And One Nation are harping on about immigration again. Now they have come up with a negative migration plan.
One Nation wants to slash migration. New analysis suggests the budget could receive something else instead: another 275 billion dollars in debt over a decade.
That’s quite a substantial item to discover in the policy’s checked baggage.
Reporting today examines a scenario using Parliamentary Budget Office tools to estimate the consequences of One Nation’s migration targets.
The party wants three years of negative net migration – more people leaving Australia than arriving – before allowing a smaller positive intake.
The analysis projects fewer workers, lower tax collections and substantially higher debt compared with the baseline.
But here’s the qualification: this is scenario modelling using PBO tools, not a definitive costing of a fully detailed One Nation policy, which One Nation doesn’t have yet.
The assumptions matter. Change the types of migrants, workforce participation or other policies, and the results can change.
An economic model is a calculator with assumptions, not a crystal ball wearing a Treasury lanyard.
Still, the underlying question is serious.
Migrants need homes and services. Many also work, pay taxes, build houses and staff hospitals.
Reducing arrivals can ease some pressures while creating others.
If fewer people are earning taxable incomes, governments need to explain how they’ll fund their promises.
The hospital doesn’t accept “we reduced migration” as payment for a new operating theatre.
My view? Concerns about housing and infrastructure deserve answers. People struggling to find a home shouldn’t be dismissed.
But a migration target needs a workforce plan and published budget analysis alongside it. They seem to not have any answers to these questions.
One Nation should explain which workers would remain, how essential industries would be staffed, and what spending or revenue changes would offset the projected shortfall. They seem to not have any answers to these questions.
And, of course, the major parties should face the same scrutiny.
A bigger economy doesn’t automatically mean better living standards for everyone. Equally, a smaller intake doesn’t automatically mean a healthier budget.
Demand the details.
Because a policy promising fewer arrivals shouldn’t wave an extra 275 billion dollars through without anyone checking the paperwork.
We hope you enjoyed this article. To read all our business articles, please click here.
Please check out our online shop where you can buy all our Doctor Who and Star Trek books as paperbacks or eBooks.
Please check out our video podcast, “Australia Asks”. There are interviews with Australian federal politicians and political commentators, as well as special features addressing current political issues.
Follow us on Social Media
Leave a Reply