The Greens’ expulsion of a co-founder is unlikely to jeopardise the party’s future

As the fallout of the expulsion of Australian Greens co-founder Drew Hutton continues, Hutton and others have claimed the Greens have “lost their way^[1]” and are “in real trouble^[2]”.

Do such claims stand up?

Hutton’s expulsion

Hutton – who co-founded the Australian Greens alongside former leader Bob Brown in the early 1990s – recently had his Queensland Greens membership terminated. This followed an extended suspension of his membership over actions taken in 2022.

The initial action that led to Hutton’s suspension was providing a platform for Facebook connections to leave comments demeaning transgender people under a post he made. He refused to remove the offending comments.

He was expelled earlier this year^[3] when he sought to publicise his plight through the media, and increasingly took to social media to criticise people he labelled “trans extremists”.

Hutton appealed the decision to terminate his membership. However, it was upheld by delegates of the party’s state branches^[4]. This led to him labelling the party “authoritarian, aggressive, unlikeable^[5]” and run by a “trans and queer cult^[6]”.

Why the decision will likely hold

The party’s first two leaders – Brown and Christine Milne – called for Hutton’s membership to be restored^[7]. However, current Greens leader Larissa Waters, who is also a Queenslander, backed the outcome of the appeal^[8], claiming “nobody is above the rules” and the decision reflected “good governance”.

The Greens’ sole MP in the Queensland parliament, Michael Berkman, also backed the decision, writing in a Facebook post^[9]:

[U]nfortunately, Drew’s commitment [to] the Greens and our work on social and environmental justice seems to have been overshadowed by his obsession with trans policy.

The electoral calculus for the party helps explain the leadership’s unwavering backing of the decision, even when faced with displeased former party leaders.

Hutton is not the first to have his membership revoked or face other penalties over comments deemed harmful to trans people. But he does stand out as a more high-profile scalp that has fallen foul of the party’s ethics code.

In particular, the Victorian Greens have struggled with these issues, and sought to remove such elements of their membership. The ousting of Linda Gale as state convenor in 2022^[10] is the most notable example.

There were also alleged discussions^[11] within the Greens about expelling the Victorian branch from the national party if it failed to address transphobia within its ranks.

Leaving aside the ethical justification of this for a moment, what of the electoral implications?

Polling conducted by Redbridge for Equality Australia^[12] prior to the 2025 election suggests Australians overwhelmingly respect trans people’s fundamental rights and reject the politicisation of trans issues. This polling indicated that over nine in ten agree that trans people should be able to live their lives in the way that makes them happy. Close to nine in ten agree the government and opposition should not politicise trans issues for political gain.

That’s not to say Australians are overwhelmingly ardent defenders of trans rights. Transphobia is certainly a problem in Australia^[13] that contributes to disproportionate harms such as discrimination in employment and healthcare, high rates of verbal and physical abuse, and the high mental toll of such stigma, discrimination, and assault.

But it suggests many Australians are uninterested in the narratives presented by those who seek to weaponise trans issues.

We saw the electoral consequences of parties leaning into such issues in 2019, when the Liberal Party experienced some of the most substantial swings against them in Warringah after Prime Minister Scott Morrison hand-picked, then continued to back, anti-trans Waringah candidate Katherine Deves, whose views featured prominently in the media^[14].

For Greens members and supporters, low tolerance of harmful views towards trans people is expected. In parliament, the Greens are the only party whose members vote consistently in favour^[15] of supporting the rights of trans people.

Available evidence confirms this. The ABC’s Australia Talks survey^[16] revealed that Green voters are most likely to have trans people in their social circles and are most supportive of people being referred to the gender pronouns they identify with, even if that differs from the one they were assigned at birth.

Claims this will be detrimental for the party are overblown

It appears claims about the Hutton decision resulting in significant harm to the party are overblown. Following comparable actions being taken against members of the Victorian Greens, it does not appear voters have penalised the party as a result.

In fact, in the 2022 state election, held soon after the ousting of Gale, the party increased its vote share slightly^[17].

While some might claim Hutton’s prominence makes this a somewhat different case, it is not at all unprecedented for Australian parties to revoke the membership of prominent party members. Disgraced former Labor leader Mark Latham, for example, who is currently facing serious accusations^[18] of abuse and will see a disclaimer placed under his portrait in Parliament House, was expelled from the party and banned for life in 2017 for numerous prior actions.

The Hutton case should signal to Greens members and supporters that trans rights and safety are not negotiable for the party.

References

1. ^{^} lost their way (www.theguardian.com)
2. ^{^} in real trouble (www.afr.com)
3. ^{^} He was expelled earlier this year (www.theguardian.com)
4. ^{^} upheld by delegates of the party’s state branches (www.theguardian.com)
5. ^{^} authoritarian, aggressive, unlikeable (www.abc.net.au)
6. ^{^} trans and queer cult (www.news.com.au)
7. ^{^} called for Hutton’s membership to be restored (www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au)
8. ^{^} backed the outcome of the appeal (www.theguardian.com)
9. ^{^} Facebook post (www.facebook.com)
10. ^{^} ousting of Linda Gale as state convenor in 2022 (www.theguardian.com)
11. ^{^} alleged discussions (www.theage.com.au)
12. ^{^} Polling conducted by Redbridge for Equality Australia (equalityaustralia.org.au)
13. ^{^} a problem in Australia (www.transresearch.org.au)
14. ^{^} featured prominently in the media (www.theguardian.com)
15. ^{^} vote consistently in favour (theyvoteforyou.org.au)
16. ^{^} Australia Talks survey (www.abc.net.au)
17. ^{^} increased its vote share slightly (www.abc.net.au)
18. ^{^} facing serious accusations (www.news.com.au)