PAULINE HANSON WAS RIGHT
A factcheck of Pauline Hanson's maiden speech 26 years later [5 Minute Read]
Exactly 26 years ago last week, on the 10th September 1996 newly elected member for Oxley, Pauline Hanson would stand before parliament and deliver her now-infamous maiden speech. The predictions and claims made in this 20 minute speech instantly garnered her a reputation for ‘racism’.
The iconic maiden speech remains shockingly relevant, the fact that quotes such as “This is our land.’ Well, where the hell do I go?” and “I believe we are in danger of being swamped by Asians” are still remembered to this day prove Mrs Hanson struck a chord with Australian’s nationwide.
So, 26 years after the fact, today The National Observer will be analysing Pauline Hansons maiden speech to answer one simple question. Was Pauline Hanson’s maiden speech full of illogical racism or were her claims and predictions correct?
Click the underlined headings to read corresponding paragraph of the speech
1. Aboriginals receive more benefits than non-Aboriginals
Regardless of whether mainstream sensibilities deem Mrs Hanson ‘racist’ for stating it, Aboriginal’s do in fact receive a greater amount of government provided benefits than other Australian citizens. In terms of government assistance, aiatsis.gov.au lists a series of grants available to those who can verify their Aboriginal ancestry, including indigenous housing loans, research and study grants, university courses with specific Indigenous positions and Indigenous specific employment. According to aihw.gov.au, on a per-person basis, Indigenous Australians receive $13,968 of government welfare expenditure, compared to $6,019 per non-Indigenous person.
Another specific example given by Mrs. Hanson of preferential treatment is “when they can obtain three and five per cent housing loans denied to non-Aboriginals.” In 2022 The ‘Indigenous Home Ownership scheme loan’ given by ‘Indigenous Business Australia’ allows an individual to put down a minimum deposit of 3% in some cases, a service once again not afforded to other Australians.
Pauline Hanson was correct about Aboriginal benefits
2. Reverse racism
Pauline Hanson claimed that ‘reverse racism’ is being applied by “those who control the various taxpayer funded ‘industries’ that flourish in our society servicing Aboriginals, multiculturalists and a host of other minority groups”
“Reverse racism” is a term commonly used to describe racism against European populations in countries with a majority European population. Examples of this ‘reverse racism’ would be anti-white media bias or discrimination in university admission and hiring practices.
Mrs Hanson identifies “Those who promote political correctness” as the perpetrators of reverse racism, in the context of her speech these promoters subscribe to ideological liberalism and strive to silence dissenting conservative voices, such as her own.
Australia possesses various bodies “who promote political correctness”, immediately activist organisations such as the ‘Anti Defamation Commission’ come to mind alongside an undisputed heavyweight of political correctness enforcement, Australia’s mainstream media. I will briefly draw the reader's attention to the Greens party which ticks each of the boxes Mrs Hanson outlined: they ‘promote political correctness’, are ‘taxpayer funded’ and ‘flourish in our society servicing Aboriginals, multiculturalists and a host of other minority groups’
The greens frequently employ reverse racism, making claims about white Australian history and culture they would never dare to level at any of Australia’s migrant or Aboriginal communities.
Pauline Hanson was correct about Reverse Racism
3. Anti-Conservatism is driven by ‘fat cats, bureaucrats and the do-gooders’
Mrs Hanson claimed that her loudest detractors were “fat cats, bureaucrats and the do-gooders” who’s “power, money and position” were derived from their perceived support of Indigenous issues
For examples of some of the ‘noise’ made by bureaucrats and do-gooders I will once again raise the example from earlier in the article, the Greens party has screamed the loudest because it has gained the most. It has repeatedly and successfully weaponised Australia’s history to shame and control those who question any element of the government's endless failed attempts to improve Indigenous quality of life. Alongside them, the current Labor government has spared no time in pushing ‘the voice to parliament’ which will add yet another layer of bureaucracy to the Australian government.
Talk about money here
Pauline Hanson was correct, her greatest opponents are the rich, beurecrats and ‘do-gooders’
4. $40 million has been spent on native title claims since Mabo
Pauline Hanson in 1996 claimed that $40 million had been spent on native title cases, reminding her audience that “the $40 million spent so far in native title has gone into the pockets of grateful lawyers and consultants. Not one native title has been granted as I speak.”
A lot has changed since Mrs Hanson made this claim, in 2022 more than 100 native title cases have succeeded, meaning a total of 32% of Australia’s landmass has been claimed under native title. In terms of compensation, $3.3 million has been paid out by the Australian government in the case of Northern Territory v Mr A Griffiths and Lorraine Jones on behalf of the Ngaliwurru and Nungali Peoples.
In the same paragraph Mrs Hanson claims that “$1 billion has been made available to compensate in cases of failed native title claims.” Although this 1 billion is yet to be spent in its entirety, the abovementioned legal case may have just paved the way to future compensation spending in the range of multiple billions.
