Australia's government outlines a set of values associated with citizenship and public life. This site invites you to explore how your views — and those of political parties — relate to one interpretation of these values.
People often agree on broad values such as freedom, equality, and respect, but differ in how they interpret and prioritise them in practice.
This tool does not attempt to rank individuals or assign correctness, but to illustrate how responses relate to one way of interpreting these values.
This is a reflective tool, not a definitive or scientific assessment.
This section describes one interpretation of Australian civic values used within this model of interpretation.
The Australian Government publishes a document known as the Australian Values Statement, administered by the Department of Home Affairs and required reading for most visa applicants and prospective citizens. While these values are often described as widely cited civic principles, their meaning and application are not fixed and are subject to ongoing interpretation.
The values are commonly grouped into several core areas:
Australia is widely regarded as a parliamentary democracy. No person — including religious authorities — is above the law. Laws made by elected parliaments are generally considered to take precedence over all other codes.
Freedom of speech, association, and religion are widely recognised as core entitlements. People may hold any faith, or none, and may express views openly without fear of persecution.
Equal treatment regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, age, or disability is widely regarded as a core principle. Men and women are generally considered to have equal rights and opportunities in public life.
Australians are commonly expected to treat each other with respect across cultural and religious differences, and to tolerate lifestyles and beliefs that differ from their own.
Cultural diversity is often described as a national strength. English serves as the widely shared national language, while cultural backgrounds are respected and valued.
The idea of a "fair go" — genuine opportunity regardless of background — paired with compassion for the vulnerable, is often regarded as central to Australian public life.
This overview summarises how Australian values have been expressed in public policy over time and reflects commonly cited interpretations.
Australia's formal articulation of national values has evolved significantly over more than a century, from exclusion to inclusion, from assimilation to multiculturalism, and from informal assumption to explicit requirement.
Australia's early national identity was explicitly defined by racial exclusion. The Immigration Restriction Act 1901 used dictation tests to limit non-European migration. "Australian values" were implicitly Anglo-Christian and monocultural. The policy was gradually dismantled between 1949 and 1973.
The Whitlam government formally ended racial discrimination in immigration. The Fraser government's Galbally Report (1978) formally adopted multiculturalism as national policy, shifting the frame from assimilation to integration — migrants were encouraged to maintain cultural identity within a commonly referenced civic framework.
The Keating and Howard eras saw sharp debates about national identity. Pauline Hanson's maiden speech in 1996 challenged multiculturalism directly. Public debate about Australian values became more prominent in political and public discourse, as Howard used phrases like "Australian values" to promote social cohesion — and, critics argued, to signal cultural expectations of conformity by migrants.
The Howard government introduced the formal Australian Values Statement, required of all permanent visa applicants. It explicitly listed democratic beliefs, English, the rule of law, and equality as core expectations. Applicants were required to sign an acknowledgement that they had read and understood the values — not a binding legal commitment to them, but a formal declaration of awareness.
The Australian citizenship test was introduced in October 2007, covering Australian values, history, and democratic institutions. Significantly, in November 2020 the Morrison government updated both the Australian Citizenship Test and the Australian Values Statement itself — adding stronger language on English language proficiency and integration expectations, and placing greater emphasis on values alignment. These updates are directly relevant to the ongoing political debate this survey explores.
Australian values are now actively contested political territory — invoked by all sides to either defend minority rights, limit migration, promote religion in public life, or challenge perceived progressive overreach. The question of whose values define Australia has never been more live.
Far from settled, these values are a live area of political debate. Different parties interpret, emphasise, or question them in ways that reflect different visions of national identity.
The following are simplified and interpretive descriptions of how these parties are commonly understood to engage with these values.
Generally emphasises all of the commonly cited values, with particular focus on equality across gender, sexuality, race, and disability. Places emphasis on multiculturalism and diversity. Navigates internal tensions over religious freedom versus LGBTQ+ protection.
Generally emphasises democratic values and rule of law, with particular focus on freedom of speech and religious freedom. Places more cautious emphasis on LGBTQ+ equality — particularly on transgender issues — and diversity-driven programs. Focuses on English and a commonly referenced civic identity.
Generally emphasises rural and regional Australia's traditions. Places emphasis on democratic participation and community solidarity, with a more sceptical view of urban progressive interpretations of equality and diversity. Traditional values remain more influential in the party's base.
Generally emphasises equality, tolerance, and diversity most prominently. Focuses on expanding democratic rights and human rights frameworks. Places a more qualified emphasis on absolute free speech — supports restrictions on hate speech. Advocates for constitutional recognition of multiculturalism.
Generally emphasises national identity and social cohesion, placing greater weight on what it describes as traditional Australian culture. Tends to prioritise a more uniform approach to civic integration over multicultural and diversity-focused interpretations of these values. Places less emphasis on LGBTQ+ inclusion in public institutions.
One observation worth noting: the party that most loudly claims to speak for "Australian values" — One Nation — scores the lowest when its published policies are assessed using this approach. These comparisons are inherently contestable — see the full methodology in Digging Deeper.
This survey translates the framework into 20 statements and invites you to rate your agreement with each on a scale of 0 to 5. It is designed to help you:
Many Australians have never consciously explored how their personal views relate to the civic framework commonly cited in public life.
Your responses contribute to a pool of user-submitted data. Explore how other users have responded within this approach, across regions, birthplaces, and political leanings — not representative of the broader population.
See how your responses compare to interpretive assessments of each major party's published policies within the same framework.
All demographic questions are optional. No personal information is collected. User-submitted responses are not intended to represent the broader population. Read our privacy policy.
When each party's published policies are interpreted using this approach, the results are sometimes thought-provoking. Here's a quick overview — see the full party comparisons and the methodology behind each score.