Here's what the Greens will prioritise in a minority Labor government
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has repeatedly ruled out any deal with the Greens, scarred by the Gillard-era crossbench deal, which involved the minor party.
But the Greens' mission remains clear: wield the balance of power in a Labor minority government to secure progressive policy reforms.
"The housing, cost of living and climate crises are getting worse," Greens leader Adam Bandt told the ABC.
"People are realising we can't keep voting for the same two parties and expecting a different result."
Stay updated:
Catch the latest interviews and in-depth coverage on
Mr Bandt is set to launch the party's national campaign in the inner-Melbourne suburb of Brunswick East on Wednesday night, alongside Wills candidate and former Victorian Greens leader Samantha Ratnam.
The party's policy wishlist is long and ambitious.
So what are their key priorities?
Affordable dental care
There's a reason Mr Bandt has been carrying a giant red toothbrush around for the past few weeks.
The Greens want to expand Medicare to cover dental services for adults.
Adam Bandt has been wielding an oversized toothbrush during the election campaign.
(
Supplied: Facebook
)
Parliamentary Budget Office analysis suggests the average adult who accesses the scheme would receive about six or seven dental services, each valued at about $141, in the first year (2025-26).
Services would include treatments such as fillings, tooth extractions, cleaning and X-rays.
The Greens say families could save $2,642 in the first year of the expansion, with a four-person family benefiting by up to $29,322 over a decade.
Young people under the age of 17 can access Medicare coverage for basic dental services, but this benefit doesn't apply to adults.
The plan is expected to cost a whopping $195 billion over 10 years.
Housing tax reform
The Greens want to phase out tax concessions for people who own more than one investment property in a bid to address chronic housing unaffordability.
The party is lobbying to scrap negative gearing, which allows property investors to deduct the costs of running a rental property against their taxable income.
Housing has become one of the defining issues of this election.
(
AAP: Diego Fedele
)
Photo shows
Three homes with red roofs and bushes nearby
This is one of the questions in Vote Compass, which can help you understand your place in the political landscape. Follow the link to take the survey.
They also want to wind back the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount, which allows property investors to only pay tax on half the profits they make when selling rental properties.
The Greens argue these two tax breaks are exacerbating Australia's housing crisis by making it easier for wealthy property investors to outbid first home buyers at auctions.
Under their proposed reforms, landlords will be able to keep their existing negative gearing and capital gains tax benefits for one investment property they already own, as long as it was purchased before the policy commences.
Labor has repeatedly ruled out changes to negative gearing and the capital gains discount ahead of the election.
Read more about the federal election:
Want even more? Here's where you can find all our 2025
Ban new coal and gas projects
The Greens have pledged to thwart fossil fuel expansion by blocking federal approval of new coal and gas projects.
The party has been scathing of the Albanese government's approval of more than 30 new coal and gas projects since coming to power in 2022.
Young voters have expressed growing anger over inaction on climate change.
(
ABC News: James Carmody
)
They've vowed to push the federal climate minister to use the safeguard mechanism to put a "hard cap" on pollution from new projects under the scheme, which requires major carbon emitters to progressively reduce or offset their emissions over time.
The policy is a key plank of the Albanese government's efforts to reach a 43 per cent reduction in emissions by 2030, and net zero by 2050.
The Greens will also seek to cancel exploration permits for oil and gas projects.
How will they pay for it?
Dubbed their "Robin Hood Reforms", the Greens plan to fund their ambitious policies by collecting more tax from big corporations and billionaires.
Their plan involves introducing a 40 per cent tax on the excess profits of big corporations, which the Greens say will raise $557 billion over the medium term.
Excess profits are earnings above a company's normal or expected returns.
"Under Labor and Liberal, one-in-three big corporations pays no tax," Mr Bandt said.
"Just by taxing the massive profits of the top 0.1 per cent of Australia's biggest corporations, we can raise $585 billion to fund the services everyone needs."
The Greens also plan to introduce a 10 per cent tax on the net wealth of Australia's billionaires, which they say is expected to raise $23 billion over the forward estimates and $50 billion over the decade.
