How to vote for your values - WePlanet Australia Federal Election Scorecard
- WePlanet Australia
- Apr 17
- 12 min read
Updated: Apr 22
Australia is heading to the polls — we know you're busy but want to vote for your values, so we've done the analysis to save you time.
Federal elections can shape the future of our country, and the world, well beyond the next three-year parliamentary term. The clean energy transition, reforming our food system, and protecting and restoring our unique biodiversity are all long-term projects that can outlive any single government.
That’s why we’ve put together a scorecard to show where the political parties stand on energy, food systems and climate action. We’ve also done a deeper analysis of the policies and public statements of the Australian Labor Party, the Liberal-National Coalition, and the Greens so you can vote armed with the facts.
The next government must build on the progress of previous governments and make the reforms needed to build a better future — faster, braver, and guided by science. Because Australians are already living through the consequences: Higher costs for power and insurance, longer bushfire seasons, record-breaking floods, and dangerous heatwaves.
We’re out of time for delay. We need leadership that will build on past progress, put evidence and the country before politics, and lay the foundation for future prosperity.
The choice is ours. Let’s make it count.
Analysis of the major parties' policies (Click the chevron to expand)
Australian Labor Party
The Albanese Government has promised bold climate action — and to be fair, they’ve taken some real steps forward. But when you look closer, a pattern emerges: strong language, selective action, and contradictions that threaten our health, our environment and our prosperity.
So where does Labor really stand on key issues of climate action? We’ve broken it down.
Support for renewables (Score – Right direction)
Labor has strong support for renewable energy, with an ambitious target of 82% renewable energy by 2030. Unfortunately, we’re not on track to meet it. The government has backed major investments like the Capacity Investment Scheme and committed to expanding renewables, primarily wind and solar, through to 2050, aiming for near-total renewable generation.
This is an ambitious target, and an as-yet unproven pathway for decarbonising.
No developed country has successfully decarbonised their electricity sector with primarily variable wind and solar. While it may be technically possible, the path to achieving it is unknown and risky.
82% renewable energy target by 2030.
Currently not on track to achieve this target. (Source)
Continued roll-out of renewables, aiming for close to 100% renewable generation by 2050.
Introduced the Capacity Investment Scheme (CIS) to attract investment in renewables projects (explainer)
Policy commitment of $2.3 billion for home batteries to support rooftop solar
Support for nuclear energy (Score – Wrong Direction)
Unfortunately, Labor still prohibits the use of civilian nuclear energy in Australia, even though it’s a proven, zero-carbon energy source used by most advanced economies. That ban limits our options, especially as energy demand soars, and increases the risk that we won’t successfully decarbonise our electricity system.
Labor’s conditional support for uranium mining at the national level allows Australia to contribute to global decarbonisation efforts by supplying raw material required for civilian nuclear energy.
However, current prohibitions on Australia engaging in other parts of the nuclear fuel cycle for civilian use limit our capacity to fully support growth of global nuclear energy and may ultimately hinder international decarbonisation efforts.
Labor currently supports the docking of nuclear-powered warships in Australian ports, including the planned AUKUS nuclear submarines. It is hoped that this would also translate to support for nuclear-powered cargo ships which are being planned to decarbonise global shipping.
Committed to maintaining the current ban on nuclear power plants and all other stages of the nuclear fuel cycle in Australia (Source)
Conditional support for uranium mining (Source)
Strong precautions for nuclear powered vessels, including nuclear powered vessels to visit only those ports which have been determined as being suitable. (Source)
Role of coal and gas to 2050 and beyond (Score – Needs Work)
Labor says is their plan is the same as outlined in the AEMO ISP ‘Step Change’. This predicts the closure of coal fired power station by 2038 to achieve Labor’s legislated renewable energy and emissions targets. No solid commitment from Labor to forecast coal closure dates or guarantees on what will replace them – assumption is renewables and gas.
Labor sees a role for gas-fired electricity beyond 2050 – with more fossil gas burned in absolute volume than today.
Some support exists for home electrification, but it’s not enough to break free from fossil gas at the scale and speed needed.
Labor continues to approve new coal and gas projects – primarily for export - despite the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels.
Sees a role for gas-fired generation in firming renewables in 2050 and beyond. (Source: Future Gas Strategy)
Some support for home electrification to transition away from gas
Closure of coal fired power station by 2038 according to AEMO ISP ‘Step Change’ which Labor says is their plan. No solid commitments to coal closures, and lack of clarity with state governments’ commitment to same.
