Skip to content

AUSPOLLIEWATCH EVERY CLAIM LINKS TO ITS SOURCE · NOT A SCORECARD

Where Australian parties stand on native forest logging

7 parties on record · party platforms in their own words

Each position below is sourced exclusively from the party's own published materials — never from media coverage. Click a party for its full platform, donors and members. Individual members' own stated positions are on their record pages.

Liberal Party party platform

Tasmanian Liberal policy (state division) states that native forestry is "sustainable, renewable and world-leading", supporting more than 5,700 direct and indirect jobs, and commits to extending existing native wood supply contracts for 14 sawmillers to 2040 while unlocking additional sawlog supply from the forestry "Wood Bank".

Australian Greens party platform

The platform commits to ending native forest logging nationwide, including repealing Regional Forest Agreements that exempt logging from national environmental laws, alongside investment to rehabilitate logged forests and fund a transition for affected workers and communities.

Victorian Socialists party platform

The federal platform calls for a ban on the logging of old-growth forests and an urgent program of reforestation, sustainable farming and biodiversity protection.

The Nationals party platform

The party's plan lists protecting jobs and businesses in timber and forestry among traditional industries it says are under threat, and Victorian Nationals material describes the native timber industry as sustainable and responsible, opposing the decision to ban native timber harvesting by 2030.

Animal Justice Party party platform

The party's position is that logging of native forests, including old-growth forests, must cease immediately, stating the value of native forests to animals, biodiversity and climate is greater than the commercial value of harvested material, and calls to halt habitat destruction and fragmentation by prohibiting native forest logging and land clearing alongside restoration and rewilding measures.

Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party party platform

The platform states support for a return to working forests with active management and sustainable utilisation of forest resources across NSW, without what it terms politically motivated intervention, and states that forestry is not incompatible with conservation. It states National Parks should be returned to controlled, mixed-use active management that allows native forestry, grazing and recreational use.

Democratic Labour Party party platform

The party's Tasmanian branch page states it supports the timber industry, alongside mining, as a cornerstone industry for Tasmania, describes timber workers as successful guardians of the forests for generations, and firmly opposes locking up state forests into "one giant National Park."

Recorded divisions on native forest logging · 5

Every recorded vote on a bill filed under this issue, in each parliament the site holds a division record for — second and third readings, plus any amendment listed with a reason. How each member voted is on their record.

Votes are shown as the official record lists them — Hansard federally and in New South Wales; Votes and Proceedings, Minutes of the Proceedings and Hansard in Victoria; the Record of Proceedings in Queensland; the Votes and Proceedings and Minutes of Proceedings in Western Australia; the Votes and Proceedings (House of Assembly) and Hansard (Legislative Council) in South Australia; the Votes and Proceedings of both chambers in Tasmania. "Did not vote" means the member held the seat that day and is on neither list — the record says who was in the chamber, not why, so it is never an abstention. Western Australia’s record prints no pairs, so a member paired there shows as did not vote. Nothing is shown for a presiding officer who by law gives only a casting vote (the Speaker and the President in South Australia, the President in Tasmania), nor for the member presiding at a Tasmanian division, which Tasmania’s journals record. Which bills sit under which issue is an editorial choice, made bill by bill with a reason read from the second-reading speech. A bill decided by an earlier parliament (Queensland’s 2018 abortion law reform, for one) is shown with that parliament named, read from the official record of the day. For Queensland and the federal parliament “did not vote” there means the member held a seat that day, as their service is recorded; for the other earlier parliaments the record of who held a seat could not be read, so only the printed Aye, No and paired votes are shown.