She who has never changed her position walked into the Canberra press club coliseum – and drew blood
The rolling stone of reaction to Pauline Hanson’s National Press Club address has quickly become a thundering boulder. Surprised, perhaps, at how strong her presentation was, most commentators seem to have recognised that she hit all the right notes in a bravado speech that deconstructed the various policy failures that bedevil Australia. But while acknowledging her accuracy, there is always a grumbling of ‘where’s the detail’. With almost two years to go before the next scheduled federal election, One Nation would be daft to start laying out pre-election run details – no other party does.
The Australian’s editorial writer also falls into this error. “Voters must be given more detail on how policy changes on immigration, housing, energy and a raft of other issues. There remains little evidence to suggest that One Nation is able to transform itself from a protest movement into a potent political force ready for government,” just three months after it got the stamp of approval from voters?
” … or that Senator Hanson can demonstrate the personal capacity to be an effective prime minister.” What, like Albo? With his 59 personal advisors?
Even the left’s flagship, Sydney Morning Herald, approved. Sort of. A panel of press gallery journos was asked to provide a verdict: “Pauline Hanson at the National Press Club was a high-voltage lightning rod for popular anger, but a very feeble lighthouse for illuminating solutions. It was an audition for the position of opposition leader, not prime minister. She’s been fomenting grievances for 30 years. Now, as she said repeatedly, she has two years to develop fixes. She was asking for time. She’ll need it. The hard part lies ahead.”
But its own sour view was also on show: “In a scattergun address about double the length of the usual Press Club speech, Hanson covered her usual subjects: “mass” immigration, Islamic extremism, her ill-treatment by the mainstream media, the “transgender insurgency” and her contempt for the “climate change hoax”. Her persecution complex was in full flight when facing questions from media outlets she doesn’t like. Hanson said she wants a “monocultural” Australia. This speech – punchy, hostile and slightly paranoid – reinforced what One Nation’s culture is.”
Note the quotation marks describing “mass” migration, as if it were an exaggeration; note the reference to her persecution complex, as if that, too, was an exaggeration – proving her very point about the media.
In her speech, Hanson recognises the challenges ahead for One Nation, from managing a network of branches to selecting strong candidates and developing policy details.
Former Treasury official David Pearl, also in The Australian: ” ..it is one thing to give voice to popular frustrations or hopes but quite another to meet these demands successfully in government or coalition.” But that’s where you have to start: by articulating those frustrations. Until that is done – and done so publicly – it is impossible to satisfy those frustrations.
Pearl makes a critical point when agreeing with Hanson’s list of bad policies but points to a disturbing aspect of “the hijacking of our politics by the political and bureaucratic establishment during the past decade or more. Hanson understands this anti-democratic malaise acutely.”
He points to the many “elite attacks on Australian values,” Covid lockdowns, uncontrolled immigration and destructive, energy -sapping net zero key among them. “While each of these things is bad enough, what too few people – even today – acknowledge is that they were foisted on the electorate. They were not demanded by the community. They were not debated and voted for during election campaigns. Their costs and risks were not assessed by a competent and professional public service. They were not scrutinised by a sceptical media.” Scepticism in the media is highly selective … reserved for Hanson and other conservatives but disabled for issues they champion; think climate change.
Having tapped into the discontent of citizens, where would One Nation and Senator Hanson lead them? asks one. It seems pretty clear: towards a more democratic and conservative-infused Australia.
We can believe it: she has never changed her position. It’s gladitorial.
