Australian Federal Election 2025 Results – Culturally Diverse Representation

For the 2025 Australian Federal Election, we have adopted the CARM definition as provided by the Diversity Council of Australia to determine the percentage of ethnic representation in candidates who are running. For more information, you may visit their site: https://www.dca.org.au/news/blog/words-at-work-should-we-use-cald-or-carm

Disclaimer: If viewing via mobile – the charts/graphs may not show (it seems to work fine on Chrome browser in mobile though)- apologies!!

Shortcuts via buttons:

Analysis of Voter Momentum in Culturally Diverse Electorates

This analysis examined 41 culturally and linguistically diverse federal electorates to assess positive voter momentum — defined as an increase in first preference vote share for returning candidates/parties compared to the 2022 election.

Electorates were selected using ABS data across three key indicators:

• Languages spoken at home other than English
• Religious affiliation
• Country of birth

We also included electorates with significant Jewish populations (e.g. Wentworth, Macnamara, Kingsford Smith, and Goldstein) due to the influence of cultural and religious voting patterns in these seats.

Methodology

Only 27% of those contests featured returning independent candidates eligible for momentum analysis.

Returning independent candidates only were included in the calculation of positive momentum to ensure an accurate comparison across elections.

First-time independent candidates were excluded to avoid skewing growth metrics.

Independent candidates were treated separately due to their lower contestation rate in these electorates:

Independents contested 54% of the 41 seats.

Labor have had the most amount of success, with 71% of them creating a positive momentum, followed by Independents at 67%, Greens at 61%, and Liberals at only 20% of the total culturally diverse seats.

Key Findings

Positive Momentum by Party

✅ Labor – Strong but Vulnerable

• Labor holds a high overall momentum rate, with over 7 in 10 returning candidates improving their first preference share.
• However, this success is not uniform. While the party remains dominant in many diverse electorates, there are signs of erosion — particularly in NSW and Victoria where Gaza-related disillusionment and discontent around local representation have hurt their support among Muslim, Arab, and progressive communities.

✅ Independents – Lean, Local, and Trusted

• Despite contesting only just over half of the diverse electorates, Independents performed exceptionally well where they returned — with 67% showing positive momentum.
• This suggests deep community trust and a rising preference for local, values-driven candidates.
• Their smaller footprint means their influence is concentrated — but powerful.

✅ Greens – Gaining Ground, Especially Among the Young

• With 61% positive momentum, the Greens are consolidating their base, particularly in urban and younger electorates.
• Growth was most visible where culturally diverse candidates ran, and where the party’s platform aligned with voter concerns on climate justice, Palestine, and inclusion.

✅️ Liberals – Consistently Underperforming

• Only 1 in 5 Liberal candidates in diverse electorates improved their first preference share.
• This suggests a deep disconnect with multicultural communities, and entrenched difficulty in resonating with voters of colour, newer migrants, and religious minorities.

Implications for 2025 and Beyond

• Labor’s support is strong — but conditional. If the party does not address discontent on issues like foreign policy, Islamophobia, and local representation, it risks further erosion.
• Independents are proving their staying power, even amid limited infrastructure and media visibility.
• The Greens are on a long-term upward trajectory, especially where candidates reflect the communities they aim to serve.
• The Liberal Party must fundamentally shift its engagement strategy if it wants to compete meaningfully in multicultural Australia.

Positive Momentum in NSW:

In NSW, independents have had the most amount of success, with 100% of them creating a positive momentum, followed by Greens at 78%, Labor at 72%, and Liberals at only 6% of the total culturally diverse seats.

Independents ran in 13 of 18 seats in culturally diverse electorates of which 3 had returning candidates.

Key Findings

Positive Momentum by Party

🤝 Independents: High Trust, High Return

• Independents in NSW multicultural seats outperformed all parties, with 100% showing vote growth.
• This suggests that where independents return, they tend to build local trust and recognition, especially in communities that are less party-aligned or feel neglected.

🟩 Greens: Growing from the Ground Up

• The 78% positive momentum for Greens suggests their issues-based campaigning (on climate, Gaza, rent caps, etc.) is resonating in multicultural communities — particularly with younger, progressive, or disenfranchised voters.

