Australia’s Greens have been urged to open up their leadership process after David Shoebridge won a rapid and private contest to replace Larissa Waters, amid warnings that the party’s secrecy is holding back its electoral prospects.
Shoebridge, a New South Wales senator, defeated Sarah Hanson-Young and Mehreen Faruqi during a two-day party retreat in Sydney. The ballot followed Waters’ surprise resignation on Monday.
The handover avoided a prolonged public contest, but gave neither the candidates nor the wider membership an opportunity to debate the party’s direction before the next election.
There were no public vision statements or media interviews. The only statements from the contenders before the vote were brief Instagram posts confirming that they would stand.
That meant the Greens did not publicly examine some of the central questions facing the party, including whether it should concentrate on environmentalism or left-wing economics, and whether to seek parliamentary compromise or adopt a more confrontational approach towards Labor.
Greens leadership contest exposes party tensions
The process has highlighted a contradiction at the heart of the Greens: a party that presents itself as a champion of transparency and grassroots democracy, but whose internal decision-making can be secretive and tightly controlled.
Unlike Labor, the Liberal Party and the Nationals, the Greens keep their party conferences closed to the media. In 2010, it took weeks for the party to disclose that Hanson-Young had unsuccessfully challenged Christine Milne for the deputy leadership.
Max Chandler-Mather, a former Greens MP who lost his seat at last year’s federal election and now runs the Green Institute think tank, called for ordinary members to have a direct say in future leadership ballots.
Writing in an open letter, Chandler-Mather said progressive voters were asking how the Greens could replicate the success of New York’s democratic-socialist mayor Zohran Mamdani and the UK Greens’ leader Zack Polanski.
“The recipe for their success doesn’t just lie in their policies, rhetoric or even organising strategy. It lies in the process by which they won their elections. In both instances they were elected by direct member elections,” he wrote.
Faruqi made a similar argument after failing to secure the leadership, saying the Greens “cannot call ourselves a grassroots party” without a vote of the membership.
The party’s primary vote has remained around 12 per cent despite frustration with the major parties and anger over the rising cost of living. In Australia, the source material says, One Nation and teal independents have benefited more than the Greens from voters’ rejection of the political status quo.
In the UK Greens’ 2025 leadership contest, membership rose from 68,000 to 230,000, according to Chandler-Mather’s letter. He also pointed to New Zealand’s Greens and Labor in Australia, where members as well as MPs have a role in choosing the leader.
Shoebridge has committed to allowing members to participate in the next leadership ballot. But he has also acknowledged that the change would be difficult, with members in smaller states such as Tasmania expected to resist being outnumbered by voters in New South Wales and Victoria.
The new leader built his reputation through parliamentary hearings, where he questioned defence and law enforcement officials and scrutinised the AUKUS pact. A former barrister and ally of former Greens senator Lee Rhiannon, he is also expected to place greater emphasis on economic issues.
Shoebridge is regarded as strong on policy detail and an effective communicator, although often a fiery one. His challenge now is to move beyond criticism and parliamentary interrogation to inspire and mobilise progressive voters.
Mamdani’s example has been cited as a contrast: a politician who channelled anger over inequality while presenting himself as a hopeful campaigner with a plan to reduce prices, rather than as a purely ideological figure.
The Greens’ leadership contest has therefore intensified pressure for a more open and outward-looking party. Reform may be difficult, but its advocates argue that the organisation needs to re-energise if it is to turn dissatisfaction with the major parties into electoral support.
