Australian Senators Defy Party Lines to Back One Nation Immigration Inquiry

The Australian Senate has agreed to a wide‑ranging immigration inquiry after several government and opposition senators defied their party lines to back a push from One Nation. In a vote on September 1, 2025, senators endorsed a motion from One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts to examine how high migration affects the economy, housing affordability, wages, essential services, and social cohesion. The decision sets up a politically charged process that will run into 2026 and could reshape Australia’s migration settings.

The Australian Senate move reflects rising pressure from voters worried about rent, home prices, and access to key services. Three Coalition senators—Nationals frontbenchers Bridget McKenzie and Ross Cadell, and Liberal backbencher Sarah Henderson—crossed the floor to support the motion, joining conservatives Alex Antic and Matt Canavan. The Labor government opposed the proposal, saying current migration rules are balanced and support growth and skills needs, but the crossbench and dissent in Coalition ranks were enough to carry the day.

Inquiry scope and timeline

The parliamentary inquiry will be managed through the Senate committee system and will take evidence from government agencies, economists, demographers, housing experts, business groups, unions, and community organizations.

According to the Senate’s resolution, the terms of reference focus on the economic impact of migration, housing affordability, wage growth, infrastructure strain, and social cohesion. Public hearings are expected to begin in late September, with an interim report targeted for December 2025 and a final report due in early 2026.

Members of the public and stakeholders will be able to lodge written submissions, and hearings are planned for major cities as well as regional centers. The committee will request data from the Treasury, the Department of Home Affairs, and independent experts, seeking a consistent picture of both short‑term pressures and long‑term trends.

For official schedules, submission rules, and updates, readers can visit the Australian Parliament’s Senate Committees page at Parliament of Australia – Committees.

Senator Malcolm Roberts argued the inquiry is needed because “mass immigration” is driving up housing costs, holding down wages, and putting pressure on roads, hospitals, and schools. One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has called for deeper cuts, an eight‑year wait for citizenship and welfare, and withdrawal from the UN Refugee Convention. Labor ministers defended current policy and warned that dramatic reductions would hurt the economy and worsen skills shortages.

Policy settings shaping the debate

The inquiry opens as the government’s latest migration changes take effect:

• For 2024–25, the Albanese government set the permanent migration program cap at 185,000 places (down from 190,000 in 2023–24).
  • Of these, 132,200 places sit in the skilled stream, with a stronger push toward employer‑sponsored visas.
  • Ministers say this aims to fill critical jobs while easing pressure elsewhere in the system.

Several cost and threshold changes also came into force this year:

• As of July 2025, the student visa base charge rose from AUD 1,600 to AUD 2,000.
  • The government says this will support better oversight and student services.
• The minimum salary for employer‑sponsored visas (the TSMIT) increased to AUD 76,515, raising the floor for sponsored roles to reduce underpayment risks and ensure genuine skilled placements.
• States and territories paused skilled‑migration nominations while waiting for fresh allocations, with resumptions expected between July and October 2025.
• The National Innovation Visa replaced the Global Talent Visa to attract internationally recognized figures in technology and investment.
• Ministerial Direction 111 (2024) introduced a two‑tier processing system to more tightly manage international student numbers and focus on high‑quality education providers.

VisaVerge.com reports these shifts have already changed application behavior, with universities adjusting intake plans and employers reassessing salary offers. According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, the combined effect of higher student fees, a higher TSMIT, and tighter screening is cooling parts of the temporary migration pipeline while keeping pathways open for roles in shortage.

Stakeholder reactions and possible outcomes

Supporters of the inquiry argue rapid population growth has outpaced housing supply and transport planning, showing up in rents, mortgage stress, and overloaded services. They say a pause or deeper cut to arrivals would help the housing market catch up.

Opponents warn that sharp cuts would leave hospitals, aged care facilities, construction sites, and tech businesses short of staff. Universities say international students sustain research, regional campuses, and local jobs, and note that students also help pay for new housing in some precincts. Business groups caution that lower migration, combined with an aging population, could slow growth and weaken tax revenues that fund essential services.

