We're not entertaining or discussing or being part of a coalition with One Nation
On a Sunday morning in mid-2026, Australia's conservative political order found itself confronting a fracture it could no longer paper over with denial. As One Nation's primary vote climbed to rival Labor's and eclipse the Coalition's own, Liberal frontbencher Dan Tehan appeared on national television to insist that no alliance talks were underway — even as senior colleagues publicly proposed exactly that. It is a familiar tension in democratic politics: the moment when a movement's internal contradictions become too large to contain, and the question of who speaks for the right ceases to have a clean answer.
- One Nation has surged to 26–30% in primary polling, overtaking the Coalition at 23% and nearly matching Labor, turning what was once a fringe party into the dominant force on the Australian right.
- The Coalition is visibly tearing itself apart — one frontbencher declares 'war' on Hanson, another floats seat-sharing deals, a Nationals senator offers to campaign for One Nation, and the former prime minister endorses preference arrangements.
- Dan Tehan's flat denials on ABC's Insiders collided with the public record of his own colleagues, leaving the opposition's official position looking less like strategy and more like managed confusion.
- Tony Abbott's London speech invoking 'mass migration' as a threat to Anglo-Celtic culture deepened the crisis, forcing Tehan to distance himself from the Liberal party president while insisting the partyroom sets policy.
- Anthony Albanese seized the moment at the NSW Labor conference, framing the three conservative parties as an 'axis of grievance' in a race to the bottom — and the polling math gave him little reason to be wrong.
- Experts warn that without resolving its internal split, the Coalition faces structural barriers to electoral recovery that no rebranding or policy pivot can overcome on their own.
Dan Tehan appeared on ABC's Insiders on Sunday morning with a clear message: the Coalition was not discussing, entertaining, or pursuing any alliance with One Nation. The denial was firm. The problem was that his own colleagues were doing precisely the opposite.
The polling numbers had made the question unavoidable. A recent Guardian Essential poll placed Labor at 30%, One Nation at 26%, and the Coalition at just 23%. Pauline Hanson's party had become a genuine electoral force, expected to claim seats at the next election — most of them from Coalition MPs. Polling experts were already warning that this three-way split made it nearly impossible for the Liberals and Nationals to return to government without resolving their strategic relationship with One Nation.
The Coalition's response was fractured. Andrew Hastie had declared 'war' on Hanson's party. Tony Pasin had floated seat-sharing arrangements. Bridget McKenzie offered to campaign for One Nation in Labor-held seats. And former prime minister Tony Abbott, now serving as Liberal party president, had backed preference deals with Hanson. Tehan, pressed repeatedly, kept returning to the same line — but the line was increasingly difficult to hold.
Abbott's recent speech in London had complicated matters further. He had framed mass migration as a deliberate effort to erode Anglo-Celtic culture and Judaeo-Christian values — language that signalled where at least one senior Liberal figure believed the party should plant its flag. Tehan distanced himself carefully, noting he had only heard of the speech shortly before going on air, and suggested the partyroom, not the party president, would determine policy.
Prime Minister Albanese watched the chaos with visible satisfaction. Speaking to the NSW Labor conference, he labelled the three conservative parties an 'axis of grievance,' each competing to be more anti-worker and anti-aspiration than the last. The opposition's problem, he said, was not its messaging — it was its product.
Tehan pivoted to attacking Labor's reversal on negative gearing and capital gains tax, but the argument felt thin against the larger reality. The conservative vote had genuinely split, and no amount of denial from the frontbench could change the arithmetic. The longer the Coalition remained divided on how to respond to One Nation's rise, the more that rise was likely to continue.
Dan Tehan stood firm on Sunday morning television, denying what his own party seemed to be quietly considering. The Liberal frontbencher told ABC's Insiders that a coalition with One Nation was not being discussed, not even entertained, despite mounting evidence that senior colleagues were doing exactly that. The question had become unavoidable: as One Nation's primary vote climbed into the high twenties and low thirties—nearly matching Labor and dwarfing the Coalition's own standing—could the conservative side of politics afford to keep pretending it wasn't fracturing?
