Case studies in complexity (part 8): Pauline Hanson and One Nation

This article is part 8 of a series featuring case studies in complexity from the work of RealKM Magazine’s Bruce Boyes.

Background

• Small business owner. Pauline Hanson¹ owned Marsden’s Seafood² in the city of Ipswich, Queensland, Australia³ from 1987 to 1987. I was one of her regular customers between 1987 and 1991 when I lived in the same area, and often chatted with her. As a single mother, she worked very long hours in the shop, seven days a week, often helped by her children. They all lived in a small and very basic house nearby.
• Economically depressed area. At that time, Ipswich was seriously economically depressed due to the progressive demise of the city’s traditional manufacturing and coal mining industries. It was also just before the early 1990’s recession. Hard working people like Hanson received little or nothing in the way of government support, but believed (incorrectly) that in contrast, both First Nations Australians and immigrants to Australia were receiving very generous handouts. They also saw foreign companies buying up local businesses and moving the industries and jobs offshore.
• Entering politics. After many of her customers expressed strong concerns about what they saw as serious social inequity, Hanson decided to enter politics with the aim of making change. In 1994, she was elected as a local government councillor with Ipswich City Council, and then in 1996, elected to the Parliament of Australia as the Member for Oxley. In her widely reported maiden speech⁴ to the House of Representatives, Hanson said, “I won the seat of Oxley largely on an issue that has resulted in me being called a racist. That issue related to my comment that Aboriginals received more benefits than non-Aboriginals.” She then asserted that Australia was in danger of being “swamped by Asians”, and that these immigrants “have their own culture and religion, form ghettos and do not assimilate.”
• One Nation political party. Subsequently, in 1997, Hanson and two co-founders established Pauline Hanson’s One Nation⁵ political party, commonly known as One Nation, described as being right-wing to far-right. One Nation enjoyed an initial period of electoral success in the late 1990s, polling well at the 1998 Queensland state election⁶ and winning the third-highest vote count in both the House of Representatives and Senate at the 1998 federal election.
• Lockyer electorate. One of the electorates where One Nation had success in the 1998 Queensland state election was Lockyer, which was won by One Nation candidate Peter Prenzler⁷. This meant that One Nation was a reality that I had to contend with as coordinator of the 1998-99 Sustainable Management of the Helidon Hills Project, as discussed in part 6⁸ and part 7⁹ of this series. The Lockyer Valley¹⁰ is located a short distance west of Ipswich, and was also economically depressed in the 1990s.

• 

  Profound resurgence. In 2026, Hanson continues as One Nation’s leader. One Nation has had limited success in the nearly 30 years since the late 1990s, but is currently experiencing a profound resurgence. As shown in Figure 1, a mid-June 2026 poll¹¹ has seen Hanson become the preferred Prime Minister for the first time (33%), ahead of current Prime Minister Anthony Albanese (Australian Labor Party) (29%). and opposition leader Angus Taylor (Liberal Party of Australia) (16%). One Nation is also the most popular party in the state of Victoria¹², where there is a state election on 28 November 2026 and the current governing Labor Party is in serious disarray¹³.

• Continued stance against immigration. Hanson is continuing to criticise immigration and immigrants. This includes claiming that there are no “good Muslims”¹⁴ and an upheld court ruling which found she racially discriminated against Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi¹⁵, who she had told to “pack your bags and piss off back to Pakistan.”

