One Nation is in damage control over its immigration policy, with leader Pauline Hanson intervening to pour cold water on MP David Farley’s claim that the party’s migration numbers were “not too different” from Labor’s. It comes as human rights advocates implore Prime Minister Anthony Albanese not to revoke work rights from people seeking asylum, arguing it would be “unconscionable” and not the answer to growing political pressure over migration.
Fri 28 Aug 2026 01.00 AEST
Photo: AAP Image/Lukas Coch
In recent years, the far Right One Nation party has transitioned from the political margins to the electoral mainstream. One notable explanation for their growing popularity seems to be a perception that they represent the concerns of less affluent Australians adversely affected by cost-of-living pressures.
This is a a review from Dr Michael McKernan of Alice's Dreaming by Tom Griffiths.
One Nation is in damage control over its immigration policy, with leader Pauline Hanson intervening to pour cold water on MP David Farley’s claim that the party’s migration numbers were “not too different” from Labor’s.
Farrer MP David Farley plunged the party into disarray when he argued One Nation’s headline immigration figures were similar to the government’s, but that the party would run a more targeted migration program.
It comes as human rights advocates implore Prime Minister Anthony Albanese not to revoke work rights from people seeking asylum, arguing it would be “unconscionable” and not the answer to growing political pressure over migration.
The measure was reportedly due to be unveiled as part of a broader package at Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke’s National Press Club address, before the speech was postponed.
The ABC said the suite of changes was meant to deliver “a quick and drastic cut to net migration” in a bid to quell growing support for One Nation.
An open letter to the PM, signed by more than 160 community, charity, multicultural and migrant organisations, has urged the Albanese government to rethink the move, arguing it would force thousands of people into destitution.
“We are talking about tens of thousands of people who are working hard to support their families right now – putting food on the table and contributing to their communities,” said Jana Favero, Deputy CEO of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre.
“Forcing them to stop working and become dependent on already overstretched charities and communities to survive is outrageous.”
Labor is facing sustained pressure from the Coalition and One Nation to rein in what Opposition leader Angus Taylor described as “out of control migration”.
The Coalition has ramped up its rhetoric and hardened its stance on the issue in a bid to claw back support from Pauline Hanson’s party.
Its controversial policy, announced in April, centres on “Australian values” and pledges to “lift the standards” and “boot out” migrants who fail a character test.
Quality research, analysis, explainers and factchecks from experts you can trust.
Adama Kamara, co-CEO of the Refugee Council of Australia, said restricting people’s right to work wasn’t the answer.
“We need reforms that genuinely solve the challenges with Australia’s migration system, not measures that shift the consequences to vulnerable people and communities supporting them,” she said.
Advocates said people seeking asylum are generally unable to access Centrelink and warned removing their work rights could push them to cash-in-hand employment, making them “more vulnerable to wage theft, unsafe working conditions, exploitation and abuse”.
The Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) argued it made no sense to prevent people from working and would only put further strain on the country’s already stretched charity sector.
“At a time when so many people are struggling financially, it simply makes no sense to take work rights away from people who are currently supporting themselves and their families,” said ACOSS CEO Dr Cassandra Goldie.
“The social services sector is already stretched. Stripping people of their ability to earn an income would force them into poverty and dependence on charities for food, housing and other essentials, when they are willing and able to support themselves through work. It would be unconscionable.”
The organisations said they were concerned by “growing attacks” on multiculturalism and migrant communities and warned removing work rights would also make it harder for migrant and refugee families to stay together.
“Taking away someone’s right to work would push people who are supporting themselves and their families into poverty and destitution overnight,” said Maiy Azize from Anglicare Australia.
“This change would create exactly the kind of division it claims to prevent. Forcing people out of work, into poverty and onto the margins of our communities will not bring Australians together. It will only do the opposite.”
In the letter, the groups acknowledged that “Australia’s protection system is facing serious backlogs” and said that the delays undermined confidence in the system and caused “real harm and distress” to people.
They called for the government to ensure applications are properly assets from the outset and provide access to free, independent legal assistance so people could explain their circumstances effectively.
