A rightwing populist party, led by a familiar anti-establishment figure, gathering momentum. A Labour government enjoying a comfortable parliamentary majority but struggling.
I’m talking about British politics but the description could also fit Australia. The summer has revealed One Nation enjoying an extraordinary resurgence. A Redbridge poll has placed One Nation primary support at 26%, eclipsing the Coalition and putting it within striking distance of Labor. Pauline Hanson’s favourability rating is higher than that of Anthony Albanese (38% versus 34%).
This resembles where Nigel Farage and Reform in the UK were around the start of 2025. Fast forward to today and Reform has a clear lead in the polls, one it has maintained since last autumn. As Keir Starmer limps on as prime minister, terminally wounded by the Peter Mandelson scandal, it is Farage who is shaping the political agenda.
So should we expect One Nation to follow the same trajectory as its Reform cousins?
There are some obvious similarities. One Nation is capitalising on public concern about immigration, as Reform has done. Here, for the British electorate, the crisis of migrant boat arrivals has underlined a sense that the country has lost control of its borders.
During Boris Johnson’s period as prime minister, there was a dramatic surge in net migration – the so-called “Boriswave”. Many of those who voted for Brexit did so because of Johnson’s promises to reduce immigration by leaving the European Union. Ironically, post-Brexit immigration changes meant the very opposite happened.
There are signs of rising anti-immigration sentiment in Australia too, albeit driven by different concerns. Net migration hasn’t expanded in the same way as in the UK, and the public isn’t exercised about asylum seeker boats in the way it might have been 25 years ago. Rather, the sentiment is linked to worries about housing affordability and cost-of-living pressures. Houses aren’t being built quickly enough to meet demand, while the population continues to grow at a steady clip.
However, the return of Hanson may signal something more than this. For some time, Australia felt immune from the contagion of angry rightwing populism. This seemed to be the lesson of last year’s federal election, when voters rejected Peter Dutton and returned Anthony Albanese to the Lodge. Along with Canada, Australia was viewed internationally as an example of “the Trump effect”: a country where people turned away from politicians who sought to emulate Trumpian politics.
What if this no longer holds? One Nation’s explosion of support has arguably unearthed a large constituency disillusioned with mainstream political parties who don’t believe their interests are being looked after. It may not just be immigration and economic anxiety at play but also a sense of cultural anger and loss. One that perhaps is starting to take a new political shape.
Hanson has shown her ability to thrive under such conditions. Predictably, she reverted to her most extreme form, as in her deplorable comment this week about there being no “good Muslims”. That has been rightly condemned for being divisive and for stoking hatred.
There will be a need for vigilance beyond just Hanson. The former Liberal prime minister Tony Abbott has shared his view that Australia’s Anglo-Celtic and Judeo-Christian character is under threat – that he would like to see multiculturalism replaced by the old policy of assimilation that was practised in the 1950s and 60s. At this rate, it may only be a matter of time before someone in parliament openly declares we should return to a White Australia policy.
This is perhaps where British and Australian politics diverge. Whereas Australian populists are favouring the foghorn, Farage is increasingly relying on the dog whistle. This is what happens when you’re a contender for government: respectability starts to matter. For One Nation, such a proposition seems more remote. It’s possible that its surge in support is temporary, less a product of structural disaffection and more the product of the Coalition’s dysfunction.
Unlike Reform, One Nation doesn’t yet have the ability to tap into widespread, visceral anger towards an incumbent government. Starmer has about him the whiff of impending political death; that isn’t the case for Albanese. For all the gripes Australians might have about the state of the nation, it could be a lot worse. At least the country isn’t going through a second decade of economic stagnation, or living through the harsh consequences of Brexit.
This explains why Farage is in the ascendancy. When he says that Britain is broken, there are enough people who would agree. A growing number seem to believe they have nothing to lose by giving him a chance.
Farage has shifted his tone as he positions himself as an alternative prime minister. A few weeks ago Reform released its television party political broadcast. It featured Farage in his tweed flat cap, walking his dogs along the coast in Essex, talking about his love of country – the very embodiment of patriotism. Gone is the Farage of old: the pugilist, the polariser. Today’s Farage is more softly lit, more gentle, more serious.
There is still a long way to go before the next UK general election. While Reform is growing in strength, it remains beatable. Nothing is yet assured.
Don’t be surprised, though, if the Australian right starts to show something in the manner of the New Farage: nationalist populism but with professional discipline and a more human face.
If it does, the fight will be on.
• Tim Soutphommasane is a political theorist. He is professor and chief diversity officer at the University of Oxford and a former Australian race discrimination commissioner
