Angus Taylor’s hard line on migration is not an accident. It’s a choice

April 14, 2026 — 12:00pm

You have reached your maximum number of saved items.

Remove items from your saved list to add more.

Save this article for later

Add articles to your saved list and come back to them anytime.

Angus Taylor’s hardline speech on migration is not an accident. It’s a deliberate choice.

He was elected Liberal leader to restore the Coalition’s fortunes and win back supporters who have deserted it for One Nation.

On Tuesday, he delivered a provocative speech on immigration policy that borrows from Pauline Hanson and US President Donald Trump. It will shock some voters, but strike a chord with many others.

The federal opposition was bitterly divided over immigration during Sussan Ley’s stint as leader, while the party has been bleeding votes to a resurgent One Nation for months, trading on its enduring anti-immigration stance.

Angus Taylor claims too many self-serving migrants are draining the nation

In September last year, support for One Nation rose to 12 per cent in the Resolve Political Monitor, the first time it had reached double figures. Its primary vote support rose to 24 per cent in the March poll, while the Coalition recorded a lower primary vote than the far-right party for the first time, at just 22 per cent.

But it’s one thing for Hanson, who has a long history of campaigning against immigration, to make inflammatory remarks.

It’s another thing entirely for Taylor, the leader of one of Australia’s two parties of government, to do so.

Nationals leader Matt Canavan also spoke last week about making it harder to become an Australian citizen. Taylor’s speech is another demonstration that the rise of One Nation has badly spooked the Coalition, despite claims to the contrary from MPs, and how far the Liberals will go to win back voters after two brutal election losses.

Before she was replaced as leader, Ley and her team were crafting an immigration policy that they hoped would satisfy both the moderate and conservative wings of the Liberal Party, win back voters from One Nation and serve as a springboard to attack Labor.

The policy was never released, though much of the detail leaked. Based on what we know, Taylor’s policy is more hardline and barely attempts to strike the balance Ley sought.

Taylor is essentially gambling that he can win back support among those who have abandoned the Liberals for One Nation, by moving much closer to Hanson on immigration policy while sounding much tougher than Labor on illegal migrants.

Taken in isolation, some of Taylor’s statements sound anodyne. Many will agree with him that migrants to this country should sign up (at least figuratively) to Australian values such as freedom of religion, a fair go and English as the national language.

No one wants radicals, extremists and terrorists entering the country. Some of the proposals, such as enhanced screening, have merit and are already in use when security organisations think they are warranted.

Some people will agree that migrants from liberal democracies have a greater likelihood of subscribing to Australian values than those migrating from places “ruled by fundamentalists, extremists, and dictators”, as Taylor puts it.

But many migrants from oppressive regimes come to Australia precisely because this nation is a liberal democracy that is safe, free and rich.

Taylor concedes this point when he talks about the migrants who came to Australia and built the Snowy Hydro project. His years in business mean he knows how much this country relies on workers from overseas.

But suggesting that Australia is on the same “disastrous road” as Europe is the sort of claim that Trump might make.

Mandatory social media screening and swift deportations are versions of Trump policies.

Australia is vulnerable. That’s not in doubt. Can our leaders keep us secure? We’re about to find out

Peter HartcherPolitical and international editor

Political and international editor

It’s inflammatory to claim that many migrants are a net drain on our economy, while it’s worse to argue the entire cohort of about 1300 Gazans who made it to Australia “present a clear risk to our country”. Perhaps some of the Gaza cohort need to be re-screened. But all of them?

Taylor is tapping into the growing anti-immigrant sentiment in rich liberal democracies. A crackdown on migration might win back support from One Nation.

But as former Liberal MP Keith Wolahan wrote in a recent essay, the number of people born overseas has increased from 23 per cent in 1996 to 32 per cent now. More than 50 per cent of people have at least one parent born overseas, and it’s 70 per cent in Wolahan’s former seat of Menzies.

The Coalition is already struggling to reconnect with migrant communities such as Indian- and Chinese-Australians, who have been insulted by Jane Hume’s “Chinese spies” comment or Jacinta Nampijinpa Price’s claim that Labor had increased Indian migration to boost their voter base.

It should be harder to become an Australian citizen: Canavan

For every voter Taylor might win back from One Nation, he risks losing another to Labor or teal independents and angering Liberal moderates in what is supposed to be a broad-church party room. It also risks repeating the failed attempts by Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton to win elections by appealing to disaffected voters, particularly in outer suburban and regional areas.

More than the political fallout, it risks fraying social cohesion.

One Nation voters might also decide they’ll stick with the original immigration policy hardliner in Hanson, rather than the knock-off replica that Taylor is offering.

Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.

You have reached your maximum number of saved items.

Remove items from your saved list to add more.

© Brisbane Times