What the rise of One Nation could mean for Australia

Listen to Australian and world news and follow trending topics with SBS News Podcasts.

TRANSCRIPT

Foreign Minister Penny Wong has warned " monoculturalism" would be a threat to national security in a speech to the Lowy Institute.

She says Australians still value democracy and multiculturalism.

"I’ve always believed the ability of Australians to connect with people from every part of the world is a national asset, a national asset that expands our choices in the world. The call for a monoculture is a call for Australia to curtail our choices and cut off our connections. To look inwards, to have no friends to work with, no partners to trade with and no opportunities to grow from. It is to be lonely in a dangerous world.”

The speech didn't mention One Nation or Pauline Hanson by name but offered criticisms of the party's approach, including that it would risk Australia’s standing in the world.

Just two months ago, One Nation leader Pauline Hanson stood up at the Press Club and said:

"We cannot be a multicultural society. We are a multiracial society, but we must be  monocultural."

She's calling for cuts to Australia’s migration program down to 130,000 a year, and calling for a crackdown on who she calls ' illegals'.

The Coalition also wants to cut migration, with Shadow Housing Minister Andrew Bragg flagging a reduction in net migration to 180,000 per year.

The figure had not been approved by his colleagues, but the day after his speech at the National Press Club, Mr Bragg was defiant.

"These are the parameters. If you want to close the housing and migration gap, the problem you're trying to solve, to be clear, is you've got a gap of about 350 to 400,000 people that wouldn't be housed because of Labor's migration failure, right."

He also says lower-income Australians may have to accept substandard housing - but the proposals have not been well received by his peers.

Not so from former Nationals MP Barnaby Joyce, who defected to One Nation, and says it's good to see the Coalition taking a leaf from his party's book.

“They're on a path to try and mimic One Nation - that's very flattering."

Senator Hanson has also accused the Coalition of copying her policies, while maintaining the major parties would never get the details right.

A political scientist from the University of Canberra, Dr Jordan McSwinney, says these dynamics go back 30 years.

"The history of One Nation really runs through the Coalition."

Pauline Hanson originally ran as a Liberal candidate before being disendorsed ahead of the 1996 election.

In 2001, John Howard famously urged voters to put One Nation last, but Dr McSwinney says the former Liberal Prime Minister didn't always take the fight to the party.

"Well, in a way, it kind of depends who you ask because in some respects, yes, they were quite firm against One Nation. They said they wouldn't do preference deals and things like that. But I think looking back on reflection, what we see actually is a little bit of Howard and the then coalition government kind of doing a lot of what One Nation was talking about and planning about, but by stealth and with a sort of softer language."

He says there's a lesson for the Coalition in the way the Howard government sought to neutralise key policy issues without legitimising the party.

Opposition leader Angus Taylor has ruled out a formal coalition with the minor party, but Coalition MPs have sent a series of mixed messages about preference deals, and their willingness to work with One Nation.

One example unfolded this week when Pauline Hanson tabled national security legislation in the Senate.

 "One Nation's legislation is aimed at putting in place every possible barrier to prevent their return and protect Australians. It creates a new foreign terrorist fighter  exclusion order for which the minister may apply to the federal court. The bill creates stronger bail laws, making community safer and national security the most important factors. The legislation gives the minister the power to refuse, cancel, or suspend passports where an exclusion order is in force, or if an individual is charged with or convicted of a terrorism offense."

The bill also creates an offence for facilitating the return of people who've supported a terror group overseas.

Labor and the Greens have suggested the legislation is likely to be unconstitutional, but several Coalition MPs have signalled a willingness to cooperate with One Nation.

That includes Shadow Defence Minister, James Paterson.

“We've said consistently we're happy to work with anyone who wants to protect Australia from the serious national security threat posed by these returning  radicalised people, and we consistently said we'd support the introduction of bills and the referral of bills to committees. I think that's the appropriate way to test the constitutional issues that have been raised. We're not willing to just take Tony Burke's word for it, given the government has misled the parliament and got it wrong multiple times on the constitutionality of immigration bills in the past."

Anne Twomey is a Professor Emeritus in Constitutional Law at the University of Sydney.

She says the legislation raises an issue the High Court has never ruled on before.

“And so the question is whether you can make a law that excludes Australians from being able to enter and live in Australia."

Although it hasn't been formally determined, Professor Twomey says past comments from judges suggested citizens have a right to return.

"And look, I think it's reasonably likely that the High Court would decide, 'look, if citizenship means anything, it has to mean the right to be able to enter and live in the country of which you're a citizen'. Otherwise, it's completely pointless. It's meaningless. But it's also likely that if it did find that, that it would say, "Well, you know, no right is absolute, and it would apply some kind of a proportionality test. So it would probably say, 'Is this law reasonably appropriate and adapted to achieve some kind of other legitimate end'."

The Home Affairs Minister already has powers to impose temporary exclusions for up to two years, and Professor Twomey says it's likely moving matters to the courts would result in long delays, during which citizens could be blocked from returning.

It's unlikely the legislation will ever be debated in the Labor-controlled Lower House, Dr McSwinney says the issue presents a real challenge for the Coalition.

"This is strategically for One Nation, a really great way to try and wedge the Coalition because the Coalition doesn't want to look weak on national security because that's a typical Coalition strength. But the Coalition is very wary of appearing to give support to or endorse Hansen and One Nation's legislative agenda because that will make them appear as a more legitimate political and policy actor."

The Senior Research Fellow says it's one more step on the path towards a fundamental realignment in right- of- centre politics.

“The total collapse of the Coalition at the 2025 federal election is really the starting point of that because that's a moment for a lot of conservative voters in Australia to go, 'Well, hang on, we can't trust the usual party that we place our vote with to deliver because they're in a shambles. Now we're looking for alternatives.' And One Nation was kind of well-placed to be that. You have the  Bondi terror attack. One Nation very, and Hanson and Joyce particularly, very successfully inserted themselves into that debate and helped to turn it to a debate around migration, national security, and Islam in Australia. And there's also been, of course, the sort of persistent, sticky inflation and increasing attention on the crisis of housing affordability in Australia."