Why support for One Nation is rising

ABC Listen, podcasts, radio, news, music, and more.

Hi, it's Sam Hawley from ABC News Daily, the podcast that brings you one big story affecting your world each weekday in just 15 minutes.

And what have we seen from Optus in response to these things?

A pattern?

It is a game of corporate shirking of responsibility that I personally find has kind of a yuck factor.

Join me for ABC News Daily.

Find it on the ABC Listen app.

Most of the focus has been on the coalition, which is to be expected when you've had your worst result in eight decades.

Less time though has been spent on what the election and the aftermath tells us about sentiment for Pauline Hansen and One Nation.

Now the party doubled its Senate stocks at the election and as the months have gone on it's seen a a further doubling of its support in the polls.

So is this just a short-term sugar hit because of Liberal infighting, or are we seeing a permanent rise on the right?

Welcome to Politics Now.

Hi, I'm Brett Worthington, filling in for PK.

And I'm Shalila Maduro from Triple J's Hack Program.

Hey, Shalila, we are desk buddies, so it's great to be able to get to spend some time in a podcast on the show.

I think we get to do this professionally instead of just the usual gossip.

Banter across the desk.

We will get to some of the social media changes and the government's plans to ban under 16s a little later, but I really want to dig into One Nation.

I know it's an issue you've been looking at.

And we've really been focused a lot on the Liberal Party in the aftermath of the election.

But when we saw Andrew Hastie quit the front bench the other week, one of the things he really called out was the rise of One Nation, the fracturing of the right of politics as something that was an existential question that the Liberal Party needed to reckon with.

And I feel like we've been talking a lot about the Liberal Party in One Nation, but not necessarily One Nation on One Nation.

What are you seeing when you're talking to people about that rise in One Nation?

Yeah, so I guess the important thing for us to start with is the facts and figures, right?

Like, what are we actually seeing and is it tangible?

So, to give you a bit of a sense, polling at the moment has One Nation between 10%, support for One Nation between 10% and 14%.

The Essential Poll that was out recently had them at 13%, which is double their support since the last election, and also higher than the Greens' national vote.

So across the board, we're seeing this sentiment that there is more support for One Nation.

I'm a big demographics nerd.

I focus a lot on young people for my job.

So I like to look at like who these people are.

That tells itself an interesting picture.

If you look at the Coalition and One Nation, they have the same average age of voters, which is 55.

Labor's at about 44, and the Greens are at 31.

So traditionally in Australia we have a population, Gen Z millennials, who very much look at the left wing of politics and look at parties on the left and vote for parties on the left.

What we're seeing on the other side of things when it comes to parties on the right is that the rise in One Nation support according to companies like Redbridge really comes from disgruntled Gen X's.

So that's between the age of 45 and 60 and a lot of them are people who live in the outer suburbs of the city or live regionally.

They still rent.

And that is a really big mobilising factor that for a lot of people who are turning their support to One Nation, they feel as though they've been doing the right thing their whole life.

You know, they've got a job, they've raised their kids, they've done everything the way they're supposed to.

And they see people overtaking them.

And there's this sense of...

feeling left behind.

For some people, they turn to who's to blame for that and immigration is a really big issue that comes up with a lot of One Nation supporters.

But for younger people, they look at the system and they go, the system's rigged against me.

We're seeing boomers.

you know, hoarding wealth, ruining the environment, taking up all the housing stock, and they're looking at that as a system.

For older generations, they don't see the system as a problem.

They're looking for someone to blame, and a lot of that comes down to immigration.

So if we were to, just to put it into perspective, if it was that One Nation delivered a primary vote on Election Day, around about that 13, 14%, if delivered over two elections, that would see One Nation with the same level of Senate representation as the Greens.

So you're talking about one in every state at every election getting up and get elected.

It's interesting to me because Pauline Hanson has been a mainstay of federal politics for the couple of decades now.

