Pauline Hanson’s rise has wreaked havoc on the right flank of Australian politics. Now, centre-left Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will be tested on how he handles an imminent overhaul of the migration system. The clampdown will define his response to the outbreak of right-wing populism, which could dent Albanese’s legacy if it flourishes under his watch.
The splintering on the right has partly masked the fact that Labor, according to an average of all polls, has lost 6.7 percentage points from its 34.5 per cent primary vote at last year’s May election. The Coalition has dropped 10, meaning One Nation’s rise may cement Angus Taylor’s fate as one of the majority of Liberals leaders who fail to become prime minister.
For months, Albanese’s lieutenants have talked privately about how vigorously to confront Hanson on migration, the issue on which polls say she is more trusted than both Albanese and Taylor.
One government Left faction MP scoffed when this masthead asked them a few weeks ago why Labor hadn’t adopted a firmer position. Why, they asked, would Labor ape Hanson and upset its voter base, which has far more migrants than right-wing parties can claim.
News this week about Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke’s plans for a migration crackdown suggests Albanese has sniffed the wind and made a call that the forces propelling Hanson cannot be ignored.
We don’t know the details of Burke’s policies, which were debated by the cabinet on Monday. A speech in which Burke was due to reveal the measures was set for Thursday and abruptly cancelled, after the government realised it needed more time to work through the economic and social consequences of proposed policies. Up for consideration, as first reported by the ABC, are tighter rules on family visas, capping the number of backpackers, and curbing the appeal rights of asylum seekers.
What we do know is the political message that Burke and Albanese will project to voters straining under years of high inflation: the Albanese government is taking control of migration.
A significant proportion of voters have formed the view, lacking nuance or otherwise, that expensive homes, flat wages and the general struggle has been exacerbated by the record number of people who entered the country after the pandemic when borders shut and inflows crashed.
These Australians haven’t necessarily bought wholesale the online-right lines on “mass migration” that Liberals such as Jacinta Nampijinpa Price have helped popularise. Yet they share Hanson’s core message that something has gone wrong in the country and should change.
But Labor knows it must also keep faith with members of migrant communities who feel the pain when Hanson talks about a monoculture.
One minister expressed concern this week that elevating the issue of migration, which Labor will not be able to quickly solve, or be seen to have solved, will only play into Hanson’s hands.
The One Nation leader was crowing on Thursday that she lived “rent-free in Tony Burke’s head” and she was ready to block “dog walkers, nail technicians and Uber drivers” from coming once she is running the show.
Former UK prime minister Keir Starmer made a fatal mistake in Britain, staking his leadership on the issue while failing to stop small boats crossing the Channel.
“The problem isn’t as big as Hanson and co make out. We still need to be seen to be doing something and be in control,” a senior minister told this masthead, arguing in favour of neutralising the debate without using harsh language about migrants.
Burke and his assistant minister Julian Hill had been working on methods to cut back on the demand-driven visas, such as international students, before Hanson’s polling rise. The One Nation surge will change the complexion of Burke’s National Press Club speech (he likes to speak off the cuff with few notes) and turn it into a hinge point of Albanese’s second term.
One can quibble with Price and Hanson’s motives for criticising the migration system. But Bureaucrats who shaped and reviewed the system have their own feedback.
Martin Parkinson, an esteemed former Treasury boss who reviewed the intake in 2023, said in May that the program had morphed over time into a “a quasi-guest worker system” which might have hurt productivity because employers had “become used to relying on really low-skilled cheap labour”.
Asked if Australians would have voted for such a program if it were taken to an election, Parkinson said: “I don’t think they would have”.
Abul Rizvi, a senior public servant in the immigration department until 2007, shared Parkinson’s judgment about the likely electoral prospects if voters were given a choice on the system he helped set up under John Howard in 2001.
The genuine concern about Australia’s migration program has boosted a torrent of racism in social media comments sections, particularly towards Indian Australians, that shouldn’t be normalised. Support for Hanson proves that it’s not inconceivable that a figure like Tommy Robinson, the UK-based anti-Islam race-baiter, could thrive in Australia if the system is viewed to be out of control for too long.
It shouldn’t be assumed, however, that Hanson’s support is coming solely, or mostly, from these quarters.
Labor MPs have been surprised at the level of endorsement Hanson receives from non-white voters in their electorates. Albanese, desperate to maintain his grip on the centre of Australian politics, won’t die wondering what he should have done as he fights to stop these middle ground voters drifting into Hanson’s arms.
Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.
Paul Sakkal is Chief Political Correspondent. He previously covered Victorian politics and won a Walkley award and the 2025 Press Gallery Journalist of the Year. Contact him securely on Signal @paulsakkal.14.Connect via X or email.From our partners
Discover more from PressNewsAgency
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.