The prime minister who’d rather not talk about immigration

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has spent almost his entire political life battling Australia’s conservatives, since joining the centre-left Labor party at 15 and becoming a Member of Parliament at 30. Yet today, his most serious political challenge comes not from the Liberal-National Coalition, but from Pauline Hanson’s far-right One Nation party.

Albanese has quickly devised a strategy to try to confront the populist surge. The initial signs are that his approach is working – and it may provide valuable guidance for centre-left parties around the world facing populist right-wing surges.

Reversing the dynamic

Rather than confronting Hanson over immigration, Albanese has sought to shift the political contest onto terrain where he believes Labor has the stronger case: the economy, wages, public services and inequality. Early evidence suggests the strategy may be succeeding as Labor has returned to the lead in opinion polls. His approach – if it ultimately succeeds – could offer an important lesson for centre-left parties around the world struggling to contain the rise of right-wing populism.

Hanson, who first became an MP in 1996, has long called for restrictions on immigration, initially attacking Canberra for allowing in too many Asian migrants and now focusing her attacks on Muslim migrants.

Her rise in opinion polls has coincided with growing concerns about immigration. An annual Lowy Institute poll released in June 2026 found that 55 per cent of Australians believe migration levels are too high, 29 per cent believe it is about right, 5 per cent say it is too low, and 11 per cent are uncommitted.

Rather than engage in an extended argument with One Nation about immigration, Albanese has largely defended Australia’s migration programme while steering the political debate back to economic issues.

Labor appears to have concluded that debating Hanson on her preferred terrain risks amplifying her message rather than weakening it.

At a time when growing numbers of voters in countries around the world – rightly or wrongly – have blamed high immigration for pressures on public services and housing affordability, it may prove to be sensible for centre-left leaders to avoid engaging in running debates with populists on that topic.

Instead, Albanese has sought to redirect voters’ frustrations towards questions on economic policy, tax policy and wage policy, according to Australian politics expert Rodney Smith from Sydney University.

“They are trying to paint Pauline Hanson as a hypocrite who says she is for ordinary Australians but has an agenda that is not. Albanese is pushing the attention back to the economy and to why people are feeling the pinch,” he told The Straits Times.

How to talk about immigration

Across many democracies, right-wing populists have successfully channelled economic insecurity into debates about immigration and national identity. Albanese is attempting to reverse that dynamic by assuring economically anxious voters that he acknowledges their concerns about high inflation, rising interest rates and surging housing prices are genuine – but that he is better placed to address these grievances than One Nation.

He has attacked One Nation for its opposition to measures such as minimum wage increases, additional support for childcare, expanded healthcare services and reduced fees for vocational study. He has also pointed out Hanson’s close ties to mining magnate Gina Rinehart, Australia’s richest person, who has provided funding to One Nation and a private plane to help Hanson campaign across the country.

“One Nation… opposes all of the measures that have made a difference to people,” Albanese told Sky News on June 21. “The fact is that One Nation pretends that they stand for workers whilst getting planes given to them by Australia’s richest person.”

The message is intended to expose an apparent contradiction between One Nation’s populist rhetoric and its economic positions. Polls show that many supporters of One Nation, like those favouring far-right populists in countries such as the US and the United Kingdom, tend to have lower levels of education and are less likely to be in white-collar jobs.

Albanese, who grew up in public housing and paints himself as a champion of the working class, believes that many voters who have drifted from Labor to One Nation can be won back by focusing on economic opportunity and traditional values.

“Most Australians have nothing to sell but their time, nothing to give but their hard work,” he told reporters on June 23. “We want those people, those hard-working Australians, to have the opportunity to own their own home.”

That recognition that the economy is leaving some voters behind has been reflected in a more ambitious approach to policy. Despite often being criticised as politically cautious, Albanese recently pushed through controversial tax reforms affecting property and share investors.

The reforms attracted criticism from both One Nation and the Coalition, but he argued they would improve housing affordability and make the tax system fairer for working Australians. The willingness to pursue politically difficult reforms strengthens Labor’s broader argument that it is prepared to tackle inequality rather than merely talk about it.

Winning over swing voters

Josh Sunman, an Australian politics expert at Flinders University, believes Labor sees an opportunity to win back a sizeable share of One Nation supporters who are “floaters” motivated more by economic dissatisfaction and not wedded to Hanson’s anti-immigration populism.

“Labor is trying to take this approach that says One Nation is not your populist saviour and is attacking benefits such as paid parental leave and the minimum wage,” he said. “Labor’s campaign has been to remind voters that Pauline Hanson’s record on these things is not in their favour and that they should come home to Labor.”

So far, Albanese’s strategy for confronting One Nation appears to be proving successful.

The latest polls showed Labor has reclaimed its lead and that One Nation’s rise in the polls may be ending. The latest Newspoll on June 29 found Labor was supported by 33 per cent of voters, ahead of One Nation with 29 per cent, the Coalition with 17 per cent, the Greens on 13 per cent, and 8 per cent for others.

A separate survey in The Australian Financial Review on June 28 also found Labor had reclaimed the lead, backed by 30 per cent of voters, ahead of One Nation at 29 per cent, the Coalition at 18 per cent, the Greens at 14 per cent, and 9 per cent for others.

Admittedly, this turnaround cannot be solely credited to Albanese’s strategy. Hanson’s first-ever address to the National Press Club on June 17 – during which she called for Australia to reject multiculturalism and become a “monocultural” society while proposing cuts to paid parental leave – may have prompted some voters to question whether she is ready for government.

Inevitably, there will be limits to how much other leaders and parties can borrow from Albanese’s approach due to the differing political circumstances in other countries. Australia, for instance, has compulsory voting, which makes it harder for charismatic populists to win elections by encouraging a devoted support base to come out to vote.

But Albanese appears to have fared better than outgoing British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who also faced a populist insurgency led by a veteran anti-migrant politician – Nigel Farage, who leads the Reform UK party, now leading in opinion polls. Starmer announced his resignation as Labour leader and prime minister on June 22, after Labour struggled with infighting and suffered dismal results in local council elections.

Sunman said Albanese’s move to target Hanson’s economic record and his willingness to adopt ambitious tax reforms suggested that the Australian leader may have started to uncover a formula for success that could have worldwide application.

“Albanese has a case to say he has taken a position and copped flak from the conservative press and politicians, but is trying to make the country fairer,” he said.

“This is the battlefield that Labor wants to compete on – over economics rather than immigration and culture. Maybe one broad lesson is that it is better for centre-left parties to fight these populist parties on their core terms of economics and inequality.”

It is still too early to declare Albanese’s strategy a success. Further polls and an upcoming state election in Victoria will help to give clearer evidence about whether Australia’s public mood is shifting back towards the centre.

But the initial signs suggest that Albanese’s insistence on focusing on the economy rather than immigration, and backing ambitious reforms that demonstrate a commitment to supporting workers and addressing inequality, can help to stem the populist surge.

Indeed, like other centre-left parties around the world, Labor has found itself increasingly struggling to keep hold of the working-class voters who were once its voter base.

Hanson’s populist surge may provide Labor with a reminder about the need to put its core labour-based values at the centre of its politics – a shift that could prove the key to ensuring its political future.