Watching the rise of Pauline Hanson and the renewed chatter about One Nation as a plausible alternative government, it is worth applying a simple test of reality.
Strip away the slogans, the outrage and the grievance politics, and ask one basic question: are they equipped to govern?
The answer becomes stark if we translate politics into a setting Australians understand well: a school.
Imagine an established, high-performing school. Parents expect stability, professional leadership and strong outcomes. Now imagine sacking the experienced staff and replacing them with a whole school of first-year-out teachers with no formal training in education. No grounding in curriculum. No understanding of student welfare. No experience managing classrooms under pressure.
Then appoint a principal who has never held a leadership role, has no articulated vision for the school, seeks to exclude large parts of the community, turns up only about half the time — and still promises parents the top HSC results in the state.
That is what treating One Nation as a serious alternative government amounts to.
Government, like education, is not theatre. It is a craft. It requires experience, deep institutional knowledge, policy discipline, teamwork and the capacity to manage crises without improvisation or tantrums. One Nation has none of this. It offers anger instead of policy, slogans instead of costings, and protest instead of preparation.
Pauline Hanson has been in public life for decades, yet One Nation remains a party without a coherent policy framework across health, education, national security, climate or the economy. Its parliamentary presence has been sporadic and its internal organisation chaotic. The party cycles through candidates and staff with alarming speed, often leaving a trail of resignations, infighting and legal disputes. This is not a training ground for government; it is a warning sign.
Even Hanson’s own parliamentary record undercuts the claim that she is ready to lead. Leadership starts with showing up, mastering briefs, scrutinising legislation and doing the unglamorous work of governance – which she doesn’t. Hanson’s attendance record sits at around 50%. If this was school attendance it would be raising serious concerns, and she would be asked for a “please explain”. Turning politics into a rolling grievance tour does not build schools — or countries.
Supporters often argue that One Nation “speaks for the forgotten”. But representation without responsibility is not leadership. In education, we would never accept a teacher who “feels strongly” about students but refuses training, preparation or accountability. We understand instinct is no substitute for expertise when children’s futures are on the line.
The same is true of a nation’s future.
Australia faces complex challenges: workforce shortages, housing affordability, cost-of-living pressures, regional inequality, climate transition and geopolitical instability. These are not problems solved by protest votes or ideological shortcuts. They require the political equivalent of qualified teachers, experienced principals and a clear, evidence-based plan.
Treating One Nation as an alternative government is not an act of rebellion. It is an act of recklessness — like gambling a school’s future on inexperience and hoping outrage will magically produce excellence.
Anger can get you attention. It cannot get you results — and it is no foundation for One Nation as a serious alternative government.
Denise McHugh is an experienced educator in Tamworth. She is Chair of the NSW ALP Education and Skills Committee and Deputy President of the Independent Education Union (IEU).
Got something on your mind? Go on then, engage. Submit your opinion piece, letter to the editor, or Quick Word now.