She has remained and all these other party leaders have come and gone.

I think she's probably one of the most, if not the most recognisable face in Australian politics for a whole range of people.

And to what extent do you think that helps One Nation and Pauline Hanson because she is such a recognisable figure, but also someone who does, frankly, a lot of plain speaking.

Last week she was raging about plastic bags versus the bags you can get from Woolworths and Coles, and she was giving them a lecture about that.

I mean, that's definitely a factor because underneath all of this, and we will talk about, I'm sure we will talk about the coalition here because it's a big factor, but underneath all of this is the question about the two-party system, what's going on there.

And we know over a long time that that primary vote

for the major parties has just fallen away quite significantly.

And a big part of that is this feeling that politicians are professionals, that they come polished, that they don't necessarily say what they speak.

That's a really big motivator for people to vote outside of the major parties.

And Pauline Hanson, let's be fair, she is a professional.

And over the period of time that she has been in politics, we have seen a professionalisation of One Nation as a party too.

But she has largely managed to escape a lot of this idea that she's, you know, speaking in political terms or, you know, she comes across as someone who speaks her mind.

And that comes with the benefits of actually not having any power, frankly.

Like, you can say what you think when you do.

You don't have to be responsible for that.

You don't have to be responsible.

Her policies are very well known.

You know, she hasn't shifted a whole lot in terms of what she represents over time, which is very comforting to a lot of people.

And she herself is recognisable.

She does a lot of, you know, she goes out there, she speaks to people and that is really appealing to a lot of people.

One thing that gets brought up a lot when we talk about what is happening on the right wing and the right of politics is this idea of grievance politics and it's sort of levelled in a sense of, well, there's this sense of grievance of immigration and it tries to tell a broader story and you're just stoking people's worst behaviours and worst instincts to try and encourage that.

To what extent do you think the political class has contributed to what you're seeing in terms of the fracturing and the ways in which which people are sitting back and going, I feel I've worked hard my whole life.

I can't get into the property market.

I'm struggling to find a job or I'm struggling to find a well-paid job.

To what extent is the political class responsible?

Oh, such a big question.

I think we really need to, to answer that, we need to go back to Peter Dutton a little bit because Peter Dutton flirted with aspects of One Nation

policy and even in the way he spoke, things like rallying against standing next to an Aboriginal flag, that sort of culture war stuff that really appealed to people on the right.

Now that he's no longer in charge of the Liberal Party, there is that sense of, well, you know, he spoke for me and maybe he doesn't now, and maybe the party doesn't now.

Maybe, you know, the party by moving more to the centre where theoretically it would win more seats because that's where it's lost a lot of its seats, that actually...

is spurring a lot of this kind of support for One Nation, the fact that they don't have a sort of right, very right-wing person in charge of the Liberal Party.

So there's definitely that aspect.

Peter Dutton was really good at honing in on that sort of grievance.

Like if you think about the first part of Labor's term when it first won election in 2022, cost of living, he was hammering them at every turn.

And we kind of have seen that fallen.

We saw that fall away towards the end, you know, before the election.

And now the Liberal Party is trying to do the same thing, but it might not be resonating in the same way.

So I definitely think grievance politics is huge.

I think that's also part of this shift away from the major parties, that people are looking at the major parties and they're going, they don't represent me, they don't stand for what I believe in, they don't listen to my concerns.

And that has really spurred a lot of this move towards independence and third parties.

And we'll have a look at the international perspectives in a second, but I am curious the extent to which this moment where Labor, the thorn in its side, is the Greens in a lot of way in a political contest.

And in the last term of parliament, you saw housing really come to the fore as an issue that the Greens wanted to focus on.

Max Jan Lama, who lost his seat, was really driving that, focusing on younger people and the one-third of the country that is renting.

We are seeing, I guess, the rise of One Nation politically will mean that the Liberal Party in particular and the coalition more broadly is having to factor in One Nation like Labor does the Greens.

