The One Nation leader rejects warnings of economic damage and says she is willing to submit her plan to independent scrutiny, as business and farming groups raise concerns about labour shortages.
By the editorial team
Pauline Hanson has defended One Nation’s proposal to cut Australia’s temporary migration intake by 750,000 over three years, dismissing concerns that the policy could damage the economy and push the country into recession.
Speaking to News24 on Tuesday, the senator said the proposal reflected the “will of the people” and challenged the credibility of economists warning about its consequences.
“Do you trust these economists? What they come out and say? Because I don’t,” she said.
Her comments came amid warnings from experts cited by News24 that a sharp reduction in temporary migration could trigger a technical recession and disrupt industries including hospitality and agriculture.
Hanson rejected that assessment, saying she did not believe the measures would deliver a hit to GDP. She argued that Australians had been demanding action on migration for years and described One Nation’s proposal as a comprehensive policy developed through research.
“What I’m doing is implementing the will of the people,” she said. “They want to cut the mass migration, and we’ve put out a comprehensive policy.”
Asked whether she would submit the proposal to the independent Parliamentary Budget Office, Hanson said she had “no problem with it”.
However, she also questioned the reliability of cost estimates, invoking budget blowouts associated with Snowy 2.0 and the National Broadband Network.
Hanson pointed to Canada as an example of a country that had scaled back international student arrivals and other immigration following a post-pandemic increase.
She claimed that the Canadian approach had improved living standards and reduced rents by about $1,000 a year.
“The country hasn’t fallen apart,” she said. “It’s actually improved living standards of people.”
Those figures and the claimed link between lower migration, rents and living standards were presented by Hanson as arguments in favour of her proposal. The News24 report did not include independent evidence establishing those effects.
The senator also accused big business of seeking access to cheap labour and argued that Australia should put greater emphasis on training its own workforce through vocational education, apprenticeships and skills development.
Business and agricultural organisations, however, warned that restricting access to overseas workers could leave employers struggling to fill essential roles.
On Monday, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry cautioned that major cuts reducing skilled migration would put the economy at risk.
The National Farmers’ Federation raised particular concerns about regional Australia, where temporary workers make a substantial contribution to agricultural production.
NFF chief executive Michel Guerin said backpackers alone filled approximately one in seven farm jobs nationally, helping to keep food production running.
He also highlighted their contribution to local economies, saying they spent millions of dollars in regional communities and generally stayed in hostels, caravan parks or accommodation built specifically for workers on farms.
“They are not the cause of Australia’s housing crisis,” Guerin said.
The disagreement centres on how a substantial migration reduction would affect both living standards and the workforce. Hanson argues that fewer arrivals would improve Australians’ quality of life, while business and farming groups warn that cuts could undermine the industries supplying jobs, services and food.
Source: News24.
