Women are expected to play a decisive role in this weekend’s federal election, not just in terms of sheer numbers but in how they’re shaping the political discourse, the policy agenda and ultimately, the result in key battleground seats. As the major parties scramble for support, there’s growing recognition that ignoring women, their anger, their lived experience, their aspirations, comes at a political cost no candidate can afford.
The pandemic changed everything. As lockdowns dragged on, women shouldered the heavy lifting: supervising home learning, holding frontline roles in health and education, losing jobs at higher rates, and picking up the pieces in households where the pressures of confinement frayed already strained nerves. Meanwhile, the political stage was dominated by men. The daily press conferences, the war-room briefings, the bungled vaccine rollouts, women were watching, and many weren’t impressed. That frustration didn’t stay bottled up.
“The 2022 election result revealed women’s anger at government inaction, particularly on climate change and integrity in politics,” Michelle Grattan wrote in The Conversation.
“Teal independents – most of them women – defeated moderate Liberals in previously safe Liberal seats, largely because women swung against the Coalition.”
But the shift was broader than the Teal Tide. Labor picked up key seats with high female turnout, and candidate quality, particularly trustworthiness and community roots, became more critical than party brand. Women, it seems, were no longer voting tribally.
Trust and personal credibility now trump policy for many female voters. A revealing insight from Australian National University research shows a growing policy divide between men and women, particularly on issues like climate, health, and public service. Yet, women don’t necessarily vote for female candidates or even female-friendly parties. They vote for who they trust.
Labor moved quickly to make women central to its campaign. From early policy announcements to high-profile campaign appearances by female ministers, the message was clear. This was a government that understood women’s concerns. In a campaign statement titled Labor’s Commitment to Women, the ALP touted achievements like “making childcare cheaper for 1.2 million families, increasing Paid Parental Leave to 26 weeks, expanding access to the single parenting payment and gender equity in the workplace.”
“Women’s interests have been at the centre of our agenda since day one, and we will continue to drive change,” Finance Minister Katy Gallagher said.
But many advocates argue that the government’s focus, while well-meaning, is still far too narrow. Most of the health investments flagged by Labor are in reproductive care such as fertility, endometriosis, menopause, and miscarriage support. Important, yes. But not the whole picture. There is a lack of investment in women’s mental health, chronic pain, neurological disorders – including complete silence on migraine which affects 1 in 3 women, and autoimmune diseases, areas where women are disproportionately affected.
On the other side, the Liberal Party has not just failed to keep pace, it has actively regressed. The party set a modest target of 50 percent female MPs by 2025. They’ve missed it badly – just 28 per cent of Liberal MPs and senators are women. The optics alone are jarring, but the policy platform is even more telling. For example, the Coalition’s plan to slash 41,000 public service jobs will hit women hardest as 57.9 percent of public servants are women. And that number rises in departments outside defence and national security, the only areas seemingly shielded from cuts. With costings released just yesterday showing the cuts won’t be confined to Canberra, it’s clear the axe will fall on jobs in community services, health administration, and education support, all heavily feminised sectors – and on rural women.
Women’s Agenda has provided a thorough assessment of each party’s policies affecting women. Their analysis underscores the significant divergence between Labor, the Greens, the Coalition, and Independents. “Labor has made key announcements on gender equity in leadership, superannuation on Paid Parental Leave, workplace reform and gender-based violence,” the site notes, while also acknowledging that many of these initiatives are still in early stages or require long-term funding commitments. The Greens have proposed more radical reforms, including universal childcare and stronger action on family violence. Independents are harder to pin down on a unified policy platform, but many, particularly the teal candidates, are vocal on gender equity, political integrity, and climate change, issues that disproportionately concern women.
The Liberal Party received the most scathing assessment. According to Women’s Agenda, “the Liberal Party has little in the way of comprehensive gender policies… The budget didn’t deliver any significant new policies addressing economic equality or gendered violence, and its campaign material barely mentions women at all.”
It’s this gap between women’s lived experience and political response that may once again define the election outcome. It’s not just about child care rebates or funding for menopause clinics. It’s about respect, representation, and a deeper understanding of the structural barriers women face. And for many voters, that judgment won’t be based on a party logo. It will hinge on whether their local candidate has shown up, listened, and earned their trust.
And on this disconnect is where the comments from New England women get the most passionate, as reported through the New England Times Engage Poll. Many women expressed their frustrations, screaming through the ether that the political discussion is completely out of touch with our reality.
“More and cheaper childcare won’t work for Armidale if we don’t have the centres for kids!! Same with urgent care clinics! If we can’t get a doctor the funding doesn’t matter!!”
30-34 year old female voter, Armidale
“I may trust the Labor Party to manage the issues better, but that isn’t the ringing endorsement it sounds like, because I don’t fully trust them either. The politicians in Canberra care more about keeping their donors happy than they do the needs of normal Australians.”
50-54 year old female voter, Uralla
I am tired of the mudslinging. Parties should focus on promoting their issues and refrain from pointing out faults. We are not stupid; we know what they have done in the past. We need better healthcare, housing, water security, and employment opportunities in regional areas. It totally unacceptable that in 2025 women should travel from Wee Waa/Narrabri (and surrounding towns) to Tamworth to have a baby, and that these women have not had one antenatal class before the birth of their child.
50-54 year old female voter from Inverell
The angry voice of women, combined with the disillusion of younger voters, makes this election even more volatile than 2022. The swing vote is definitely female. Women are less likely to be rusted on, and more likely to move based on issues and trust.
That doesn’t mean they’re a bloc. Far from it. But there’s a distinct pattern emerging in where female voters are shifting, toward candidates who talk less and deliver more, who don’t just nod sympathetically but build policy from lived experience.
And as they head to the polls this weekend, women may not just decide the outcome. They may reshape the political terrain itself.
Follow all the New England Times coverage of the federal election here or have your say on Engage
See more about the race in New England here
See more about the race in Parkes here