🟥️ Labor: Frontbenchers Losing Ground with some standouts Performers

• In Fowler, the Labor candidate performed exceptionally well with a positive swing and first-preference majority, but still lost due to preferences. This shows:
  • Their core base is strong, but
  • They struggle to build alliances outside that base.
• In Bennelong, Labor had a 13% swing towards them

• Despite Labor’s 72% overall momentum in NSW multicultural seats, there are major red flags:
  • In Watson, Blaxland, and McMahon, sitting frontbenchers had swings against them.
  • Watson and Blaxland saw swings of over 5%, which is very significant for safe Labor seats.
  • These losses likely connect to the Muslim Votes campaign, a grassroots backlash by Muslim voters against Labor’s stance on issues like Gaza, perceived silence on Islamophobia, or foreign policy alignment with Israel.

🟦 Liberals: Collapse in Momentum

• Only 6% of Liberal returning candidates showed any positive momentum — a disastrous figure.
• This implies deep disconnect with multicultural communities, where:
  • Messaging is not landing, or,
  • Candidates are not building long-term trust.
• Despite running in nearly all seats, the party is experiencing a total breakdown of relevance in multicultural NSW — from Western Sydney to inner-city electorates.

Positive Momentum in VIC:

In multicultural Victoria, the story is one of Labor’s resilience, Greens growth, Liberal fragmentation, and Independent stagnation — a marked contrast to the NSW landscape.

In Victoria, Labor had the most amount of success, with 67% of them creating a positive momentum, with Greens at 44% , Liberals at 39%, and Independents at 33% of the total culturally diverse seats.

Independents ran in 7 out of 18 culturally diverse seats of which 3 had returning candidates.

Summary: Positive Momentum in Victoria (Culturally Diverse Seats)

Key Insights

🟩 Greens: Growing in the Margins

Gains in seats like Fraser, Wills, and Lalor show the Greens are slowly but steadily building trust, particularly with younger, progressive, and ethnically diverse voters who are dissatisfied with the majors.

• In Lalor, a +5% swing to the Greens signals growing grassroots momentum in outer suburban electorates.
• In Fraser, that has a large Vietnamese population — Greens fielded a Vietnamese candidate and saw a strong swing (+6%+ in Fraser), showing the power of ethnic representation.
• In Wills, Greens have pushed a Labor margin below 4.6%, setting themselves up to flip the seat in 2028.
• Even the Victorian Socialists and Socialist Alliance made notable gains in Wills and Cooper, both recording 5%+ swings, signalling appetite for left alternatives in densely populated, working-class, and migrant-heavy electorates.

🟥 Labor: Holding On with Lingering Loyalties

• Despite some high-profile setbacks, Labor still holds the strongest foothold among multicultural voters in Victoria. This suggests a lingering loyalty — but not without warning signs.:
  • Calwell: Weak first preference performance and with over 14% swing against Labor, with strong support for Independents.
  • Wills: Labor’s margin shrunk significantly post-redistribution, with Greens gaining ground and Labor taking a slight swing against them.
  • Cooper and Wills: Socialist candidates gaining >5% points — a challenge from the left which would further benefit the Greens
  • Maribyrnong: Both Liberals and Greens gained — signaling a post-Shorten vacuum.

This pattern suggests Labor’s strongholds are vulnerable, especially when:

• Local candidates aren’t reflective of the electorate
• Voter expectations shift towards ethnic and ideological representation

🟦 Liberals: A Mixed Bag – Results patchy, but better than in NSW

They showed modest improvements in outer suburban and post-Shorten zones like Menzies and Maribyrnong, but still failed to break through in a sustained way.

• In Menzies and Kooyong, the Liberal candidates performed exceptionally well with a first-preference majority, but still lost due to preferences. This shows:
  • Their core base is strong, but
  • They struggle to build alliances outside that base.
• In Goldstein, the returning Liberal candidate did extremely well by gaining a majority of first preference votes as well as receiving a 4.2% swing towards him, unseating the independent incumbent.
• Maribyrnong: Swing toward Liberals suggests an opening — possibly due to Shorten’s retirement, disaffected voters, or stronger candidate campaigning.
• In Bruce, they ran a rather scandalous new candidate who received significant negative media attention as well as local community that even ran a petition against him. The Liberal party would have to re-assess their candidate pre-selection process in the future.
• However, only 39% of Liberal candidates recorded positive momentum across diverse VIC seats — well behind Labor and Independents.