Turning dreams into a reality
Although Mr Albanese has said he will not negotiate a deal with the Greens, his choices could be limited if Labor falls well short of the 76 seats required to govern in majority.
History has shown it won't come easy.
Borne out of Australia's environmental protest movement, the Greens have previously shown reluctance to compromise with the government on their agenda.
While that resolve may appeal to some progressive voters, the party has faced criticism for using its power to block or delay bills for seemingly little gain.
Photo shows
Two young children reach for sandwiches, grapes and carrots from colourful lunch boxes at school.
Greens leader Adam Bandt will spend his week in Queensland, seeking to sandbag the party's three seats of Griffith, Ryan and Brisbane and announcing the Greens would push to establish an $11.6 billion free school lunches program in the next term of parliament.
The Greens have also been lashed for pushing idealistic policies the government says it can't afford.
"They can be policy pure and they can lord that over the Labor party," ANU's Australian Studies Institute director Mark Kenny said.
"That's because they never really have the breadth of base that you need to be in government."
The Greens' sweeping policy platform includes ending native logging, making all public transport cost 50c, wiping all student debt and providing universal mental health care with unlimited sessions.
Other policies include cancelling the AUKUS agreement, providing free lunches to every public school student and making childcare free.
Professor Kenny said the Greens' plan to fund its agenda could backfire and hurt the Australian economy.
"Taxing corporations and taxing billionaires in the way [the Greens] are talking about … may have implications as to whether those corporations and billionaires continue to operate in Australia at all," he said.
"That might be a good thing in the case of some of them, and it might be disastrous in the case of some communities that rely on those corporations, whether they be big mining companies or resources companies."
Loading
Having trouble seeing this form? Try
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Sydney Morning Herald
3 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
This couple spent $500 trying to buy their dream home. They never stood a chance
Clutching a bright yellow bidding panel, amid a crowd of onlookers stretched across a concrete driveway, Rebecca Borkman was quietly hopeful she was about to secure her dream home. Advertised at just $700,000, the two-bedroom townhouse in the Sydney suburb of Bankstown was within the budget of Borkman and her partner, Byron Tolley, with $150,000 to spare. The couple were so serious about the home that they had shelled out more than $500 to obtain pest, building and strata reports in preparation, and discussed bidding tactics. But it soon became clear they never stood a chance. What Borkman, 33, didn't know when she arrived at the auction was that the reserve price for the property was $850,000, more than 20 per cent above the advertised guide. The sale had lured 18 registered bidders, and the townhouse sold for $896,000. 'As soon as that auction started, we were wondering why we even bothered showing up or getting excited,' Borkman said. 'If they let us know that the reserve was anywhere even around $800,000, we wouldn't have put so much time and money into it. But they [the agent] were firm on the $700,000 guide.' Scenes like this are repeated at weekend auctions across the country. In response to an online survey, almost 5600 people told this masthead's Bidding Blind investigation that they had spent money and time investigating properties that they would later discover they could not afford. A separate data analysis of more than 36,000 auction listings reveals that more often than not Sydneysiders and Melburnians are being misled by advertised price guides. That means Australians are forking out thousands of dollars on multiple pest and building inspections, contract reviews and strata reports during extended property hunts, only for the homes they had fallen in love with to sell hundreds of thousands of dollars above the guide. Several Victorian buyers said they had recently paid for a building inspection on homes advertised within their budget. Then, even though auction bidding surpassed the top end of the sale guide – sometimes by hundreds of thousands of dollars – the home was passed in because it didn't meet the vendor's reserve. 