In a digital age, it can be difficult to distinguish between fact and opinion, especially when it comes to politics. However, as the policies proposed by both parties set a precedent for the future, the outcome on May 3rd will impact young people more than ever. Undertaking research, locating statistics, and unpacking statements are vital tasks every individual should do before entering the polls. Here is a sourced comparison of the different policies of labour and Liberal.
First, let’s get to know the voting history of each leader as politicians emulate their beliefs into their policies. You can access all voting history on the theyvoteforyou.org website. Most votes are accompanied by legislation, which you can also see on the website.
| Peter Dutton – Leader of the Opposition and the Liberal Party (also known as The Coalition with the Nationals) | Anthony Albanese – Leader of the Labor Party |
| Voted for: Deregulating undergraduate university fees Getting rid of Sunday and public holiday penalty rates Increasing indexation of HECS-HELP debts Increasing the cost of humanities degrees Increasing the initial tax rate for working holiday makers Increasing the price of subsidized medicine Increasing the Medicare Levy to pay for the National Disability Insurance Scheme Prioritizing religious freedom | Voted for: A royal commission into Violence and Abuse against people with disability Extending government benefits to same-sex couples Federal action on public housing Increasing availability of abortion drugs Increasing the diversity of media ownership Reducing tax on lowest income bracket Same-sex marriage equality Increasing Aboriginal land rights Increasing housing affordability Net zero emissions by 2050 |
| Voted against: Net Zero emissions by 2050 Increasing support for rural and regional Australia Federal action on public housing | Voted against: Deregulating undergraduate university fees Charging post graduate research student fees Getting rid of Sunday and public holiday penalty rates Increasing indexation of HECS-HELP debt Turning back asylum boats |
Why is this relevant leading up to the election, and what does it mean for students?
HECS DEBT
HECS debt is a recurring concern amongst young people and university students, often placing a barrier on a young person’s pursuit of a degree that they would otherwise excel in. Research shows that the average time taken to repay a HECS debt has increased from 7.3 years in 2006 to 9.9 years in 2024. The Labor party pledges that they will cut student debt, including TAFE and apprenticeship loans by 20%, with an intent to wipe $16 billion in student debt for approximately three million Australians. According to the Minister of education, this means that approximately $5,520 will be wiped from the average HECS debt per student.
Why are they only doing this now?
Labor already began doing this in December last year, cutting $3 billion in total. If someone repaid their student debt in 2023 or 2024, they would have received their credit or refund from the ATO.
What about the liberal party?
No research indicates that Dutton offers a promised policy regarding HECS debt. He claimed that this policy was promised by Albanese to make “people like him again”. Opposition frontbencher Paul Fletcher claimed that people who pursue tertiary education have “higher lifetime earnings and therefore it’s appropriate that they bear some of the cost of their education”. However, research shows that this is not the case. LSJ depicts stories of young people, including young men, who fear that they will be unable to have children or own a property due to indexation rates, and despite earning a reasonable income, the cost-of-living crisis is an increased barrier to paying a large debt. The difficulty to pay HECS debt is heightened for Indigenous people in rural areas and mothers who earn less or stop working to have children.
OWNING A HOME/COST OF LIVING
The Liberal party’s first promised policy allows first home buyers to take out up to $50,000 from their superannuation to use as a deposit for their first home. However, this money needs to be returned once the house is sold. Concerns have been raised about the potential for this to increase house prices further and cause economic suffering in old age, supported by a study conducted by leading house economist, Chris Leishman. Super Members Council, Misha Schubert also supported this prospect on the SMC website.
“Raiding retirement savings for house deposits would just unleash a supercharged price hike in house prices, not create more new home buyers. And if people retire with less super, that will also push up age pension costs – a bill that every Australian taxpayer would pay.”
Dutton also promises to allow first home buyers to deduct interest payments on the first $650,000 of a mortgage against their taxable income, available with a taxable income of $175,000 or less. Independent economist, Saul Eslake told the ABC that this policy will “allow those eligible for it, to take out bigger mortgages than they otherwise would. And we know that results in higher home prices, not higher rates of home ownership”. Eslake is implying that this policy will primarily benefit the wealthy as opposed to the everyday citizens struggling to afford a home based on eligibility.
The Labor party promises to allow a 5% deposit for first home buyers and to avoid paying the hurdle of a lender’s mortgage insurance, pledging $10 billion to build new homes in the next eight years with zero interest loans or equity investments. Experts say this policy will help people who can’t rely on their parents to purchase a home. However, experts have also contemplated that this may increase the number of people into the market and prices, therefore Labour’s initiative to increase supply may be helpful by adhering to state and council partnerships, however obtaining planning approvals could be a challenge.
IMMIGRANTS
Research indicates that immigration is not the problem for increased housing prices but rather a policy error accumulated with a national obsession with property ownership. It would not make sense for house prices to continue increasing during the pandemic when borders were closed and immigration fell by 71%. An article by the Australian Institute claimed that a decline in housing affordability began in the 2000s with the introduction of the 50% capital gains tax discount policy which, coupled with negative gearing, reduced the tax property investors pay. This means that property investors rushed into the market and obtained a 50% tax-free profit, resulting in them renting out properties. However, both parties plan to ban foreign investment and temporary residents purchasing new homes for two years. Dutton has taken this a step further, by promising to slash migration levels by 100,000 and introduce caps on international students at 240,000 while increasing student visa fees. This will pose financial challenges for Australian universities and the economy as international students contribute approximately $30 billion to the economy each year.
WOMEN
In 2024, 103 women were killed in Australia because of male violence. Albanese has claimed that he is working to end violence against women and has appointed an expert panel to conduct a review and to formulate best practice-prevention processes. However, Albanese has also been slammed for his absence at domestic violence rallies. Furthermore, Dutton has been criticized as none of his policies directly address domestic violence. Oppositely, he implied that gender equality initiatives have gone too far and that men have “had enough” of being passed over for promotions,
CLIMATE CHANGE
The United Nations suggests that climate change will worsen and is likely to reach a point of irreversibility by the 2030’s. The Liberal party has offered no policies to directly tackle climate change in the next decade. Furthermore, the Liberal Party also has plans to drop Labor’s goal of 82% electricity to come from renewable energy by 2030, by relying on increased fossil fuels until they can lift a ban on nuclear energy after 2040. Increasing the use of the prime cause of climate change will worsen its impacts.
The Labor party has failed to meet their 2022 election commitment to reform federal environmental laws, as the next statutory review is not due until 2029. However, Labor has already set a legally binding target to cut emissions by 43% by 2030, whereas the Coalition has claimed that they are ‘less’ ambitious to achieve this by the end of the decade.
Don’t agree with either major party? Here is why preferential voting is important:
Since 1944, Australia has always had either a Labour or Coalition government. This is why we have preferential voting. Though you may have disagreements with both parties, it is vital that you put the major party you agree with the most ahead of the other party. Voting for an Independent or Minor party is not a wasted vote. Our voting system allows you to compare and rank what number of negatives outweigh the other.