Why it’s complex

• Popular narratives versus evidence-based reality. Soon after Hanson had echoed the popular narrative that “Aboriginals received more benefits than non-Aboriginals” in our late 1980s chats, I would engage directly with the Yuggera First Nation in Ipswich, as I discuss in part 3¹⁶ of this series. Through this engagement, I would find the reality to be the opposite – First Nations people were experiencing extreme disadvantage, and while there have been some improvements in their situation since, there is still a long way to go. As I discuss in another RealKM Magazine article¹⁷, this is not the only example of a popular Australian narrative being very much divorced from the evidence-based reality.
• Immigration is painted in ultra-simplistic terms. Immigration to Australia is often painted in ultra-simplistic “good” or “bad” or “too low” or “too high” terms. This is shown for example in the very different results of two investigations. On the one hand, a study¹⁸ by the Australian Government Centre for Population and OECD reports that¹⁹ migrants boost the labour productivity of Australian‑born workers, migration boosts the employment of the Australian‑born population and does not affect its wages, and migration boosts patenting in Australia. On the other hand, research²⁰ by the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), a right-wing think tank, concludes that “Australia’s increased reliance on migration in 2023 means that Australians were individually $7,848 poorer on a per capita basis and has totalled $80,038 since 2000.”
• Immigration reality is complex and under-addressed. Immigration in Australia is highly politicised, including by Hanson²¹ who seeks to maintain and further grow her support base through a very vocal hardline anti-immigration stance. However, 55% of Australians²² now say the total number of migrants coming to Australia is “too high.” To consider this majority of Australians as a mass of unthinking people who have just blindly swallowed the political rhetoric is also ultra-simplistic. While some people can be expected to have been influenced, a 2023 Review of the Migration System²³ for the Australian Government’s Department of Home Affairs finds very valid grounds for concern. The Review report identifies numerous flaws in immigration policy, and states that:

Australia’s migration program is not fit for purpose. The objectives of the program are unclear, and successive governments and policymakers have responded to challenges through piecemeal reforms which have not addressed fundamental underlying issues …

Migration legislation is complex and difficult to navigate, reflecting the complexity of policy settings.

• Disillusioned and wanting change. As shown in Figure 2, new research²⁴ published this week shows that while immigration is a key factor in the voter swing towards One Nation, the surge is driven more by anti-major party sentiment and a personal regard for Pauline Hanson. The trend away from major parties has been growing for some time in Australia²⁵. A factor in this is cost of living increases²⁶ that are greater than wages growth²⁷, with 1 in 8 households not having the money to buy enough food²⁸. But, as reflected in Figure 2, bigger factors are the community wanting change, which is being caused by disillusionment over broken political promises²⁹ and the feeling that the major parties are not in tune with community realities and needs, and not interested in meaningfully engaging with the community to gain better understandings and co-create solutions. For example, despite a majority of Australians³⁰ thinking that Australia’s migrant numbers are “too high” and the Australian Government’s own Review of the Migration System³¹ finding significant flaws in migration policy that need to be addressed, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese prefers to say³² “as little as possible.” The reasons for the community’s current level of disillusionment parallel those of the 1990s when Hanson first entered politics and One Nation was founded, as I discuss in part 6³³ of this series.

• Hanson connects with tacit knowledge and lived experience. As Australians turn away from the major political parties, a significant reason that they are turning towards Pauline Hanson and One Nation is that she is doing what the major parties are failing to do – connect with the tacit knowledge³⁴ and lived experience³⁵ of the community.

This engagement is what Hanson did in her fish and chip shop in the 1980s and 1990s. In her own words³⁶:

This is where I got to speak to grass roots Australians about the problems we were experiencing, and I say ‘we’ because I went through it as well. That is something politicians today don’t understand.

This engagement is what Hanson is still doing. Award-winning filmmaker, nonfiction author, and Sydney University media researcher Anna Broinowski writes that³⁷:

Hanson has this X factor that most career politicians can only dream of having. She has a way of just absolutely focusing in on you and listening to you with her whole being, and she projects an air of vulnerability, but also empathy.

Approach

• Achieving meaningful citizen participation. Fundamental reform is needed across governments and the public sector to ensure meaningful and ongoing stakeholder and community knowledge engagement.

