One Nation’s immigration policy is hard to define - even by its own MPs

One Nation’s Immigration Policy: A Moving Target

Australia’s migration debate has increasingly revolved around a single acronym: NOM, or net overseas migration. The term has become a shorthand for how tough each party claims to be on migration, yet it remains widely misunderstood. This week, One Nation found itself at the centre of that confusion when its newest MP suggested the party’s figures were “not too different” from Labor’s — a comment that was quickly walked back by colleagues.

The exchange highlights a broader pattern for One Nation, which has repeatedly struggled to articulate a consistent immigration policy since 2025. The party’s official position, as stated on its website before 2025, was zero net migration, permitting only highly skilled migrants from “culturally cohesive” countries. In early 2025, the party updated that policy to cap visas at 130,000 per year, though it was unclear whether that meant permanent migration or a net overseas migration cap.

Since then, statements from One Nation members have varied widely. In March 2025, Senator Malcolm Roberts told the Senate that the 130,000 cap would result in negative net immigration of 90,000 a year, given around 220,000 departures annually. In August 2025, Pauline Hanson said in a Senate speech that the party’s policy was to cap immigration “at approximately 130,000 per year.” By November 2025, NSW senator Sean Bell proposed net zero migration for five years in a private member’s bill. In March 2026, Roberts posted on social media that immigration policy should be guided by “negative Net Immigration until housing & infrastructure catch up.”

During the Farrer byelection campaign in April 2026, David Farley, One Nation’s newest MP, said a NOM rate of 306,000 was “probably not” too many. A month later he clarified it was “way too many,” reiterating the 130,000 cap. In August 2026, Hanson said she wanted “net migration [of] about 130,000,” then added she wanted “130,000 as the permanent number.”

The most recent confusion arose on Sunday, when Farley told ABC’s Insiders that the party’s NOM target was 130,000, but that “on top of” that, other programs such as PALM workers and aged care nurses would add around 100,000 more places “at a minimum.” Farley suggested the final figure was “not too different” from Labor’s.

Barnaby Joyce quickly moved to correct the record, saying Farley’s comments were a mistake by “an early career politician” and that there would not be an extra 100,000 on top of the 130,000 NOM target. Joyce also said people should “ignore” PALM scheme entrants because they often stay under 12 months and would not be counted in NOM. Hanson, meanwhile, clarified on X that One Nation’s NOM target was 130,000 and signalled a “dramatic” reduction in temporary graduate visas and international students. Notably, Hanson deleted a March social media post suggesting capping arrivals at 130,000 per year combined with departures of 230,000 to reach a negative NOM of minus 100,000.

The NOM Explained

Net overseas migration is the overall gain or loss of population through long-term arrivals and departures. The figure counts people who have arrived in Australia and stayed for a year or more, minus those who have left to live overseas. Importantly, that year does not have to be continuous: the NOM uses a “12/16-month rule,” counting people who have stayed in Australia for 12 months out of a 16-month period. Foreign diplomats and their families are not included.

The NOM includes not just foreigners on visas, but also Australian citizens and permanent residents returning home after long stints overseas, as well as New Zealand citizens moving to Australia. This makes the number difficult to control through visa policy alone, as the movement of Australians and New Zealanders is largely unpredictable.

According to the latest data, released in June, the NOM stood at 300,960 for the year to December 2025. That is well down from the post-pandemic peak of 556,000 in 2023. The federal budget forecasts NOM will decline to 225,000 from 2027-28.

In 2024-25, the largest cohort contributing to NOM was international students, at 156,700. Permanent and temporary skilled visas combined brought in around 86,000 people, working holiday-makers contributed around 78,000, family visas around 24,000, and humanitarian visas just under 15,000. Notably, 64,000 overseas migrant arrivals were Australian citizens and 53,000 were New Zealanders.

Where the Parties Stand

Beyond One Nation, the major parties are also wrestling with how to frame their migration targets. The Coalition has not finalised its NOM target but wants to tie it to housing construction rates, with shadow treasurer Angus Taylor saying it will be “well below 200,000.” Liberal senator Andrew Bragg floated a NOM of 180,000, saying, “We want fewer pastry chefs and more builders.” Nationals leader Matt Canavan said touching working holiday visas was off the cards.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese labelled the Treasury NOM forecast of 225,000 by 2028 a target, and accused the Coalition and One Nation of throwing around NOM numbers “like confetti, with no real plan.” He also said skilled migration was important for aged care, agriculture, and construction.

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke postponed a National Press Club address expected to outline Labor’s migration policies, and has paused or slowed processing of working holiday and skilled visas.

As the migration debate intensifies, the NOM remains a complex and often misinterpreted metric. For One Nation, defining a clear and consistent position has proved elusive, even for its own members.