Overview of Is 'nastiness' backfiring on Pauline Hanson?
This episode of ABC News Daily examines whether Pauline Hanson’s recent wave of offensive comments is starting to hurt her politically — or whether the backlash is only giving her more attention. Sam Hawley speaks with Sean Kelly (columnist for The Age and Sydney Morning Herald, and former Labor adviser) about a shift in how major parties are responding to Hanson and One Nation.
What happened this week
A string of Hanson controversies dominated the political conversation:
- Resurfaced comments about Anthony Albanese’s mother and public housing
- A stoush with Andrew Hastie, who condemned Hanson after being targeted in a One Nation cartoon
- More resurfaced remarks in which Hanson described Indigenous Australians as “the most primitive race on earth”
- Hanson’s subsequent defensive reposting, partial apologies, and attempts to frame herself as blunt but authentic
Kelly argues that the key change this week was that Hanson was no longer just being criticized for racism in the abstract — she was seen as personally attacking individuals, which shifted the tone of the debate.
Why this matters politically
A different kind of backlash
The episode suggests that attacks on Hanson may be landing differently now because they are framed around:
- decency
- nastiness
- spitefulness
- personal slander against specific people, including veterans and the Prime Minister’s mother
Anthony Albanese’s response was notable because it moved beyond the usual racism critique and cast Hanson as someone whose politics are rooted in meanness and cruelty rather than just prejudice.
The Liberal Party’s opening
Kelly says Andrew Hastie’s forceful response may have created space for the Liberal Party to push back more strongly against Hanson after months of being cautious under Angus Taylor’s leadership.
That’s significant because, in Kelly’s view, a stronger Liberal Party is one of the clearest ways to weaken One Nation.
The strategy debate: attack Hanson or ignore her?
The discussion raises a central political question:
- Does calling Hanson racist and attacking her personally help stop her?
- Or does it feed her supporters’ sense that elites are dismissive and out of touch?
Kelly’s view is nuanced:
- He says it is still important to call racism what it is
- But he also warns that simply dismissing Hanson can reinforce the idea that she is the only one “listening” to frustrated voters
- He argues the major parties need to take the underlying grievances seriously, not just the rhetoric
One Nation’s broader strategy
Beyond the controversy, the episode notes that One Nation is also trying to look more like a serious political operation by rolling out policy positions on:
- immigration
- tobacco taxes
- superannuation
Kelly says these policies do not appear especially well developed, but the point is that Hanson is filling the political space and forcing others to react.
Broader takeaway
The episode’s main argument is that Pauline Hanson may be vulnerable in a new way: not just as a figure associated with racism, but as someone increasingly viewed as mean-spirited and personally abusive.
Still, Kelly cautions that the situation is complicated:
- controversy can help Hanson remain visible
- her supporters may respond positively to her defiance
- major parties need both better strategy and better policy responses if they want to stop One Nation’s rise
Key insight
Hanson’s power comes not only from outrage, but from the sense that she speaks for people who feel ignored.
The episode suggests that defeating her politically will require more than condemnation — it will require the major parties to address the conditions that make her message appealing in the first place.