The Sydney Morning Herald quotes Ashurst partner Tony Denholder who stated that the “Northern Territory v Mr A Griffiths and Lorraine Jones” legal case will have “strong implications for the more than 2.8million square kilometers of native title land holdings across the rest of Australia.” and that “It is likely that nationally, the liability for native title compensation will run into the billions of dollars”.
Pauline Hanson was correct Native Title expenses at the time of delivering her speech
5. Standard of living decrease
Mrs Hanson claimed that “our standard of living has dropped over the past 10 years”, this remains a very real possibility, only last year a report was released that echoed Mrs Hansons concerns, making the claim that Australian living standards will plunge over the next 10 years.
Further, her claim that Australia has experienced “no wage increase” has only grown increasingly apparent and pressing with time. The Australian Bereu of Statistics revealed just before the 2022 federal election that the wage price index rose only 2.3%, outpaced by the 3.5% increase in inflation. Since 2013 private sector wages have only grown an abysmal 1.4% above inflation.
This stagnant wage growth, in conjunction with the skyrocketing cost of living in most Australian major cities could very well be the long decline in standards of living observed by Mrs Hanson.
Pauline Hanson was correct about a declining standard of living
6. “We lost all our big Australian industries and icons”
Its no secret that Australia has been loosing its entire manufacturing industry. The most prominent example of this was the loss of car manufacuring, ‘icons’ such as Ford and Holden picked up and moved overseas, just like Mrs Hanson predicted.
According to Ai Group, Australia’s manufacturing employment peaked in the 1970’s and has experienced steep decline since, covid policy stifling any chance at a possible recovery.
Unfortunately however owever manufacturing is not the only industry disapearing, Mrs Hanson in her speech mentioned the governments intentions to sell off one of Australia’s largest companies, Telstra. In 1997 the government sold one third of Telstra on the sharemarket and later in 1999 an additional 16.6%. The remaining 52% is still held to this day by the Australian government, though it would not be surprising if the company was completely privatised. Telstra estimates 19.8% of these shares are foreign owned.
Pauline Hanson was correct about the loss of Australian industries.
7. “Most Australians want our immigration policy radically reviewed”
If it wasnt apparent 26 years ago, it certainly is today: Australia is full. Our roads are clogged, wages stagnant, environment suffering and housing prices are soaring. These are just some of the very tangible and negative consequences of Australia’s unlimited inlet of migrants. A recent survey conducted by ‘The Australian Population Research Institute’ found that only 19% of the population wanted to see an increase in immigration after covid-19. Double that amount, 42% of those surveyed to be exact wanted to see a reduction in Australia’s migrant intake and a whole 28% wanted to see net 0 immigration. (11% voted ‘don't know’). Unfortunately the opinion of the overwhelming majority of Australians has not at all curbed Australia's migration levels, instead the Albanese government has announced plans to increase migration to an unprecedented high.
Pauline Hanson was correct about immigration.
8. “We are in danger of being swamped by Asians”
One of the most memorable predictions of Pauline Hanson's maiden speech has undeniably come to fruition.
‘Swamped’ is defined by Oxford Languages as “overwhelm with an excessive amount of something; inundate”, if we look past her emotive language, the statistic at the core of Mrs Hanson's statement is undeniably true. Australia’s ethnically Asian population has grown tremendously. Although the Australian Bureau of statistics does not provide the precise ethnic composition of Australia, we do know that 17.4% of respondents listed their ancestry as Asian in the 2021 census. Considering Asian-Australians were only 5.4% of Australia’s population in 1996 this is a massive increase
Once the emotive language of ‘swamping’ is stripped back, it becomes impossible to deny cold hard statistic lying at the base of Mrs Hanson's statement: Australia’s ethnically Asian population has grown at an incredibly fast pace.
Pauline Hanson was correct about Asian demographic trends.
Conclusion
Unlike many others who have come and gone, throughout her political career Mrs Hanson has remained close to the spotlight, continuing to run her own minor political party ‘One Nation’. Mrs Hanson has stood as one of Australia’s few principled conservatives and for that she can expect history to remember her name.
She is also overwhelmingly correct in the claims she makes throughout her maiden speech, 7 out of the 8 main predictions or claims made in Pauline Hanson’s maiden speech were entirely accurate. The remaining claim, number 4 in this article, though at the time correct is now outdated - only serving to further prove Mrs Hansons point.
All this being the case I would like to draw the readers attention back to the point made in the introduction to this article. Despite all the insults, slander and accusations of ‘racism’ thrown against her, Pauline Hanson has repeatedely demonstrated her uncanny ability to percieve the most pressing complications facing Australia.
So, was Pauline Hanson’s maiden speech full of illogical racism or was she correct? Unfortunately, it appears she was correct.