Do you think there is a comparison there?

It's hard to tell because we don't have any policies from the coalition yet.

So it's really hard to speculate on what their policies will be without actually seeing them, which is part of the problem.

I think housing is a really significant one.

It's the one that when I've spoken to young One Nation supporters, it comes up time and time again.

And I think this is the problem for Labor, is that, and, you know, to be fair, it's also a problem for the coalition.

People who feel disenfranchised from, particularly from the issue of housing, they don't see either of the major parties doing anything radical enough.

Because for them, it's like business as usual.

And let's be fair, it is a bit of business as usual, because at the moment, we're in this weird situation where, you know, Labor doesn't want to annoy people who already have houses.

But pretty soon that balance is going to tip, and young people are going to be, you know, in terms of raw numbers, we're going to see fewer and fewer people own homes.

So there's that balance that Labour has to have there.

I think it's the same with the coalition.

Like until we see what their actual policies are in this space, and I think you had mentioned before, Brett, that their one policy, which was rating is super,

that's now no longer necessarily their only policy that's up for review.

So we don't actually know what the coalition has to offer in this or any other space when it comes to policy.

And that's creating a vacuum that One Nation is really good at filling.

And I think one thing you touched on, which was really telling, was Pauline Hanson is such a well-defined figure.

And you talked to some within the Liberal Party, and there's a sense of people don't know what we stand for, which is partially a product of...

Well, they don't know what they stand for.

Right, because in government you have to make decisions that aren't necessarily aligning with the policy platform or you see Labour doing it all the time, passing all these laws that are completely removed from the policy platform.

But the definition of Pauline Hanson certainly helps to people understand what is One Nation and who she is.

But it also would be too simplistic to just view this in an Australian perspective.

And much is being made about the rise of Nigel Farage

in the UK, the ways in which his party is outpolling the British Conservative Party.

Obviously, the MAGA movement in the US is very well canvassed, but if you look in France and in Germany, right-wing parties are certainly in the ascent.

Do you see parallels with the Australian debate, with what we are seeing abroad?

I think it's hard not to.

One thing I would point out, with the UK and the US, a lot of those far-right movements are driven by young people.

That's not the case in Australia.

In Australia, young people are...

by and large, very politically progressive.

And it's actually notable how politically progressive they are compared to generations before them at their same age.

So that's a really big difference if you don't have a groundswell of young people supporting these like really ultra right-wing movements, then your numbers are dwindling.

But also I think you can see it in the way that aspects of Trumpism have seeped into Australian mainstream politics, you know, make Australia great again.

It was a moment in the campaign, wasn't it?

It has, it has.

And so those things do attract a certain element, but I mean, we are always going to be somewhat protected by having compulsory voting.

The fact that parties on the extreme don't do really that well because you have to kind of target everyone.

And so we have that going for us where other countries don't, which makes us a slightly different kettle of fish, I think.

And I think that fuels that question that exists within the Liberal Party at the moment, is that preferential voting and compulsory voting means that the Australian political landscape is different from others out there.

Now, we've seen a few polls since the election.

We're very early.

It's yet to be determined where this goes more broadly.

But But some within the coalition will argue that they need not stress so much about the rise of One Nation because based on this polling, One Nation would struggle to get a lot of MPs up, unlike what you're seeing with reform in the UK.

On those numbers, they would be elected the majority government.

In Australia, tacking tomorrow's centre line is where you will win back those people on preferences.

What's your gut instinct saying about?

Is this a sugar hit or is it a permanent, fundamental change that we are seeing to politics as we know it?

I mean, I think it's permanent and fundamental in the fact that it is again about that splintering of the two-party system and that's here to stay and frankly good because the two parties have become a little bit you know lazy in some ways let's face it

but I think also in terms of one nation purely a lot of that bleeds back to the coalition and we just have to wait and see what the policies are because for a lot of these people who have drifted away from the coalition they may well think that the policies are enough to draw them back.

