One Nation unveils plan to cut Australia’s temporary migration by 750,000 over three years

Consensus Summary

One Nation unveiled a sweeping plan on September 13, 2026, to slash Australia’s temporary visa holders by more than 750,000 over three years, targeting international students and families of skilled migrants. The policy, announced by leader Pauline Hanson, aims to return temporary visa numbers to 2017 levels of approximately 2.1 to 2.2 million and impose a net-negative migration rate for the first three years before capping net overseas migration (NOM) at 130,000 annually. Key measures include reducing student visas to 100,000 per year—down from current levels reported as high as 590,000—and eliminating family visas for skilled migrants, except for high-value postgraduate students. The plan also introduces stricter enforcement for unlawful non-citizens, offering a three-month grace period before imposing lifetime bans for those who remain.

The proposal follows months of political pressure to address housing shortages, strained public services, and public dissatisfaction with high migration levels. Labor’s Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke had delayed a planned National Press Club address in August to outline migration cuts, originally targeting a reduction from 301,000 in 2025 to 245,000 in 2026-27 and 225,000 in 2027-28. One Nation’s announcement preempted Labor’s delayed policy, framing its plan as necessary to ease pressure on housing, healthcare, and wages. The timing coincides with rising public concern over living costs and infrastructure gaps, which Hanson attributes to ‘mass migration’ enabled by the major parties.

Key figures responded sharply to the plan. Pauline Hanson defended the policy as a response to ‘Australians doing it tough,’ citing competition for rental housing, hospital bed shortages, and youth exclusion from homeownership. Labor frontbencher Murray Watt warned the cuts would ‘destroy regional economies’ and risk recession, while Liberal Deputy Jane Hume criticized the lack of economic modeling behind the proposal. Hanson’s comments about Anthony Albanese’s late mother—living in public housing for decades—resurfaced in a February podcast, sparking backlash from Hume, who called the remarks ‘gratuitous and unnecessary.’ Barnaby Joyce defended Hanson, arguing the focus should be on housing availability rather than personal attacks.

Coverage diverged on the plan’s feasibility and impact. The Guardian reported former immigration official Abul Rizvi estimated enforcement would cost ‘many billions of dollars,’ requiring raids on workplaces, expanded detention centers, and legal compensation for wrongful deportations. Aged care providers warned the plan would force regional facilities to close due to labor shortages, while business groups cautioned against arbitrary migration targets. ABC highlighted confusion within One Nation about defining net migration, with MPs struggling to clarify whether backpackers or seasonal workers would be included. THEWEST noted speculation of policy leaks from the Liberal Party to One Nation, while 7NEWS emphasized the plan’s potential to disrupt regional industries reliant on migrant workers.

The political fallout remains unresolved, with Labor and the Coalition still finalizing their own migration policies. Labor’s delayed announcement and internal debates over linking migration to housing construction suggest ongoing uncertainty. One Nation’s aggressive stance has shifted the debate, with both major parties now scrambling to address public concerns without repeating Hanson’s more extreme measures. The next steps include Labor’s eventual policy release, Coalition negotiations on housing-linked migration caps, and potential legal and economic challenges to One Nation’s enforcement proposals.