🤝 Independents: Lack Foothold

Despite running in 7 seats, only 3 were returning — and just 1 showed vote growth. This suggests Independents haven’t yet cracked the formula for multicultural traction in Victoria the way they have in NSW

• Kooyong is a standout:
  • Despite a smear campaign alleging CCP ties, the independent incumbent not only won, but recorded a +3.2% swing.
  • This indicates voters rejected racialised fear-mongering and stood by trusted local representation.
• Calwell and Scullin:
  • Calwell: Voters leaned away from major parties.
  • Scullin: All major parties saw swings against them — possibly signalling space for a strong independent in future.

What This Means for Victoria

🟥Labor Still the Anchor — But Anchors Can Drift
The ALP remains the party of choice for many migrant-heavy electorates — but its margin of safety is shrinking.
Case in point:

• Calwell: Massive (-14%) swing against Labor.
• Wills & Cooper: Greens and Socialists both making ground.
• Maribyrnong: Liberal and Green swings in the post-Shorten vacuum.

Labor is holding on, but not surging ahead. This means they need to refresh their message or risk leakage to both the left and centre.

🟩Greens Gaining on Identity and Justice Issues
Greens success in Fraser (Vietnamese candidate, +6% swing) and Wills (margin shrinking) shows that representative candidates and issue-based politics (climate, Gaza, rent caps) resonate with multicultural communities — especially Gen Z and Millennials.

🟦Liberals Still Struggling, But Not Dead
Unlike NSW, some Liberal candidates gained ground in VIC.

• Menzies: Majority first-preference vote, despite losing on preferences.
• Maribyrnong: Positive swing suggests opportunity in vacuums left by retiring or disengaged Labor MPs.

But overall, they remain behind Labor and Greens, and out of sync with the values of many diverse communities.

🤝Independents Lack a Foothold
Despite the buzz around Kooyong and Goldstein, Independents have not made multicultural inroads in VIC.

• Only 1 in 3 returning candidates grew their vote.
• In seats like Scullin, where all major parties lost votes, there is space for a strong independent — but none have broken through… yet.

Elected CARM MPs

• NSW
• VIC
• WA
• QLD
• NT

Elected CARM Senators

• NSW
• VIC
• WA
• TAS
• NT

ELECTED CARM MPs and Senators – Data

14 out of the 150 seats in the HOR have gone to CARM members. That brings it to a total of 9% CARM representation,

In 2022, we had about 8% CARM represenatation. This is only a slight increase, despite more CARM candidates running this election.

Indigenous MPs only make up 1% this election. Last election we had elected about 3% indigenous MPs.

About 5% of CARM women (same as 2022) and 4% of CARM men (up from 3% in 2022) have been elected to the HOR.

The count for Senate is still ongoing and so I will update this asap.

Data on CARM Candidates who ran for the Lower House and Upper House

Please note that all information regarding candidates were found from:

• https://www.aec.gov.au/election/candidates.htm
• Individual political party websites
• Candidates’ social media pages, mostly from Facebook
• Google searches

Total CARM Candidates (HOR + Senate): 176/1456 candidates (12%)

House of Representatives (HOR): 122/1126 (11%)

Senate: 54/330(16%)

CARM Candidate Burnout Rate (2022 → 2025 candidate attrition)

Liberal Party: 17 out of 25

Labor Party: 8 out of 18

Greens: 11 out of 16

Independents: 8 out of 11

Key Findings:

What This Tells Us:

✅ 1. Highest Burnout Rates:

• Independents (73%) and Greens (69%) saw the most significant drop-off. This suggests that culturally diverse candidates in these spaces struggle to sustain campaigns without institutional backing or proper post-election support networks.

✅ 2. Liberal Party’s Crisis (68% burnout):

• The Liberals are bleeding diverse talent — only 8 out of 25 CARM candidates from 2022 recontested in 2025.
• This points to a toxic culture, possibly worsened by internal racism, factionalism, or lack of meaningful support.

