation? Isn't it normal for candidates to explore options?
It matters because the Voices movement is built on grassroots authenticity—finding local people who genuinely represent their communities. Farley was actively trying to position himself within that framework, discussing preferences and strategy. Then when they chose Milthorpe instead, he pivoted to One Nation. That's not just exploring; that's shopping around.
But One Nation's response is that people change parties all the time. Is that a fair point?
It's fair in the abstract. But there's a difference between changing your mind over years and actively courting multiple movements simultaneously. The documents show he was engaged with Voices in 2023 and 2024 while also apparently considering Labor and independents. That's not a journey—that's a search for the winning ticket.
What does it say that he seems to disagree with One Nation on immigration policy?
It suggests either he hasn't fully committed to their platform, or he's willing to stake out independent positions even within the party. At the forum, he endorsed Labor's migration numbers. That's not a small thing for a One Nation candidate. It raises the question of whether he's found his home or just found a vehicle.
Do voters care about this kind of political history?
Some do, some don't. Voters who value consistency and authenticity will see it as a red flag. Voters who are frustrated with the major parties and see One Nation as a protest vote might not care where Farley came from, only that he's not Labor or Liberal. The real test is whether Milthorpe can make the case that his shifting allegiances matter more than his current platform.
What's the most damaging part of this story for Farley?
Probably that he was actively working with the Voices movement—the same movement now backing his opponent—and they rejected him. That's not ambiguous. It's a direct comparison. Voters can see that the people who knew him best in the independent space chose someone else. That's harder to spin than just saying you explored your options.