Proponents of active party engagement argue that the recruitment and renewal of members is a fundamental and legitimate component of a healthy political organization. From this viewpoint, the activities described at the ICAC inquiry—such as those performed by the Reformers—are essentially standard political work. Supporters emphasize that for any parliamentarian to maintain their seat and represent their constituents effectively, they must ensure their local branch remains engaged, active, and supportive of their platform. In this context, the ability to marshal a wide network of friends and supporters is viewed as a valuable skill rather than a nefarious tactic.
Those who defend these practices often point out that political parties are voluntary associations that rely on the energy of their members to function. By organizing events, discussing policy, and encouraging participation, groups like the Reformers were arguably fulfilling the basic democratic duty of mobilizing the base. They argue that the intense focus on these activities by the commission risks criminalizing routine political organizing. For many, the goal was simply to ensure that the party remained aligned with the conservative values of its members, such as pro-family policies and traditional social stances.
Furthermore, supporters suggest that the scrutiny of these internal processes may be driven by factional rivalries rather than genuine integrity concerns. They contend that the 'branch stacking' label is often used by political opponents to delegitimize the success of a rival faction. By framing the recruitment of like-minded individuals as a corruption issue, critics may be attempting to gain an advantage in internal party wars. For these stakeholders, the priority is maintaining a robust, ideologically driven party that can effectively compete in the broader political arena, rather than being hampered by excessive regulation of internal membership drives.