Biodiversity conservation and restoration (Score – Needs Improvement)
Labor says it’s committed to zero new extinctions, protecting the Great Barrier Reef, restoring native forests and rivers, and creating a national Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
But actions speak louder.
During this term of government, they’ve failed to halt native forest logging and delayed critical reforms to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act. Not only did they delay strengthening our environmental laws, but they weakened them to protect industrial scale salmon farming in Tasmania, putting endangered species like the Maugean Skate at greater risk.
They’ve also approved large-scale renewable projects which have seen the clearing of native forests. This is due to the failures of our national environmental laws and Labor must do better.
Labor's commitments are lip service, not leadership.
Commitment to zero new extinctions – actions in this parliament have shown this to be lip service. I.e EPBC Act changes to protect salmon farming despite risk of Maugean Skate extinction. (Source)
Promised to establish a national Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) if re-elected. NOTE: Labor also promised to establish an EPA if elected in 2022 but has not done so. (Source)
Commitment to reforming EPBC Act to strengthen environmental laws - actions in this parliament show this is not a priority. (Source)
Commitment to protect the Great Barrier Reef (Source)
Commitment to protect and restore our nation’s waterways (Source)
Commitment to protect and restore native forests – no commitment to end native forest logging. (Source)
Support for reducing environmental impact of food systems (Score – Needs Improvement)
Labor supports research into methane-reducing livestock tech—an important step. They’ve committed to independent, science-based regulation for agriculture and land management innovation.
That’s promising. But without detailed policy with targets, timelines or funding, we won’t achieve the kind of transformation we need in our food systems to achieve Labor’s stated goal of net-zero by 2050. Agriculture is a major export industry for Australian and accounts for one-sixth of our emissions.
But without detailed policy with targets, timelines or funding, we won’t achieve the kind of transformation we need in our food systems to achieve Labor’s stated goal of net-zero by 2050.
Labor supports research, development and deployment of methane-reducing livestock technologies. “We will continue to work with the industry to identify and overcome technological, economic and social barriers, including consideration of large-scale trials of technologies and mechanisms to reward the emissions savings, with a view to meaningfully reduce methane emissions from agriculture.” (Source point 126, pg 31)
maintain independent, evidence-based regulation for agricultural science, technology and innovation, including in crop genetics, livestock emissions technologies and land management initiatives; (Source point 125;j pg 31)
The Verdict (Score – Needs Improvement)
Labor is making progress - but it’s not enough.
Targets mean little if they’re not backed by credible, science-aligned delivery.
A clean energy transition can’t coexist with new coal and gas. Protecting nature doesn’t work if you’re still approving native forest logging or weakening our national environmental laws. And banning nuclear while betting on gas just doesn’t add up.
Australian Greens
The Greens present themselves as the most ambitious party on climate and the environment - promising rapid decarbonisation, strong conservation, and a swift transition away from fossil fuels. Their passion and urgency reflect the seriousness of the crisis we face and we commend their ambition, however the absence of a detailed, achievable roadmap — particularly one that embraces a broader range of clean technologies like nuclear energy and gene editing — raises concerns about whether their ambitious goals can be delivered having serious consequences for energy security and climate action.
So where do the Greens really stand on key issues of climate action? We’ve broken it down.
Support for renewables (Score – Right direction)
The Greens have a bold target: 100% renewable electricity generation by 2030. It’s the most aggressive target of any major party. But such an ambitious plan needs a credible plan for how this would be achieved.
Transforming the electricity grid to run entirely on renewables - primarily wind and solar - in under five years would be unprecedented globally, and raises serious questions about reliability, affordability, and energy security.
Targets are powerful, but they need clear plans for implementation. So far, the Greens haven’t outlined the systems-level changes or backup generation needed to make this promise viable.
100% renewable electricity generation by 2030. No credible plan for how this could be achieved. (Source)
Support for nuclear energy (Score – Wrong Direction)
The Greens currently stand firmly opposed to nuclear energy in any form—including civilian nuclear energy, nuclear-powered cargo ships, and uranium mining.
While this position reflects longstanding concerns within the environmental movement it diverges from the global scientific consensus that nuclear power will be needed alongside renewables to meet net-zero goals—especially in countries with growing electricity demand and limited hydro or geothermal resources. By taking nuclear off the table entirely and opposing uranium mining, the Greens limit the range of clean energy options available to Australia and may unintentionally make deep decarbonisation harder
domestically and globally.
