Pauline Hanson’s resurgence stirs up Australia’s immigration debate

QUEENSLAND (Australia) — It is standing-room-only at the Buderim Tavern as a crowd of 200 strains to hear Ms Pauline Hanson rail against immigrants, foreign companies, the mistreatment of farmers and the “Islamisation of Australia”. Flanked by supporters wearing T-shirts and badges bearing the name of her One Nation party, the fiery politician says people are sick of being tagged “racist” for expressing what she says are legitimate concerns.

“We need to put a cap on immigration,” she tells the Financial Times, as her supporters tuck into mini hamburgers during the rally on Australia Day last month. “I want to block more Muslims coming in. Look at what has happened in England, it is a hell of a mess, and in France. You have no-go zones, where you aren’t even game to go anywhere near because they are Muslim dominated.”

Ms Hanson’s anti-immigrant rhetoric and dubious claims resemble those of United States President Donald Trump, the leader of France’s National Front, Marine Le Pen, and the former head of the United Kingdom Independence party, Nigel Farage, who have tapped into a wave of popular discontent among mainly white, working-class voters in the US and Europe.

In rural towns such as Buderim in Queensland, a state with a history of conservatism and where good jobs are scarce, wages are flat and houses are unaffordable for many young people, her populist message is resonating with voters. One Nation’s hardline rhetoric comes at a time when Australia’s immigration system is attracting global attention.

The United Nations and human rights groups have decried its detention of asylum seekers on South Pacific islands as inhumane. They warn that other countries may follow its hardline approach, undermining the UN refugee convention.

Canberra’s unwillingness to settle these “boat people” led to an angry telephone exchange this month between Mr Malcolm Turnbull, Australia’s Prime Minister, and Mr Trump, over whether he should stick to a deal struck by former US president Barack Obama to resettle 1,250 refugees in the US.

Some analysts worry that One Nation’s populist appeal will push the main parties further to the right and undermine its openness to skilled migration and free trade.

“Hanson is Australia’s answer to (Dutch rightwing politician) Geert Wilders or Marine Le Pen,” said Dr Duncan McDonnell, lecturer at Brisbane’s Griffith University and co-author of Populists in Power. “She wants to take Australia back to the 1950s. She wants a white, protectionist, illiberal nation.”

The party’s four senators, including Ms Hanson, were elected in July’s federal election, giving the party some leverage over legislation in a narrowly divided Parliament where the Liberal-led coalition government has a majority of just one. Public support for One Nation, while still at a very low base, is rising, and it is tipped to win seats in state polls in Western Australia next month and Queensland later in the year.

The re-emergence of One Nation, which first burst onto the political scene in the mid-1990s before imploding, has shocked the political establishment in a country that has not experienced a recession for a quarter of a century, and where immigration has enjoyed broad public support. More than a quarter of its 24 million population were born overseas, making it one of the most multicultural countries in the world.

“Since World War Two, no other country has integrated as many immigrants as Australia so successfully. It averages about 1 per cent of the population a year — that is enormous,” said Dr Sev Ozdowski, adjunct professor at Western Sydney University, who arrived as a refugee in Australia when he was 24. “It’s a very controlled migration system, which initially doesn’t provide entitlement to social welfare, and boosts the economy. I don’t see the problem.”

Over the past three decades, Australia’s main parties have praised its migration programme, which enables the government to cherry-pick skilled migrants, as the basis for its economic success. It was floated as a model for the UK to follow by Brexit supporters, until they discovered Australia takes in more migrants per capita than Britain every year.

Alarmed by the threat from One Nation, the centre-right government of Mr Turnbull has strengthened its already hardline asylum and border protection policies.

Anti-racism campaigners fear the changing political tone could incite hatred and undermine the country’s multiculturalism. Businesses worry that any backlash against immigration risks damaging the country’s economy, which shrank for the first time in five years in the third quarter of 2016.

“Closed borders make people poorer,” said Mr James Pearson, chief executive of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. “If we respond to political tensions on migration with the blunt tool of cutting our intake, we will limit the ability of Australian businesses to expand and thereby create local jobs.”

Since it was colonised in the 18th century, Australia has had a controversial history when it comes to immigration and race. It imposed a “White Australia” policy at the turn of the 20th century to deter a flow of migrants from Asia and treated its indigenous population harshly, with many Aboriginals still facing chronic unemployment, housing and social problems.

The policy was gradually dismantled after World War Two and, in 1975 the Racial Discrimination Act, which outlawed racially biased selection for migrants, was passed. Immigration accelerated during the mining investment boom in the mid-2000s. The steady flow of immigrants contributes about a third of the country’s annual economic growth, said economist Saul Eslake.