✅ 3. Labor’s Retention is Better, But Not Good (44% burnout):

• Labor performs better than others, but still lost nearly half of its culturally diverse 2022 cohort.
• Suggests that even with structural backing, CARM candidates may not see a viable or safe path forward.

Why This Matters:

This attrition proves what CARM communities already feel — that:

“Parties want our faces, but not our voices.”

CARM candidates are often:

• Used for optics, not nurtured for leadership
• Given no real backing, training, or investment
• Abandoned post-election, leading to exhaustion and withdrawal

Total Number of CARM Candidates for HOR:

Raw Numbers:

• Total HoR candidates (2025): 1,126
• CARM candidates (2025): 122
  → CARM share: 11%
• CARM share (2022): ~8%
  → 📈 38% increase in CARM candidate participation compared to 2022

Indigenous Representation:

• Indigenous candidates (2025): ~1.5% of all HoR candidates
• Indigenous candidates (2022): ~2%
  → 📉 Decline in Indigenous participation, despite more candidates overall.

Total Number of CARM Candidates for Senate:

Raw Numbers:

• Total Senate candidates (2025): 330
• CARM candidates (incl. Indigenous): 54
  → CARM share: 16%
• CARM share (2022): 20%
  → 📉 Drop of 4 percentage points → a 20% proportional decline
• Indigenous Candidates (2025): ~4.5%
  → Compared to 2022: ~4%

Key Takeaways

1. CARM Senate Representation Is Healthier Than the House

• At 16%, CARM candidates are better represented in the Senate race than in the House of Representatives (11%).
• Still, meaning representation remains largely behind what it should be to match demographics.

2. Indigenous Representation Up Slightly — But Still Far From Equity

• Indigenous candidates now make up 4.5% of the Senate field, up from 4% in 2022.
• That’s progress — but still below proportional representation (First Nations people make up ~3.8% of the national population, but Senate candidate share should ideally be higher to reflect justice-centered leadership pipelines).

3. Senate Races Attract More Diverse Contenders — But Don’t Guarantee Election

• The Senate may attract more diverse candidates, but structural barriers (e.g. voting quotas, party preselection, ballot order) still limit actual success rates for CARM and Indigenous contenders.

HOR Candidates in Major Parties (Liberals, Labor & Greens) & Independents

Total CARM Candidates (HOR): 122

CARM = Culturally and Racially Marginalised (includes Indigenous)

Major parties (Labor, Liberals, Greens) together account for 57% of all CARM candidates in the HOR.

The Greens are running the most number of CARM candidates for the HOR. They have increased their number of CARM candidates from previous election from 16 to 26 this year. Labor and Liberal have run about the same number from previous election. The number of independents has increased from 11 to 16 candidates.

Senate Candidates in Major Parties (Liberals, Labor & Greens) & Independents

The major parties (Libs, Labor, and Greens) make up only about 33% of the total CARM Senate candidates running. The remainder are from minor parties and independents. All 3 parties have run about the same number of CARM candidates as they did the previous election. Independents have increased their numbers by a whooping by 200%!

Raw Numbers:

• Total Senate Candidates: 330
• CARM Senate Candidates: 54 → 16% of all Senate candidates
  (Down from 20% in 2022)

Breakdown by Party:

Total by Major Parties (Libs, Labor, Greens): 18 → Just 33% of all CARM Senate candidates

Analysis:

1. Independents Are Leading the Way

• Independents more than doubled their CARM Senate candidate count — a 200% increase.
• Reflects a grassroots-driven surge in multicultural political engagement outside of traditional power structures.

2. The Senate Diversity Drop Is a Warning Sign

• Overall drop in CARM Senate representation (from 20% → 16%) is a systemic red flag.
• As the House continues to diversify incrementally, the Senate is now lagging behind — despite its role as a check on power and an incubator of long-term reform.

Data on South Asian Candidates

South Asian Candidates for HOR & Senate

A total of 63 South Asian candidates contested the election, reflecting growing political engagement from the community—but a deeper dive reveals which parties are truly opening doors.