We're still a long way out from an election.

So, you know, we can't speculate on this.

But I think it does talk to essentially a shift in the Australian political landscape around the fact that the majors can no longer look to their existing voters and count on them forever.

You're doing a lot of interesting work looking into this.

I know there'll be more stories coming out tomorrow.

We appreciate getting a bit of a forward sizzle here on the podcast, but let's stick with the coalition for a little bit longer.

And we talked yesterday on the podcast about taking out the trash and how it usually happens on a Friday.

But yesterday we saw the government announcing superannuation changes just ahead of major news coming from the Middle East and the Prime Minister away.

As the day went on, Susan Lee also put out just a little bit of news as the day went on as well.

Usually you'd get a reshuffle on a Sunday.

It's a big news day.

Or a Friday night when no one is watching TV.

In this case, we saw the reshuffle launch.

So Susan Lee has made a few decisions that were largely expected.

So Jonathan Dunham, the Tasmanian senator, moves from education into home affairs.

That means that Julian Lisa, who was the shadow attorney general and hold the arts portfolio, he'll move from that.

He'll keep arts.

He'll move from Attorney General into education, replacing Jonathan Dunham.

And the Queenslander Andrew Wallace, who has been on the backbench, more on the Conservative side of the Liberal Party, moves into the shadow Attorney General portfolio.

The big question that was just looming is, do we need to talk about Jane?

Because an obvious omission from this is Jane Hume, one of the most well-known figures in the Liberal Party.

And to be frank, I think there are some parts of the backbench that you could struggle to name a lot of the blokes.

They all look very similar in that party room.

Jane Hume is a well-defined figure, didn't have a great campaign.

How surprising is it that she's not there?

You're right.

She didn't have a great campaign.

She really struggled on a lot of issues.

We had her on our show asking about education policy and like payments and things, and she just wasn't across it, let's face it.

But it wasn't just her that had a bad campaign.

The leader lost his seat

and they lost the election.

No shortage of generation has lost as a result of this.

Jane Hume is one cog in the wheel.

Absolutely.

And also, you know, a youngish woman in the Liberal Party, well, like, how rare is that?

Which is unusual that they wouldn't have more of that because that's clearly an electorate that they're struggling to win.

And in line with what Susan Lee is arguing here, like, Jane Hume embodies the type of voter that the party is trying to reach back.

Women, urban electorates, believes in climate change,

believes in small government, but is meant to be the modern face of the Liberal Party.

So it makes you wonder what's going on behind the scenes, really.

Makes you wonder what rift is at play here.

Yeah, I think it's really interesting.

Looking at some of the aspects of the reshuffle, one of the things I wanted to mention was, you know, people have said Julian Lisa is being demoted because obviously Attorney General, very important portfolio.

But when you look at the education portfolio, it's just completely ripe for criticism on labor.

So you've got childcare, obviously huge issue on the minds of voters.

You've got NAPLAN results, which are not very good at the moment.

Again, really easy target.

And you've got universities like disarray at the moment.

So you've got these three major policies where you could have someone who is really good at criticising labour

in these spaces to be able to take that up a notch.

I think Julian Lisa has proved himself as a really steady and competent person.

Certainly smart and well considered.

And well considered.

And I think that having him in that attack dog role in the portfolio of education might potentially get traction in these places that the Liberal Party sees as pretty ripe for criticism.

And we had seen a fairly decent working relationship between Jonathan Dunham and Jason Clare, particularly in light of some of those horrific stories that were coming out of the childcare sector.

So it will be interesting the ways in which Julian Lisa, to some extent, I agree with you, that it's seen as a bit of a demotion going to education, but also it is a way of broadening his resume because very much has been focused on more intellectual, higherbrow, constitutional type arguments at times.

This will very much bring him to the fore of the cut and thrust of politics, and it will be interesting.

