Pauline Hanson warns Labor’s rushed hate speech laws threaten free speech.

January 15, 2026
In the aftermath of the Bondi terrorist attack the Albanese Labor government is introducing hate speech laws next week in Parliament in a Bill and explanation that is nearly 500 pages long.
These laws have been rushed with inadequate consultation with organisations, politicians, national security agencies and the general public.
Over the past four years we’ve seen how – time and time again – this government has rushed bills through only to see them fail to address the real problem. For example: the bill to address the release of detainees from detention centres just a few years ago. Many had heinous criminal offences and some reoffended after release yet nothing was done, and the rushed bill was a failure.

This is no doubt another one of those bills, but worse. Australians will be stripped of their freedom of speech, opinion and ability to express the pride they have in their culture and nationality.

I want to explain to the people my grave concerns about this manipulative, controlling, politically driven piece of legislation. It needs to be called out, and people have a right to be informed.

The PM wants to appear that he has Australians concerns at heart but when the public have less than two days to make a submission to a snap inquiry on the legislation, it’s obvious he is not interested in what you have to say.
Do I always get it right? No, but I am trying to inform you. Look at what's happened to a councillors in Britain for saying she was 'born and bred' there. It is up to you to fight back and send in a submission opposing this legislation, or accept it and live with the consequences.
Here are some concerns I have with just one section, 80.2BF.

‘Intimidation’, which is not defined in the Bill, and ‘to fear harassment’ are two very low bars that mean almost anything could be made a criminal offence. 'Fear' is a personal expression and we have seen in domestic violence courts that no evidence is needed to prove someone is in fear, so where is the onus of proof here. ‘Hatred’ is also very open to interpretation and vague.
So to criticise the immigration program and say migrants from certain countries shouldn't be accepted into Australia will be an offence. Government has recently put tougher requirements on student visas from India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan - haven't they just committed an offence based on someone's national origin?

Talking about banning the burqa certainly will be an offence.
Criticising the immigration program would probably be an offence because that may cause migrants to feel intimidated because of their national origin.

Subsection (1)(b)(ii) could make someone saying ‘Australia is the best country in the world’ a criminal subject to 5 years in prison. Will flying the Australian flag be an offence as well? That’s disseminating ideas of superiority (the best) over a group of people based on their national origin (not being Australian).
Subsection (3) says for the purposes of subsection 1 it is IMMATERIAL for the offence whether anyone actually felt intimidated or feared harassment, or even whether they were the national or ethnic origin targeted.
Subsection (4) means - quoting from the religious texts of Islam that call for violence on other people would be exempted from the offence. So some of the worst calls to violence would still go unpunished.
These powers are huge and could be weaponised against everyday Australians. Do you trust politicians with this power? We don’t.