“High levels of immigration and a house-building boom helped keep Australia out of recession following the global financial crisis,” said Mr Ian McAllister, politics professor at Australian National University (ANU). “But people are becoming more wary of immigration due to the steep rise in house prices, a weak economy and a perception among some people that parts of Western Sydney are becoming mini Islamabads.”

An ANU survey of representative voters in the 2016 election showed that 42 per cent wanted to reduce immigration, 32 per cent would maintain it at the same level, and a quarter thought Australia could accommodate an increase.

But while just 2.2 per cent of Australians identified themselves as Muslims in the 2011 census, the attitude to Islamic immigration is more negative. A Newspoll survey this month found that 44 per cent of people would support the introduction of a Trump-style ban on all travel from the same seven predominantly Muslim nations into Australia.

The government, which is trailing Labor in opinion polls, has ratcheted up its rhetoric. In November, Immigration Minister Peter Dutton said he would remove some jobs from the list of 650 occupations — ranging from architect to gas fitter and heart surgeon — for which skilled migrant visas are available.

Mr Tim Soutphommasane, Australia’s race discrimination commissioner, warns, “While many people have legitimate concerns about the economy and social change, they shouldn’t be encouraged to think that they can simply target migrants or minorities for blame.”

An annual survey of 1,500 people by the Scanlon Foundation in August found reports of discrimination based on skin colour, ethnic origin or religion rose 5 percentage points to 20 per cent in 2016 — the highest level in a decade.

The ruling Liberal party has struck a voter preference agreement with One Nation in next month’s Western Australia elections, prompting a coalition government minister to say Ms Hanson’s party had “evolved” and was “a lot more sophisticated” now.

Ms Hanson, who left school at the age of 15 and ran a fish-and-chips shop before entering politics, burst onto the political arena in 1996 when she was elected as an MP on a platform warning that Australia risked being “swamped by Asians”.

She proposed tightening refugee laws in 1998 — the year One Nation’s popularity peaked, winning 20 per cent of the vote in a state election in Queensland. Soon after, bitter infighting led to the party’s demise as a political force. Ms Hanson was subsequently convicted of voter fraud in 2003 and sentenced to three years in jail. The conviction was quashed on appeal.

But then-prime minister John Howard had already sown the seeds of Australia’s hardline asylum policy by pledging in 2001 to “decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come”.

His government introduced temporary protection visas for asylum seekers arriving by boat, which denied them access to the services, rights and residency pathways available to people seeking protection that arrive via UN resettlement programmes. Almost two decades later this pledge has evolved into a blanket ban on any asylum seekers who arrive by boat and their detention on remote South Pacific islands.

Back in Buderim, Ms Hanson said the established parties are scrambling to copy One Nation. She said this time her party will stay united to capitalise on an even greater appetite for changes to immigration policy.

“This is a global movement with Trump and Brexit,” she said. “The difference now is that people who never supported me are coming on board. They can see that what I said back then has happened and I have gained credibility.”

When asked by the FT to pinpoint the location of one of the “no-go zones” in England — a claim spread by Mr Trump during his campaign — she later clarified through her spokesman that she never meant to say Britain. But Ms Hanson stands by her claim that there are no-go zones in Europe. Economists say One Nation’s call for net zero immigration — a one-in, one-out policy — would devastate the economy.

“This policy doesn’t make sense as it would prevent the labour market from adjusting to the swings in the economy,” said Mr Bob Gregory, a former Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) board member. “People tend to leave Australia when the economy is weak but this policy would mean that would be the only time inward migration would be allowed.”

One of the key arguments, used by critics of migration, is that it is taking jobs from local workers. Yet net inward migration has actually been falling in Australia since peaking in 2009 at the height of the global financial crisis, at 300,000 people.

Nevertheless, Ms Hanson’s call for tougher immigration policies is popular in areas where investment in infrastructure has failed to keep pace with a population growing about 1.5 per cent a year. A shortage of housing, blamed by some on migration, has seen prices double in Melbourne and parts of Sydney over the past decade.

The RBA this month urged state and federal governments to invest in infrastructure to ease the strains that “can reduce the public support for a growing population”.

But building new roads, railways and homes takes time. At the Buderim Tavern many of Ms Hanson’s supporters say they have waited long enough for politicians to respond to their concerns.

“Pauline Hanson is passionate about listening to people — she isn’t part of the political gravy train,” said Mr Steven Ford, who plans to run as a One Nation candidate in Queensland. “We are going to be a significant force in Australian politics.” FINANCIAL TIMES