The recent OECD report³⁸ Exploring New Frontiers in Citizen Participation in the Policy Cycle identifes systemic challenges and proposes lines of action for the future, advising that:

Many people feel that their voices are not being heard, despite a myriad of opportunities for citizens to contribute to public debate and policy. Policymakers are increasingly faced with complex policy issues that require careful trade-offs between the long and short term and across different groups in society. Meaningful citizen participation in policymaking is now critical …

Achieving meaningful citizen participation will require concerted action by adopting a strategic and targeted approach to citizen participation, lowering barriers to enable more inclusive participation, building capacity among both civil servants and citizens, and ensuring impact and accountability.

This advice is echoed by the recent University of Canberra Centre for Deliberative Democracy report³⁹ Bridging the Gap: Citizens, Elected Officials and Deliberative Engagement in Australian Democracy, which puts forward approaches and mechanisms for deliberative citizen engagement, stating that:

[I]f trust continues to erode and citizens feel their voices don’t matter, the foundations of Australia’s democratic system will weaken.

At the heart of this challenge lies a widening gap between citizens and their elected representatives. Australians continue to believe in democratic ideals, but they want a system that listens, responds, and meaningfully engages them in the decisions that shape their lives. Bridging this disconnection is essential to rebuilding public trust and strengthening the resilience of Australian democracy …

Demand exists for the creation of deliberative spaces where citizens are recognised not merely as voters, but as contributors whose input and ideas can be meaningfully integrated into parliamentary work. Deliberative forums not only signal that leaders are listening; they also provide a constructive channel through which disaffection can be converted into democratic participation.

Other RealKM Magazine resources supporting meaningful and ongoing stakeholder and community knowledge engagement include “Knowledge management approaches that public administrations are actually using” part 1⁴⁰ and part 2⁴¹.

• Case study. As shown in Figure 3, the Sustainable Management of the Helidon Hills Project⁴², which I coordinated in One Nation heartland in 1998-99, is a case study of the successful application of deliberative engagement approaches.

• Public good policy. Meaningful and ongoing stakeholder and community knowledge engagement needs to be supported by policies that truly serve the public good, as described in the recent publication⁴⁴ The Policy Playbook: Bending the arc of policy towards public good, which advises that:

Whether you are crafting new policies, reforming existing systems, or leading teams through change, this playbook equips you with the tools and mindset needed to bend the arc of policy towards positive outcomes for communities and society at large.

Outcomes

• An unclear future. At the time of writing this article, it is not clear if the renewed popularity of Pauline Hanson and One Nation will translate into election wins, and if it does, what the consequences of that will be. But I hope that recognition of the reasons for the resurgence could lead to long overdue reform across governments and the public sector to ensure meaningful and ongoing stakeholder and community knowledge engagement.

Lessons

• Essential aspect of knowledge engagement (KM). Meaningful and ongoing stakeholder and community knowledge engagement is an essential aspect of societal knowledge management (KM)⁴⁵.
• The knowledge management (KM) community needs to both lead and lead by example. The global knowledge management (KM) community needs to play a leading role in encouraging and facilitating meaningful and ongoing stakeholder and community knowledge engagement. In doing so, the KM community needs to lead by example, which it is has not been adequately doing, with the KM community’s own processes sometimes being closed or elitist rather than open to the widest possible participation. One example of a closed process is the development process for ISO 30401:2018 Knowledge management systems – Requirements⁴⁶. Just as is happening with Pauline Hanson and One Nation, involving only selected people in the development of ISO 30401 resulted in a backlash⁴⁷ and has contributed to poor uptake of the standard⁴⁸. Another example of a closed process is the development of the Knowledge Management (KM) Map⁴⁹, which does not appropriately represent the role of RealKM in KM because our knowledge was not sought in its preparation. This is in contrast to the open process of the later KM Landscape @2025 project⁵⁰ which has actively sought our involvement. Another example of an open process is the KM Triversary Forum 2025⁵¹, which engaged as many stakeholders as possible in not only understanding the complexity of the research-practice gap in KM, but collectively making sense of all of those understandings to chart a way forward.

Header image source: Jfish92 on Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain.

References: