Greens Senator Jordon Steele-John Denies Misconduct Claims From Women
Senator says timing of allegations reflects party infighting as Greens launch internal probe and claims are referred to federal watchdog
By AXY Politics Desk ·
Key points
- Greens senator Jordon Steele-John denies misconduct allegations from women and says he is not on leave from the party room.
- He accuses the party of "nasty political games" and links the timing of the claims to preselection for the next federal election.
- The Greens have launched an internal probe, and Shoebridge's office confirmed a referral to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission.
- Local media reported a 47-page party dossier listing allegations against Steele-John, which he says was meant to protect the women involved.
Australian Greens senator Jordon Steele-John has denied allegations of misconduct towards women and accused his own party of "nasty political games", days after a letter from seven current and former members set out claims against him. The senator's denial was reported by the BBC on 19 October 2026, and it marks a sharp public split between Steele-John and the Greens leadership over how the allegations were handled.
The party's leader, David Shoebridge, said last Thursday that Steele-John, 32, had taken leave from the party room after the letter said he had been accused of "multiple allegations" of misconduct between 2017 and 2025. In an online post on Sunday, Steele-John rejected that account. He said he was not on leave, and he addressed a separate sexual assault claim by saying that police investigating the matter had closed the case and that no charges had been laid.
What the allegations involve
The claims were set out in a letter sent to Shoebridge, which was signed by seven people described as current and former members of the party. The letter alleged that Steele-John had been subject to "multiple allegations" of misconduct over an eight-year period. The reported details are limited, and the public accounts so far come from the letter's description, from Steele-John's response and from local media reporting. The senator's own statement is the main on-the-record response available at this stage.
Steele-John's account is that the allegations are not accurate. He has not conceded any specific wrongdoing, but he has acknowledged that the allegations would have "damaged" public trust in him. He said he was "committed to rebuilding that by acting with as much transparency and accountability as I can". That statement is a notable concession in tone, even as he disputes the claims themselves.
The nickname at the centre of the dispute
One detail that has drawn attention is a nickname attached to the senator, "Feels on wheels". Steele-John told the party that the nickname originally referred to him becoming emotional when advocating for disability rights. He wrote that it had since taken on a "more sinister meaning" connected to the alleged mistreatment of women. He has not said who used the nickname or when it began to take on that meaning, and those questions remain unanswered in the material currently available.
The detail matters because it shows how the allegations have been framed within the party. Steele-John has disclosed that he has cerebral palsy and uses a wheelchair, and he was first elected to the Senate for Western Australia in November 2017. His public profile has long included advocacy on disability issues, which makes the nickname a sensitive point in the wider debate about how the allegations are being discussed.
The dossier and the question of timing
Steele-John has challenged both the timing of the letter and the way the party has handled the matter. He said "it is no coincidence" that the allegations were sent to the leader "the day after we agreed on the timeline for the next preselection". Preselection is the internal process by which a party chooses its candidates for an upcoming election, so the senator is suggesting that the claims were timed to affect his position as a candidate for the next federal election.
He also said Shoebridge had mishandled the matter. The senator's claim that the timing was politically motivated is his own assessment, and it has not been independently established. Under Australian parliamentary practice, however, a dispute over preselection timelines is a common reason for internal party tension, so the allegation is worth understanding in that context.
In a separate development, local media reported that the party had created a 47-page dossier years earlier. According to those reports, the document listed a number of allegations against Steele-John and set out how to manage media coverage if the allegations became public. Steele-John said the dossier was prepared so that the media would not "bombard" the two women at the centre of the claims. He also said that neither woman had made a complaint. The contents of the dossier, and who commissioned and received it, have not been detailed in the material available to AXY News.
Internal probe and external referral
The Greens have launched an internal party probe into the allegations. Shoebridge's office has also confirmed that the matter has been referred to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission. That body is a federal mechanism for handling complaints about the conduct of members of parliament, and the referral means the claims are now being considered outside the party as well as within it.
For readers less familiar with the process, the two tracks serve different purposes. An internal party probe examines whether a member has breached party rules, and it can lead to suspension, removal from a party room or other sanctions. A referral to a parliamentary standards body concerns conduct under parliamentary standards, and it may involve a separate assessment. Neither process has reached a conclusion in the material currently available, and neither has publicly determined that Steele-John is guilty of any wrongdoing.
The police element of the story is also distinct. Steele-John said police investigating a sexual assault claim had closed the case and that no charges were laid. A closed police investigation means that authorities are not pursuing charges at that time, but it does not by itself establish whether the underlying allegations were true, and it does not prevent other forms of complaint from being considered.
Why it matters for the Greens and for public trust
The Greens are a minor party in the federal parliament, and their senators are elected through proportional representation, which gives smaller parties a path to the Senate. A serious dispute over conduct can therefore carry more weight for a party whose public reputation depends heavily on its ethics and its commitments on gender and social issues. Any party facing allegations of misconduct against a senior member has to balance due process for the accused with a credible response for complainants, and the public will be watching how the party handles both.
For voters, the central issue is trust in how parliamentary parties respond to complaints about their own members. Steele-John has acknowledged that the allegations have damaged public trust, and he has pledged transparency. Analysts who follow Australian politics often say that the handling of such cases, rather than the initial allegations alone, shapes how voters judge a party. That is a general observation about political accountability rather than a finding in this case.
The story also raises questions about how complaints by women are processed inside political organisations. The senator has said that neither of the two women at the centre of the claims made a complaint, while the letter from seven members was sent to the leader. That difference between a formal complaint and an internal letter is one of the factual points that will likely be scrutinised as the matter moves forward.
What to watch next
Several developments will determine how the story unfolds. The first is the outcome of the Greens' internal probe, including whether Steele-John remains in the party room and whether he stays on the party's preselection timeline. The second is how the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission handles the referral, including whether it confirms receipt, opens an assessment or publishes any findings. The third is whether the 47-page dossier becomes the subject of further reporting or formal review, since its existence has raised separate questions about the party's handling of the matter.
Analysts expect that the preselection dispute will remain a focus, because the senator has directly linked the timing of the letter to his candidacy plans. If the probe or the standards referral produces findings, those could affect his future in the party and his standing with voters. Until then, the material publicly available consists of the letter's broad allegations, the senator's denial and his account of the police case, the party's confirmation of the probe and referral, and local media reports about the dossier.
AXY News will update this report if the Greens, the senator or the standards commission release further details. Readers should note that the allegations remain unproven in the public record, and that the senator denies them.
Questions and answers
What is Jordon Steele-John accused of?
A letter from seven current and former Greens members said he faced multiple allegations of misconduct between 2017 and 2025. Steele-John denies the claims and says police closed a sexual assault case against him without charges.
Why has the Greens party referred the matter to a standards commission?
Greens leader David Shoebridge's office confirmed that the allegations were referred to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission, alongside an internal party probe. Neither process has reached a public conclusion.
What is the 47-page dossier reported in the case?
Local media reported that the party created a 47-page dossier years earlier listing allegations against Steele-John and how to manage media coverage. Steele-John said it was meant to stop the media from bombarding the two women involved, and that neither had made a complaint.
What happens next in the Steele-John case?
The outcome of the Greens' internal probe and the standards commission's handling of the referral will determine next steps. The senator has also linked the timing of the claims to his preselection for the next federal election.
Topics: Jordon Steele-John, Australian Greens, David Shoebridge, Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission, Australian Senate, Western Australia, Preselection, Misconduct allegations
Sources: BBC Asia