'Agents often argue that it's the buyers and auctions that drive up the price, but conversations with the agent often indicate early on that the buyer wants a much higher rate than advertised,' said one of these prospective buyers. Another buyer looking in Sydney's inner west, a hotspot for underquoting complaints, said it felt like they were being constantly scammed. 'We are often lied to about vendor expectations and then spend money on building reports, contract reviews by lawyers ... We recently had an experience where the auction guide was $1.7 million and the reserve was closer to $2.2 million.' Following the Bidding Blind investigation, the Victorian and NSW governments are facing pressure from industry groups, consumers and opposition parties to stem the tide of wasted cash by overhauling underquoting laws. Victoria's peak real estate lobby group announced it would support the mandatory pre-auction disclosure of reserve prices by sellers, a significant policy shift for a group long resistant to such a proposal. Key real estate industry leaders in NSW have also backed that model, with both state governments promising to seek advice or continue consultation on potential solutions. Another idea to stem the cost of inaccurate price guides is to require vendors to provide prospective purchasers with free building and pest inspections before auction, as is the case in the ACT. 'There will still be buyers who will want to get their own independent report, but this removes the cost and the double up for a large portion of buyers, and it would directly remove the financial harm of underquoting,' said Consumer Policy Research Centre chief executive Erin Turner. In NSW, agents are required to provide prospective purchasers with a contract of sale and disclose issues such as whether the property has been subject to recent flooding, has any external combustible cladding or has been the scene of a murder or manslaughter in the past five years. In Victoria, sellers are legally required to provide a 'section 32 vendor's statement', which details information about any easements, zonings, strata scheme management and fees and whether a property is in a bushfire-prone area. However, buyers in both states are encouraged to seek their own building inspections, which usually cost between $300 and $1000 depending on the size of the property and whether a pest inspection is included. Contract reviews, also recommended, will generally cost $200 or $300. And in NSW, buyers have to pay a fee to access strata reports. 'It's not unusual to get 30 or 40 people through a home … let's just say half of them [arranged inspections and other due diligence] – there's 15 grand down the toilet,' said buyers agent Paul Mulligan. Loading 'There are a lot of gutted buyers out there, and what ends up happening is even worse than the cost [because] they go out and then they buy a place out of frustration, and potentially overpay or buy a lemon. It's huge. It's a huge consumer cost, emotionally and financially.' Victorian buyers advocate David Morrell, who described underquoting as 'cheating', said the practice came with an 'opportunity cost' for prospective buyers who missed out on properties when they didn't obtain access to enough pre-approved finance due to misleading price guides. 'If the agent hadn't lied to you at the start, you'd be living in your favourite home,' Morrell said. As a former property manager at a real estate agency, Rebecca Borkman felt like she should have been in a better position than most to navigate the auction process when she was searching for a home in Sydney last year. But the human resources professional said her experience was so painful that she eventually refused to consider buying any property that was being auctioned. Borkman and her partner instead bought a home in Carlingford, in Sydney's north-west, through a private sale. 'If something came up for auction, we would immediately write it off the list, no matter how much it suited our needs, because it was so damaging to our bank account, to our self-esteem and to our emotional wellbeing,' she said. 'If even I, with that experience [of being a property manager] in my past, feel almost scammed, then what's someone who has no idea what they're getting themselves into meant to do?' Borkman said the reason they had fallen in love with the Bankstown townhouse, with its front and back garden and 297-square-metre block, was because it had been undervalued by the $700,000 auction guide. 'The minute that we showed up there and looked at the property, I thought, 'This is so far beyond anything else that we had seen within that price range' … as it turns out, we were looking at a property that was worth $900,000.'