He's a nicer, kinder person, is what he said at times.

That's not a reflection on Jonathan Dunham, but will he be able to throw a few elbows and get in the cut and thrust of it?

It will be interesting to watch and see.

One of the other big stories that is just going to be ticking around for the best part of the next two months is the social media ban that's coming in for under 16s.

I don't know about you, but I get a bit of a shiver down my spine when I hear the words advertising campaign.

It's just always like advertising campaign.

You're like, oh my goodness, who is having to act in this ad?

The government's spending a bit of money on advertising campaign on TV.

I'm not sure if that's the best place for these ads, but that's beside that.

But they also said school bulletin boards.

Yeah, school bulletin boards it's really going old school here there will be the irony here these ads will be on social media as well yeah um now there's obviously communicating with the younger people people you know 14 15 who feel probably most affected by by this policy but it's also communicating to parents as well oh yeah and trying to make clear that government is taking action in this but what action the thing that i still don't understand is how are they going to do it they talk about social media i'm like okay that's great but how are you going to do it well i think we're saying we're not doing it that is for them.

That's their problem.

We've set the law.

You now go and fix it.

Now fix it.

Yeah.

Well, I think a lot of the advertising would come down to how are you going to do it?

And I think people's skepticism is, I don't understand how it's going to work because that's my skepticism.

I'm like, I still don't understand how are we actually physically going to do this.

So, yeah, I'm wondering what the advertising campaign is about.

Like, hey, guys, you're not going to be able to use social media anymore.

Not my problem.

One thing that I think will be an interesting element of this debate going forward is the government feels that it's on to a winner politically in that parents out there in particular are terrified of what is happening.

You talk to parents of young girls in particular, we're really concerned about some of the horrific stuff that they're seeing on their devices.

But there will be an interesting conversation about the role of community for people.

And at times it feels like the Prime Minister says, everyone should be out there playing footy and playing netball.

But community is also built in different ways.

And I think if you're a younger, a queer person, you're a younger person that might not necessarily fit in with the mainstream, how then do you ensure that there are supports around those kids and those people out there?

That's such an open question.

I think it's such a good question because, you know, today we've seen some reporting from Riverland and from our reporter there, Shannon Pierce of the ABC, who has spoken to young queer people who've said, actually, communities online saved my life.

Like, not everyone has a community in their physical proximity, A, any kind of community, but B, any kind of supportive community.

And when we're having these conversations, rightly so, I think we're talking about the harms of social media because like you said, it's a really scary time to be a parent of a young person when you have this wild west out there that we don't really know how to control.

But also we should be looking at the fact that there are some benefits from being on social media and that's particularly strong for the most marginalised in our community.

I would like to see what the government is going to do about that.

Are there going to be safe spaces inverted commas that are exempt from a social media ban?

How are you going to foster those communities if they've already sprung up through social media?

And how are you going to protect those young people?

Yeah, it's going to be fascinating.

Obviously, there are a lot of eyes, not just within Australia but globally, on this.

It is going to be world-leading push to.

And we've already seen other countries say, yeah, this is a good idea.

We're going to look into it.

Imagine the pressure of knowing.

Is it going to work?

Are we going to be able to do it?

The ABC will have more on this.

The Digital Dilemma will be on ABC TV and Radio, friend of the podcast.

Raph Epstein and the ABC technology reporter and my general go-to for all things social media ban, and Shlavois Pierre will be there answering all the curly questions.

So, if you don't see it tonight, you can obviously catch up later.

Gosh, we've had a bit to get through.

Thank you for joining me.

My pleasure.

It's been great to chat to you in a formal capacity.

Yes, with just a few other people listening in this time.

Tomorrow, David Spears will join me on the podcast.

If you do have a question, we'd love you to send a voice note to the party room at abc.net.au, and Mel Clark and I will get you an answer for that on Thursday when we record the party room.

See ya, Shilala.

See ya.