A former Liberal frontbencher's approach to immigration policy created an environment conducive to the rise of Pauline Hanson's One Nation party, according to political commentator Peter Van Onselen. He argues that the Coalition's failure to credibly address public concerns about immigration numbers, housing, and the cost of living allowed Hanson's message to gain traction.
Van Onselen identifies Senator Paul Scarr, who held the shadow immigration portfolio, as a key figure in this perceived strategic failure. Described as a "little known" and "invisible" politician to the broader public, Scarr was tasked with opposing Labor's immigration policies during a critical post-election period. Instead of presenting a strong stance, Van Onselen contends that Scarr adopted a timid approach, which he likens to a "miniature poodle" and "politics by damp cloth."
The commentary highlights the irony that Scarr, a Queenslander representing Hanson's home turf, did not appear to grasp the political force of her arguments. Van Onselen suggests that Scarr's moderate stance and perceived lack of understanding of voter sentiment on issues like social cohesion and housing costs led to "total surrender" on the immigration debate.
Meanwhile, Andrew Hastie, then shadow home affairs spokesman, was reportedly blocked from addressing the immigration issue, a portfolio he was passionate about. This move by Sussan Ley, the then opposition leader, to carve immigration away from Hastie and assign it to Scarr led Hastie to resign from the frontbench until Ley's departure. Van Onselen suggests that when voters desired strength on immigration, the opposition offered hesitation.
The analyst posits that Hanson's resurgence was not due to her reinventing herself but because major parties became too hesitant in addressing surging immigration numbers amid a housing and cost of living crisis. While Scarr did not single-handedly cause Hanson's rise, Van Onselen argues he became a symbol of the Coalition's broader issue: promoting individuals incapable of capitalizing on political opportunities.
Van Onselen suggests that the Coalition could have effectively linked migration to housing, infrastructure, and social cohesion, an argument he deems obvious and not extreme. He believes Scarr's tenure in the shadow immigration role represented a "strategic disaster" and that his preselection should be reconsidered when his Senate term expires in 2031. The commentary concludes that the Liberal Party's current standing, with its primary vote at a recent low of 17 percent, suggests a need for significant internal change. 