Sydney Morning Herald
3 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Recognising Palestine won't stop the killing, on either side
Reality is reflected in the mirror of the response issued by the Palestine Action Group, who organised last weekend's Sydney Harbour Bridge march and the Sydney Opera House hate fest in October 2023: 'We must be clear: recognition of a Palestinian state has never been a demand of this movement ... we will take to the streets again … until the Australian government takes real, decisive action to end its complicity.' Hamas has 'applauded' the announcement. Both of these should give the government pause. Loading Australia's white-saviour act at the UN next month won't stop the killing or the associated conflict on our streets. It won't release from hell the Israeli, Thai and Nepalese hostages starved and tortured by Hamas for almost two years now. No pronouncement by any foreign leader will have the slightest impact on peace, security or co-existence for Israelis or Palestinians. Israelis are screaming and IDF generals threatening to resign because Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's latest plan for Gaza will prolong both the horror of war for all, and the longevity of his coalition. West Bank Palestinians despise the Palestinian Authority (PA), which has no ability to implement any of the 'commitments' it has made to the international community. I remember a Palestinian academic sneering to our 2023 tour group that the only thing PA leader Mahmoud Abbas could organise was a parade for himself. Hamas still has a stranglehold on Gaza's population, whom it's terrorised for 18 years, using civilians as human shields, stealing food from them, beating and murdering dissenters. Loading Let Palestine be recognised as a state, and held accountable as a state actor, finally. Let the corrupt and complicit UNRWA be shut down because Palestinians won't be refugees any more; they'll have a state to return to. Let there be elections where the PA losers don't get thrown to their deaths off roofs by the Hamas winners, as in 2007. Let them reconcile their contradictory commitments to 'statehood' (the PA) and a global caliphate (Hamas Charter). May our government's great faith not be misplaced. I wish Wong and Albanese had been on the tour I led this May, meeting Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Druze and Palestinian women who graciously shared with us their intertwined lived experiences. One was the very first non-Jewish person to reach out to me after October 7: a Palestinian friend who lives in East Jerusalem. The sisterhood, mutual empathy and pragmatism of these women in the middle of a war zone stood in stark contrast with the performative sloganeering that fills our social media feeds and shamefully, our Hansards, too. The women we met in May were focused on the future. They look into the faces of their children every day. After WWII, the defeated Germany needed to rebuild its economy and deprogram its people after years of antisemitic indoctrination and warmongering had crippled them. The international community helped them with both, and the result was a spectacular success. Why don't we offer a similar, strength-based approach to Palestine? Let's put people ahead of political posturing and give the faces of both Palestinian and Israeli children something to turn to with hope in their eyes.

The Age
3 minutes ago
- The Age
The problem with taking advice from ‘finfluencers'
For better or worse, now when people go looking for life advice or want to find answers to burning questions, the place we increasingly turn to is social media. And sure, there are a lot of areas in our lives where this can be great. Suggestions on how to use up half a can of chickpeas or learning how to braid your hair is one thing. But when it comes to things like our health and finances, the risks associated with getting advice from unqualified influencers are exponentially higher. That's one of the reasons that I was happy to see that the Australian Securities and Investments Commissions recently took part in a global crackdown on financial influencers, also known as 'finfluencers', along with regulators from the United Kingdom, Italy, Hong Kong, Canada and the United Arab Emirates. Following the crackdown, ASIC commissioner Alan Kirkland explained: 'It's important that consumers separate fun from fact when it comes to influencer content. Popularity doesn't equal credibility.' In other words, a finfluencer might have 100,000 people eager to listen to what they have to say, but that doesn't mean they have the qualifications, expertise or a legal right to be saying it in the first place. In the UK alone, the regulator issued 650 requests for content to be removed from social media, 50 takedown requests to websites being operated by influencers, and seven cease and desist letters. The regulators also invited four influencers in for interviews, and made three arrests. In Australia, though, the fallout was much smaller, with ASIC issuing just 18 warning notices to financial influencers suspected of providing unlicensed financial advice and/or unlawfully spruiking high-risk financial products. Loading As tempting as it might be to think that our markedly smaller numbers are a sign of Australian finfluencers being better, more honest people than those in other nations, that's not quite it. The main reason for our A+ performance is a thing called INFO 269, which are guidelines ASIC issued in 2022 specifically outlining the rules and regulations for social media influencers offering financial advice. In addition to breaking down the legal standards influencers are required to meet before discussing or promoting stocks, financial products or investment funds, the guidelines also make the consequences of breaking any rules crystal clear: up to five years in jail, or fines of over $1 million. These threats aren't idle, either. In 2021, ASIC successfully filed a lawsuit against Tyson Scholz, an Australian finfluencer who dubbed himself the 'ASX Wolf'. At the time, Scholz was offering stock tips via paid online subscriber groups to his Instagram followers, which sat at well over 100,000 people. At the time, though, Scholz did not hold a valid financial services licence, meaning his advice specifically on what stocks to buy was against the law. By 2023, he was facing bankruptcy over a $450,000 court-imposed debt from the regulator. And it's not just finance influencers who are being closely watched and regulated, either. In 2022, the Therapeutic Goods Administration announced restrictions on how influencers post about products such as vitamins, protein powders, supplements, sunscreen, medical devices and medicines. These changes mean influencers must clearly disclose if they are in partnership with a brand, and they also cannot share their personal experience with therapeutic products.