Independent economists and demographers offer a mixed picture:

• Migration increases housing demand, especially in tight markets, and can affect rents in the short run.
• Skilled migrants also lift productivity, start companies, and fill gaps that would otherwise limit growth.
• The key question is not simply how many migrants arrive, but the mix across skilled, family, student, temporary, and humanitarian streams, and whether housing, training, and infrastructure keep pace.

Possible recommendations the committee could consider:

1. More changes to the permanent cap, including a further reduction from 185,000 or a rebalancing between skilled and family places.
2. Tighter student visa settings if evidence shows quality or integrity issues.
3. New controls on temporary visas and review of post‑study work rights.
4. Housing supply measures linked to migration intake planning, including data‑driven triggers for intake adjustments.

One Nation has proposed a steeper path:

• A cap of 130,000 visas per year.
• Deportation of 75,000 people without lawful status.
• An eight‑year wait for citizenship and welfare.

If adopted, those steps would sharply reduce the intake of skilled workers, students, and humanitarian entrants. Consequences could include major revenue losses for universities, longer waits for employers to fill shortage roles, and a need for settlement services to pivot.

Labor has signaled it will defend current settings, stressing that skilled migration supports the energy transition, defence projects, health care, and construction. Coalition leaders have tried to balance local housing concerns with business demands for workers, even as several of their senators backed One Nation’s inquiry to reflect constituent pressure.

Practical implications for migrants, students, and employers

For migrants already in Australia, the inquiry itself doesn’t change visa rights or conditions. However, it raises the chance of new rules in 2026.

Practical takeaways:

• Students planning to apply later this year should budget for the AUD 2,000 fee and expect stricter checks under Direction 111.
• Employers considering sponsorships must meet the AUD 76,515 minimum salary and may need to justify skills needs more clearly if the committee urges a tighter employer‑sponsored stream.
• State‑nominated applicants should watch for nomination rounds restarting as allocations are confirmed in coming months.

The committee will also examine whether federal infrastructure funding and housing programs match population forecasts. If evidence shows consistent gaps, senators may push for closer links between migration intake and verified housing delivery. That could mean staging intake increases only when new homes, transport upgrades, and key services are online, rather than relying solely on long‑term projections.

Political and diplomatic stakes

The political stakes are high:

• One Nation will frame the inquiry as proof that major parties ignored warning signs on housing and cost‑of‑living pressures.
• Labor will argue it has tightened settings and is steering a middle course.
• The Coalition risks further splits if regional senators keep siding with One Nation on intake reductions while city‑based colleagues champion business needs and university funding.

There is also a diplomatic layer. Universities, tourism operators, and international partners watch Australia’s visa posture closely. A sudden drop in places—or a perception that students and skilled workers are less welcome—could shift investment and study plans to other countries.

Conversely, a steady, rules‑based approach that targets skills shortages and protects integrity could strengthen confidence while easing pressure on housing.

What to watch next

Applicants, employers, and education providers should prepare for a busy few months. The Senate inquiry will:

• Call for submissions.
• Publish hearing schedules and transcripts.
• Release an interim report in December 2025 that may signal which policy areas are most likely to change.

Participants can follow the process, lodge evidence, and read updates through the official committee portal at Parliament of Australia – Committees.

As hearings start, core questions include:

• How big should Australia’s intake be?
• Which streams should grow or shrink?
• How should visa settings link to housing supply, wages, and essential services?

The answers will shape the immigration inquiry and the wider debate into the next election cycle. For families seeking reunification, students choosing a campus, businesses hiring critical roles, and communities managing growth, the outcome will be felt well beyond Parliament House. Senators must weigh short‑term pressures against long‑term gains and decide whether Australia can build the homes, classrooms, clinics, and transport it needs at the pace its population is growing—or whether it should slow the flow while it catches up.