Opposes the use of nuclear energy in any form (even oppose the OPAL research reactor at Lucas Heights) (Source)
Opposed to uranium mining (Source)
Role of coal and gas to 2050 and beyond (Score – Right Direction)
The Greens support a complete phase-out of coal and gas-fired electricity generation by 2030—another very ambitious target. However, like their renewables plan, they haven’t provided a detailed roadmap for how this would be done without risking reliability or cost blowouts.
They propose electrifying LNG terminals and shifting export markets towards hydrogen and ammonia - this would require massive infrastructure and market transformation. Hydrogen projects globally have failed to achieve commercial success and the use cases for hydrogen continue to shrink as alternatives, such as battery technology, improve.
There is also strong support for home electrification to eliminate household gas use, which is a welcome step toward decarbonising buildings and improving indoor air pollution.
Still, the overall strategy lacks detail on the transition pathway from our current fossil-heavy energy system to their proposed zero-carbon future.
Commitment to end all coal and gas-fired generation by 2030 (Unclear how this would be achieved.) (Source)
Electrify LNG terminals and transition to hydrogen and ammonia exports. (Source)
Support for home electrification to end household gas use. (Source)
Biodiversity conservation and restoration (Score – Right Direction)
The Greens have some of the strongest policies on protecting nature. They propose investing 1% of the federal budget into ecosystem protection and restoration, ending native forest logging, and placing a moratorium on the clearing of koala habitat.
This level of ambition is essential if Australia is serious about halting biodiversity loss and reversing environmental degradation. On this front, the Greens’ policy is both clear and commendable. However, their plan for 100% renewables may conflict with their efforts to protect biodiversity and restore ecosystems without careful consideration of the environmental impacts of large-scale wind and solar projects such as materials and mining required and clearing for transmission infrastructure which would need to be carefully managed.
Invest 1% of federal budget to protect and restore ecosystems (Source)
End native forest logging (Source)
Moratorium on clearing koala habitat (Source)
Support for reducing environmental impact of food systems (Score – Right Direction)
The Greens show leadership here, with a strong package to modernise and decarbonise food systems. They propose:
$100 million to support development of alternative proteins
$60 million to establish cellular agriculture centres of excellence
$20 million to coordinate national research efforts
$20 million in grants to help local plant-based food businesses scale up
This is a clear, actionable investment in the future of food. But there’s a tension: while the Greens support innovation in plant-based and lab-grown food, they simultaneously call for a moratorium on GMOs—despite their potential to aid alternative-Proteins and reduce environmental impact of conventional agriculture while maintaining productivity.
That’s a contradiction that could undermine progress.
Advance the development of alternative proteins with a $100 million investment to support a greener, sustainable food system: (Source)
Establish cellular agriculture centres of excellence with $60 million to accelerate research and innovation.
Coordinate research efforts with $20 million for a task force linking programs like CSIRO’s Future Protein Mission to other research initiatives.
Support local businesses with a $20 million grant fund over three years to expand operational capacity and build facilities for processing Australian-grown plant proteins.
Moratorium on GMOs (Source) which have the potential to maintain productivity while reducing environmental impact.
The Verdict (Score - Right Direction)
Big ambition, but serious questions: The Greens are aiming high - and on biodiversity and food systems, they’re on the right track.
But ambition without delivery is just a wish. Without credible pathways to phase out fossil fuels and achieve 100% renewables in five years, the risks to energy reliability and public confidence are high. And by ruling out nuclear entirely, the Greens remove a powerful tool from the decarbonisation toolbox.
A future powered by clean energy and thriving ecosystems is possible—but we need bold and practical leadership to get there.
Liberal-National Coalition
The Coalition talks up energy security and low-cost power — and they’ve made a bold bet on nuclear. But while they’re finally recognising the role of clean, reliable and affordable nuclear energy, their climate plan lacks credible delivery on key fronts. With no clear support for electrification, no biodiversity strategy, and uncertain support for wind and solar, the gaps are hard to ignore.
So where do the Liberals and Nationals really stand on the climate challenge? Here’s the breakdown:
Support for renewables (Score – Needs Improvement)
The Coalition says it won’t stand in the way of renewables — but its actions suggest otherwise. Leading Coalition figures have opposed major wind energy projects, both onshore and offshore, some for good reasons such as concerns about impacts to critical native habitats, but others for political gain. Some have also called for a cap on renewable generation — contradicting claims that they won’t restrict investment.