By Party Affiliation:

• Greens: 16 candidates
• Liberals: 12 candidates
• Labor: 9 candidates
• Minor parties & Independents: 26 candidates

Proportion of South Asians who ran for major parties vs Minor parties & Independents

About 59% of South Asian candidates preferred to run for the major parties.

Key Insights:

1. Major Party Preference

• 59% of South Asian candidates ran with major parties (Labor, Liberal, Greens).
• This suggests a strong desire to work within the existing political infrastructure, but still leaves 41% opting out, which is significant.

2. Greens Lead on Representation

• The Greens fielded the highest number of South Asian candidates, showing a notable shift in multicultural trust and recruitment toward progressive, climate-forward politics.
• This may indicate the Greens are perceived as more accessible or welcoming to culturally diverse communities.

3. Liberal Party vs Labor

• The Liberals ran more South Asian candidates (12) than Labor (9), despite Labor often positioning itself as the party of multicultural Australia.
• This could raise questions about Labor’s candidate selection pipelines or factional barriers that may limit culturally diverse representation.

4. The 41% Outside the Major Parties

• A significant 4 in 10 South Asian candidates are choosing to run with minor parties or as independents, hinting at:
  • Frustrations with systemic barriers in major parties.
  • A desire for more values-aligned or community-driven platforms.
  • Potential to disrupt the status quo from the outside.

Data on CARM Women Candidates

CARM Women Candidates for HOR:

CARM women make up a mere 3.4% of all HOR candidates running for election

CARM women make up a mere 5 % of all Senate candidates running for election

Of the 121 CARM HOR Candidates, 38 are women – they make up 31% among CARM candidates for HOR

CARM Women Candidates for Senate:

Of the 53 CARM Senate Candidates, 16 are women – – they make up 30% among CARM candidates for Senate

Key Insights:

1. Tiny Footprint in the National Candidate Pool

Despite making up over 30% within their own CARM cohort, CARM women represent:

• Just 3.4% of all House of Reps candidates
• Just 5% of all Senate candidates

This shows that even when diverse communities are represented, gender parity lags significantly behind, leaving CARM women almost invisible on the national candidate stage.

2. The ‘Double Glazed Ceiling’

CARM women face the double burden of:

• Structural barriers to political participation due to race and ethnicity
• Persistent gender-based exclusion across parties and electoral platforms

Even within efforts to diversify candidate slates, women from multicultural communities remain drastically sidelined.

3. Systemic Disempowerment Across Party Lines

• No major party appears to be proactively correcting for this.
• This data suggests tokenism or performative multiculturalism—where a few high-profile multicultural women are showcased, while real inclusion is negligible.

Ultimate List of All CARM Candidates Running for the 2025 Australian Federal Election

Liberal Party

• NSW
• VIC
• WA
• QLD
• ACT
• NT

Labor Party

• NSW
• VIC
• WA
• QLD
• ACT
• NT

Australian Greens

• NSW
• VIC
• WA
• QLD
• SA

Trumpet of Patriots Party

• NSW
• VIC
• QLD

One Nation Party

• VIC
• SA

Libertarian Party

• NSW
• TAS

Family First Party

• NSW
• VIC
• QLD
• SA

Gary Ong – Candidate for Chisholm

Legalise Cannabis Party

• VIC
• WA

Fusion/Planet Rescue /Whistleblower Protection/Innovation

• VIC

Shooters Fishers Famers Party

• NSW

Animal Justice Party

• NSW
• SA

Citizens Party

• VIC
• WA

Gerard Rennick People First Party

• NSW
• VIC
• QLD
• WA

Socialist Alliance Party

• NSW

Indigenous – Aboriginal Party of Australia

• NSW
• VIC
• QLD
• WA
• NT

Victorian Socialists Party

• VIC

Australian Christians Party

• WA

Sustainable Australia Party

• VIC

Australia’s Voice Party

• NSW
• VIC
• WA

Rasheed El Achkar – Can’t find info.

Jacqui Lambie Network

• NSW
• TAS

INDEPENDENTS

• NSW
• VIC
• QLD
• WA
• NT

Abdi Mohamed – Can’t find info online