One Nation has been at the forefront of migration policy. Many months ago, One Nation posted their policy which states, among other things, the deportation of 75,000 illegal migrants.

The material problem for the Coalition has been the overwhelming support conservative voters have for immigration hostility.

Whether it pertains to threats of imported religious wars that play out on the streets, Islamic terrorism, economic hardship for citizens, the undercutting of the labour market, unbearable pressure on housing, or the cultural collapse of cities – Australians are increasingly saying no to the Big Australia pushed by corporate interests.

What should have been a straightforward political correction to migration over a decade ago was fought against with ideological misinformation that wrongly labelled Australians racist or xenophobic for wishing their nations to remain Australian.

Even today, the Greens are calling out Angus Taylor’s new migration policy, which is still only a whisper of an idea, as ‘reintroducing elements of the White Australia Policy’. Awkward really, as people keep reminding the Left that this was a union-backed Labor Party policy.

Greens Senator David Shoebridge’s argument includes the line, ‘…actively excluding people on the basis of their country of origin, potentially on their religion…’

It is a sentiment that falls apart with even the slightest application of logic.

Not only do other countries strictly control the working ability of migrants and strongly affirm that citizens should be prioritised over visa-holders as if it were the most natural and moral order of things, Australians are smart enough to understand the difference between migration and being, to borrow from Pauline Hanson, swamped.

It would be interesting to see the Greens call out Beijing for racism or sexism given the demographic makeup of the CCP Politburo. Communism isn’t keen on diversity or inclusion.

Further, Australians know that they are uniquely punished, as Westerners, for wishing to embrace history, honour their ancestors, and build a future for their children. And those children have realised that the financial burden they undertook to give themselves a world-class education has been undermined by their government importing a cheap labour force to take their place and live in homes that were meant for them.

As leader of the Liberal Party, Angus Taylor would be well aware that continuing to ignore the concerns of voters on the issue of migration would be catastrophic.

Sure, Taylor could keep the moderates happy with a few winks in the direction of the development sector, but there is no guarantee that would translate to winning back the Teal seats when they are quite happy with their niche virtue signalling politicians. And while the big business and professional class might be happy, their CEOs only have one vote each…

One Nation is eating the LNP alive when it comes to Menzies’ ‘Forgotten People’ and many suspect that if Menzies were alive today, he’d probably stand beside Pauline Hanson.

If the Liberals don’t have the benefit of nostalgia, they won’t have anything at all.

It is therefore wise that Angus Taylor has copy-pasted One Nation’s policy footnotes into what Sky News Australia captioned on one of their videos: Angus Taylor to unveil mass deportation plan with ICE-style taskforce.

Australia has a non-discriminatory immigration program.

We do not discriminate based on nationality, race, gender, or faith.

But for an immigration program to work in the national interest it must discriminate based on values.

The Coalition is going to proudly put Australian… pic.twitter.com/yS2TOt06rO

— Angus Taylor MP (@AngusTaylorMP) April 14, 2026

The plan apparently centres around deporting 65,000 people who have overstayed their visas. (People who should have already been deported if the government was doing its job and following the law.)

To police this list of deportations, the Liberals are said to be considering a ‘safe country’ list which they could use to fast-track deportations. In other words, no more dallying around in the taxpayer-funded appeal system.

If they wanted to do something brave, they could refuse entry entirely to countries that play games with their lawbreaking exports. Australia follows the rules and conducts itself to a high standard and yet we tolerate the lowest of standards from others because we’re scared of the UN calling us mean.

Australians have been complaining that foreign applicants switch around through the visa system, misusing and abusing protection visas and student visas to gain backdoor entry to permanent residency to which they would otherwise not be entitled.

Most nations have a zero-tolerance policy for this, but Australia has a huge mix of taxpayer-funded bodies and legal entities set up to facilitate migration patterns Australians never agreed to. This is re-drafted as ‘human rights’ as if migration were an entitlement instead of a privilege granted by Australians under strict terms.

Over a year ago, it was pointed out that the government was only ‘able to locate a very small number over overstayers’. Which seems ridiculous, considering citizens find themselves with a knock on the door for mean tweets or a cent misplaced in their tax return. The idea that tens of thousands of people could just vanish adds to voter fury.

The government has further claimed that its bureaucracy isn’t big enough to deal with the problem. So obviously, it keeps letting hundreds of thousands of people in.

This isn’t only irresponsible, it’s insane, and the minister responsible has never given a good reason for doing so or failing in their role of border control.

If these tens of thousands of visa overstayers are not receiving public support, then they must be working. They must be on someone’s books. And if they are not on the books, then the businesses undercutting the labour market must be held to account.

Most people understand that visa overstayers could easily be dealt with and the problem resolved if the government wanted to ruffle a few feathers. Many suspect that Labor has been treading water on the issue for fear it might attract bad press from the hangers-on in the ‘social justice’ ecosystem.

The truth is, there needs to be a legislative change to remove the ability for migrants to object to their deportation, as other nations do. If you break the law, you should put on a plane – in handcuffs if necessary.

Further, anyone who came on a different visa should not be able to turn around and claim asylum. With Asia full of safe countries, it is dubious there are any asylum seekers except for those invited by the government. Legal help should be at their cost, not ours. Also, the ban on visa overstayers and those who abuse our system should be lifelong and institutions, such as businesses or universities, who facilitate a disproportionate number of bad-faith actors should face some form of penalty to force them to improve the checks made before sponsorship.

These are not popular sentiments at polite media parties hosted by the Left, but by gosh are they the dominant feeling within the middle and working classes who have had enough of ‘Hotel Australia’.

Angus Taylor’s problem is not the predictable outrage from Greens and Labor, or the noisy ravings of the media flock, it is whether or not he can convince conservatives that all corners of the broad church are sincere.

Can people trust the party that fed into the Big Australia problem? How strong is Taylor’s resolve when the Liberals have a history of buckling at the first mean headline? And even if they win the argument at the polls, will they follow through with 65,000 deportations?

Angus Taylor has to prove he is tough enough to enact a One Nation policy without losing his nerve.