This ambiguity undermines confidence in the sector. While the Coalition says it supports “technology not taxes,” it’s hard to see how renewables thrive under a government that sees wind turbines as the enemy.
Some opposition to large scale renewable energy projects, primarily onshore and offshore wind. (Source re: offshore wind)
Claim to not want to restrict investment in renewable energy or cap renewable generation, which requires further explanation following an announcement suggesting a “cap”.
Support for nuclear energy (Score – Right Direction)
Here, the Coalition stands apart. It has proposed building publicly owned nuclear power stations at seven sites across Australia — a massive shift, and one WePlanet supports. Nuclear is a proven, zero-carbon energy source used safely around the world.
But proposals alone aren’t enough. The Coalition must commit to realistic timelines and a credible delivery plan. Nuclear can’t be used as a political shield to delay decarbonisation — we need to see projects fast-tracked, funded, and integrated as part of a broader clean energy mix.
The Coalition also supports uranium mining and nuclear-powered vessels — two policies that help decarbonise both the global energy and shipping sectors.
Proposes building publicly owned nuclear power stations at 7 ex-coal sites across Australia. - Need to be pushed to deliver and bring online ASAP (Source)
Support for uranium mining – this supports global decarbonisation efforts
Support for nuclear powered vessels – this supports global maritime decarbonisation efforts
Role of coal and gas to 2050 and beyond (Score – Wrong Direction)
While backing nuclear is a step forward, the Coalition also supports expanding gas production for both domestic use and export — doubling down on fossil fuels as demand for clean alternatives increases.
They see gas playing a key role in energy generation beyond 2050 and have no policy to support home electrification — a key step to cutting household emissions and energy bills.
Worse, they plan to actively keep coal plants open longer while waiting for nuclear. While there is no guarantee that coal plants will shut down sooner under the alternative plans, any additional delay would see significantly more pollution — exactly what we can’t afford in a climate crisis.
Expand domestic gas production for both domestic use and export
Sees gas-fired generation as a key energy generation in 2050 and beyond
No support for home electrification
Plan to keep coal open longer until nuclear comes online
Biodiversity conservation and restoration (Score – Needs Improvement)
While some progress has been made under previous Coalition governments, this election there’s very little substance to what they are promising. No serious commitments, no policies, no vision for restoring Australia’s unique ecosystems. At a time when species loss and ecosystem collapse are accelerating, this absence is glaring.
Their inclusion of nuclear energy will help reduce the environmental impact of our energy system but this is negated by continued support for fossil fuels.
Focus on practical and genuine environmental conservation. (Source)
Support community driven initiatives to green Australia’s landscapes. (Source)
Minimise the footprint of our energy system to protect pristine landscapes and agricultural land. (Source)
Secure the National Water Grid by supporting projects which will improve water security for communities and farmers. (Source)
Play an active role in funding and fostering the protection, restoration and sustainability of our land and waterways. (Source)
Support practical initiatives to address climate change. (Source)
Ensure the preservation and protection of our natural wonders like our treasured Great Barrier Reef. (Source)
Support for reducing environmental impact of food systems (Score – Wrong Direction)
No policy commitments. No strategy for methane reductions, agricultural emissions, or land use transformation — despite agriculture being a major contributor to Australia’s emissions and environmental footprint.
The Verdict (Score – Wrong Direction)
One big idea, but not a plan.
The Coalition’s support for nuclear is welcome — but it can’t come at the cost of everything else. Without credible support for renewables, electrification, biodiversity, or food system reform, it’s not a climate strategy. It’s a placeholder.
Australia needs clean, reliable, and abundant energy — and nuclear must be part of that. But clinging to fossil fuels while ignoring nature and agriculture?
That’s not climate leadership. That’s stalling dressed up as strategy.
NOTE: While we have limited our detailed policy analysis to the three largest parties, we've also provided a score for the minor parties and independent groups. Full scorecard details here.
We encourage you to check out the full list of election candidates on the AEC website and find out as much as you can about their policies before casting your vote.
WePlanet Australia is an ecohumanist organisation promoting public policy addressing a range of social and environmental issues including climate change, biodiversity loss and poverty.
We can liberate nature and elevate humanity.
Authorised by A. Leong, WePlanet Australia, Marrickville, NSW