The numbers told a stark story. Last week's Guardian Essential poll showed Labor at 30%, One Nation at 26%, and the Coalition at 23%. Pauline Hanson's party had become a genuine electoral force, and polling experts were already warning that this three-way split made it nearly impossible for the Liberals and Nationals to return to government on their own. One Nation was expected to pick up swathes of seats at the next election, mostly from Coalition MPs. The math was brutal and unavoidable.
Yet the Coalition's response was anything but unified. Andrew Hastie, a frontbencher, had vowed "war" on Hanson's party. Tony Pasin, a junior shadow minister, had floated the idea of seat-sharing arrangements. Bridget McKenzie, a Nationals senator, suggested she would actively campaign for One Nation in Labor-held seats. And Tony Abbott, the former prime minister now serving as Liberal party president, had backed preference deals with Hanson's outfit. When pressed repeatedly on Insiders about whether an alliance was necessary, Tehan kept returning to the same denial: "We're not entertaining or discussing or being part of a coalition with One Nation."
Abbot's recent speech at the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship summit in London had added fuel to the fire. He had invoked "mass migration" as a deliberate strategy to "dilute and eventually to extinguish the Anglo-Celtic core culture and the Judaeo-Christian foundational ethos." The language was inflammatory, and it signaled where at least one senior Liberal figure thought the party should position itself. When Tehan was asked about Abbott's remarks, he distanced himself carefully, suggesting that the partyroom—not the party president—would set policy direction. He hadn't even heard the speech until shortly before going on air, he said.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was having a field day. Speaking to the NSW Labor conference on Sunday, he mocked the chaos unfolding on the right. He called the three conservative parties an "axis of grievance," each trying to outdo the others in being "more anti-fairness, more anti-worker, more anti-aspiration." The problem with the opposition, he said, wasn't their brand or their sales pitch—it was their product. It was a race to the bottom, and they were all competing in it.
Tehan's response to questions about arresting the Coalition's polling slide was to attack Labor's reversal on negative gearing and capital gains tax. But that argument felt thin against the larger reality: One Nation was eating the Coalition's lunch, and the party was tearing itself apart over how to respond. Some wanted to fight Hanson directly. Others wanted to work with her. And the longer the party remained divided on the question, the more One Nation's vote would likely grow. The fundamental problem wasn't messaging or rebranding—it was that the conservative vote had genuinely split, and no amount of denial from the frontbench could change that.
Notable Quotes
What I want to be part of is a Liberal party and a National party that in coalition runs this country again— Dan Tehan, Liberal frontbencher
It is the race to the bottom that all three rightwing parties are caught up in. They are the axis of grievance.— Anthony Albanese, Prime Minister
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does Tehan keep saying a coalition isn't being discussed when clearly people like Abbott and McKenzie are already working toward one?
Because there's a difference between what's happening in practice and what can be said in public. A formal coalition announcement would be politically toxic—it would look like desperation. So instead, you get preference deals, campaign help, seat-sharing proposals. It's a coalition in everything but name.
Is the Coalition actually divided, or is this just theater?
It's genuinely divided. Hastie wants to fight One Nation. Pasin wants to cooperate. Abbott wants preference deals. These aren't coordinated positions—they reflect real disagreement about whether One Nation is a threat or an opportunity.
What does Tehan's denial actually accomplish?
It buys time. It lets the party maintain the fiction that it's still a unified force while members pursue their own strategies. Once you admit you need One Nation, you've lost leverage in any future negotiation.
Is One Nation actually going to win a lot of seats?
Experts think so. They're polling at 26-30%, nearly as high as Labor. If that holds, they'll pick up seats mostly from Coalition MPs in regional and outer-suburban areas. That's the real threat—not just that One Nation will be powerful, but that they'll take Coalition seats.
What's Abbott's play with that speech about "Anglo-Celtic core culture"?
He's signaling where he thinks the party should position itself—as a defender of a particular cultural identity against what he frames as deliberate dilution through immigration. It's a way of saying One Nation isn't wrong about the threat, just maybe not the right vehicle to address it.
Can the Coalition actually win without resolving this?
Not according to the polling experts. The split vote makes it mathematically very difficult. They either need to reunify the conservative vote somehow, or they need to accept that they can't govern alone anymore.