Economic insecurity matters, but it cannot explain the populist challenge alone. Governments must also address migration, belonging and trust while delivering improvements in housing, services, fairness and democratic integrity. Part two of a two-part analysis.
Australians have legitimate worries about housing, services and living costs, particularly in the outer suburbs, peri-urban areas and regions where Kos Samaras finds One Nation’s appeal strongest. Bringing inflation back under control is essential but will hurt some of the households already under pressure. Increasing housing supply and productivity will take time, while there is little fiscal room for relief payments.
Economic policy alone will not answer the challenge posed by the radical populist right. People also disagree about immigration, national identity, gender, climate policy and whose views should receive respect. Treating cultural anxiety as disguised poverty fails to hear it. Accepting the populist account of a country under civilisational siege and its narrow view of what it means to be a good Australian would deepen the division we need to repair.
Australia has advantages. Compulsory and preferential voting encourage parties to persuade a broad electorate. Australians also expect government to deliver useful services and distribute burdens fairly. Competent government can regain confidence, but first it must listen without condescension.
Concern about migration’s pace can coexist with respect for migrants. Scanlon’s 2025 research finds that most people who say immigration is too high still regard multiculturalism as good for Australia. Lowy reports that 73 per cent view cultural diversity positively. Yet September’s Guardian Essential poll found that 55 per cent want the annual migrant intake lowered. Governments cannot dismiss that combination of views.
The government should explain its proposed migration changes, legislate where additional powers are needed, and require Parliament to debate the details. It should say what the changes would do for housing, infrastructure and services, and publish evidence against which those claims can be judged.
It must also explain migration’s contribution. An ageing country needs workers in health and care, construction, agriculture and food production. International students support universities, research and export earnings. The costs and benefits differ across communities, and policy should acknowledge both.
One Nation’s promises demand forensic scrutiny. What would sustained net outward migration mean for GP clinics, hospitals, building sites, farms and universities? How would mass removals be administered lawfully, and at what cost? Ask these questions firmly, with figures and workable alternatives, without calling everyone concerned about immigration a xenophobe.
Housing is the most urgent test of delivery. Faster planning decisions, serviced land, infrastructure finance, sensible use of established suburbs and enough skilled workers must produce completed homes. Review building requirements for demonstrable benefits and examine safe, accessible lower-cost housing options. Renters need greater security; first-home buyers need a path to ownership that does not simply bid up prices.
Regional fairness needs tangible bargains. Communities should influence renewable project siting early, see cumulative impacts assessed and receive durable local benefits. Neighbours bearing substantial visual or amenity costs deserve consideration for compensation alongside landowners receiving leases.
Fiscal honesty matters too. Defence, aged care, disability support and climate adaptation expenditure will keep growing. Revenue needs to keep pace. A credible government should aim for a modest surplus over the business cycle and explain how it will pay for valued services. Serious tax reform could seek fairer returns from resource wealth, revisit the Henry–Garnaut and Productivity Commission proposals for company and resource-rent taxation, and scrutinise concessions favouring asset accumulation. Higher taxes on very high incomes and exceptionally large fortunes deserve open examination, with middle and lower incomes protected. Pretending services can improve while taxes fall feeds disillusionment.
The same fiscal test should be applied to One Nation. Who would pay for its nuclear ambitions or tax cuts? What services or investments would be displaced?
Productivity policy should reach workers, not merely developers of data centres. Building those centres competes for scarce labour; operating them consumes electricity but creates relatively few continuing jobs. The greater opportunity lies in practical AI that helps doctors, nurses, teachers, tradespeople and care workers. Government can support trusted Australian applications while ensuring data-centre projects meet their infrastructure and energy costs.
Cultural belonging needs a positive narrative. We can show pride in democratic institutions, the rule of law, mutual obligation and the fair go while telling the truth about dispossession and exclusion. Citizens must be free to argue about curriculum, gender and migration without being presumed hateful. Minorities must likewise be protected from intimidation and vilification. A shared civic identity cannot require everyone to suppress their differences.
Social media also needs reform. The eSafety Commissioner warns that recommendation systems can narrow feeds until repeated, increasingly extreme claims appear normal. Platforms should provide a non-personalised feed as the default, make personalised recommendations an informed choice, and give independent researchers and regulators access to examine harmful amplification and its monetisation. Political advertising should be transparent. Duties concerning unlawful content should be enforceable. Extending publisher or professional-advice liability to platforms or AI will require careful legal design to protect free expression.
Finally, trust in democratic institutions needs repair. The National Anti-Corruption Commission’s arrangements should be reconsidered, particularly public hearings, third parties and the treatment of pork-barrelling. Tighter election spending caps should capture third-party campaigning as well as party expenditure. Voters who suspect that influence can be bought need evidence that the rules apply fairly.
No single policy will defeat the populist right. The democratic centre must hear disagreement, share the costs of change, protect liberal freedoms and deliver improvements on a believable timetable. Reassuring people that Australia is doing well on average will not persuade those whose experience says otherwise. A fair go must be visible in housing, services, opportunity and the integrity of government. Competence becomes a political argument when people can see it working.
Read part one of this two-part series
Roger was the longest-serving disabled Departmental Secretary (of Environment and Heritage) in the history of the APS – there have only been two since 1901. He contracted polio in 1948 and uses a wheelchair, leg braces and crutches.