Do we like them?Do we like Andrew Wilkie?
Our score: 7 out of 10. A strong record on LGBTQ+ rights, climate and refugees, held back by one contested vote on hate laws and by how little else we could verify.
Start with what matters most to this page. According to They Vote For You, which uses the parliament's own division records, Wilkie has consistently voted for same-sex marriage equality, for increasing legal protections for LGBTI people, and for transgender rights and protections. He also voted against a same-sex marriage plebiscite and against letting civil celebrants refuse to marry same-sex couples. That is a clean run, and it is his own votes, not just talk.
On the planet, the record is just as clear. He has consistently voted for a carbon price, for limiting warming to 1.5 degrees, for net zero by 2035, against new thermal coal mines and for no new fossil fuel projects. He has also backed ARENA and marine conservation. He has consistently voted against nuclear energy and against carbon capture and storage, which some green-minded people will cheer and others will argue about.
On migration he sits well to the humane side. He has consistently voted to close the Nauru and Manus Island processing centres, to get children out of immigration detention, and against turning back asylum boats. He has also voted for a ceasefire call on Gaza and for the Voice referendum.
Here is the one mark worth knowing about. They Vote For You has him consistently voting against criminalising hate speech and against criminalising hate symbols. We haven't read his reasons, so we can't say whether it was a civil-liberties call or something else. It is a contested position, not a pattern of harm, and it is why the harm test gets an asterisk.
His signature fights are accountability and scrutiny. In 2014 he moved a motion criticising Senator Stephen Conroy over comments about Lieutenant General Angus Campbell, calling Conroy's claim a direct attack on the general's character. Greens leader Adam Bandt called the exchange political theatre, so where you land depends on whether you saw it as defending an officer or as point-scoring. In 2017 he tabled claims in parliament from apparent whistleblowers who alleged misconduct by Crown Casino. Crown rejected the claims.
Nothing fresh turned up in what we could check. In March 2026 he told SBS that Australian intelligence was being used by Israel and the United States in their war on Iran, and that parliament should be able to scrutinise any Australian involvement. Israel's top diplomat in Canberra says the strikes were self-defence and lawful. That fits his votes for more oversight of intelligence agencies and police, so he is at least consistent.