Gabriella Power:
Joining us now is Senior Research Fellow and Chief Economist at the Institute of Public Affairs, Adam Creighton. Adam, thank you so much for joining us. Since we last spoke, we of course have a new leader of the Liberal Party, Angus Taylor. He is expected to reveal his front bench today, and Sky News has confirmed that Jacinta Price and Andrew Hastie will be returning to the front bench. And as we’ve heard from Angus Taylor so far, he’s flagged tougher immigration policies and to quote him, “To shut the door to people that want to bring hate and violence.”
We’re going to of course, get into the immigration debate in a moment. But Adam, first of all, can I get your thoughts on the new leadership? Because as well as getting the right people front and centre, unifying the party, putting out some strong policies, he’s up against the rise of One Nation and he’s trying to win back support there, and that’s going to be very tough to earn back the trust of voters who’ve abandoned the Liberal Party.
Adam Creighton:
Yeah, certainly that is true. Look, I think it’s a positive development for the Liberal Party. Of course, the leadership under Sussan Ley was not going well. I think that’s pretty clear regardless of what you might think of Sussan Ley. I think the challenge now for the Liberals and for Angus Taylor is to get policies out there. I mean, I think it’s right actually that One Nation has more detailed policies on its website than the Liberal Party does. And of course on the immigration policy, they’ve been consistent for many, many years.
And the struggle I think the Liberals have there is they don’t have a great deal of credibility on that policy because, of course, they’ve overseen largely the immigration levels that we have along with the Labour Party. But there’s promising signs that Sky News poll, I think, showed a small fall in One Nation’s primary support, a small increase in the Liberal Party’s support that could continue. I think it’s all going to depend on the next few weeks and whether the electorate, and let’s be frank, probably a third of the electorate don’t know who Angus Taylor is yet. I must say, they all know who Pauline Hanson is, so there’s a recognition issue there. But I think so far anyway, it’s only been a few days, but he’s been on the front foot, so is Jane Hume, they’ve been out there. I think that’s a good thing. It’s a fresh face. Let’s just wait and see how it pans out.
Gabriella Power:
Yeah, certainly the first step I would say at turning the party around. Sky News revealed the migration policy that was developed under Sussan Ley but was not released. And that would limit visas from more than a dozen countries where terrorist groups are in control, including Afghanistan, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Palestine, Philippines, Somalia, just to name a few. Adam, what are your thoughts around this policy? Not that it was revealed.
Adam Creighton:
Look, I think it’s a step in the right direction actually. Somewhat laughably, the first thing I thought was Donald Trump’s famous Muslim ban immigration policy of many years ago. You might remember that, that was very controversial, but this kind of has similarities a little bit. It’s not called that, but I think most of those countries that you just rattled off are certainly Muslim countries. It’s not the entirety of the population from those countries. As I understand it, just certain regions. I think it’s reasonable, especially in the wake of the tragedy of Bondi. I think people want to see greater quality of migration coming to Australia. They don’t want to see people here where statistically there’s a higher probability that they’re not going to enmesh and gel with the Australian community.
But the problem with our policy I see is that it’s not really about numbers. I mean, I imagine that the sheer numbers of people coming from those places are pretty low. And I think the overarching anger about migration is the level, I think just the sheer quantity. I know it’s been falling. Labour keeps saying it’s falling from 500,000 to 300,000, which is the latest figure, but 300,000 is still a lot. And even the budget forecasts of 220,000, 230,000, these are still huge figures compared to any other Western country, probably I would say more proportionately than any other developed country in the world. So they’re still very high. Let’s say it goes back to 250, that’s still double what it was in the early ’90s. It’s roughly triple what it was in the ’80s under Hawke and Keating. So these are very high levels. Do the Australian community want those levels? It looks like at the moment they don’t.
Gabriella Power:
You’re absolutely right. And just looking at those levels, of course, this plays into our housing crisis, the cost of living, the number of hospital beds being filled up. You’ve written about the economic impact and how it’s becoming severe now with supercharging rents. Also, how 10% of Australia’s population is in an economically highly disadvantaged position after this influx of 1.2 million immigrants since 2022. Can you just explain that for us?
Adam Creighton:
Yeah, sure. Look, that was my column last Friday, and I started it by referring back to Queensland where in the late 19th century we imported as largely more or less slave labour, well at least intentioned servants. We imported islanders who worked on the farms, the sugar plantations, and at one point there were about 10% of the state’s population.
Now in 1901, we sent them all home, largely all of them. And then I realise now, fast-forward 120 years, we’ve still got 10% of the Australian population this time, the whole country, more than two million people who are in similar, obviously not as bad, but similar situation. They don’t have the same rights as Australian workers. They can be certainly taken advantage of by employers who know that they can dob them into authorities if they’re working too many hours or if they can force them to accept cash work. And I’m sure that goes on a great deal.
And I pointed out that this 10%, just like back in Queensland all those years ago, this actually benefits the wealthy. The wealthy Queensland farmers did not want this labour to be sent home. And just like now, I think the inner-city wealthy voters want their cheap Uber rides, they want their cheap restaurants, they want their cheap cleaners and nannies and so forth. The same sort of economic arguments are at play again.
And for a lower income native-born Australians, the competition for low skilled jobs is huge. Of course, it’s supercharging rents. The cost of housing is through the roof. So I think the housing issue and the immigration issue, they can’t be separated. And so far, I’d have to say I think Angus is a bit weak. I’d probably say on that. He’s just talking about supply. Everyone likes talking about supply. It’s the hand wavy easy answer, but Labor’s already trying to get supply up and it can’t. The reality is you just can’t build houses very quickly. It’s just hard to do. You need the workers, they got to be zoned correctly. So I think just talking about supply is it’s not going to do it. I think you need to cut the level of immigrants.
Gabriella Power:
No, absolutely. Look, Jim Chalmers, he’s rejected Angus Taylor’s offer to work on a bipartisan approach to rein in government spending. Jim Chalmers has rejected Angus Taylor’s offer to work on a bipartisan approach to rein in government spending. Taylor wrote to the Prime Minister arguing that the budget repair task was just too big for politics as usual, but Jim Chalmers immediately dismissed the proposal, labelling it as a political stunt. It might’ve been, but the federal spending has been forecast to exceed $1 trillion in the near future, Adam.
Adam Creighton:
Yeah. Look, it’s extraordinary. I mean, I spent a few years in Washington and I came back and federal spending had gone from something like 500 billion a year to 750 billion. I mean, that is just eye-popping and the growth rates are still extraordinary. I mean, the last few years, more or less, have been the fastest growth outside COVID since the Whitlam government in the ’70s, and it’s a serious problem. It’s fueling inflation as you know, 3.8% inflation. It’s rising. There’s budget deficits as far as the eye can see, even though tax revenues are rising extremely quickly every year. So spending is certainly out of control.
And just back to One Nation briefly, they do actually have policies on their website, as I understand it, that would significantly cut spending such as scrapping all of the associated climate change subsidies and departments, which at least on the IPA’s calculation is more than $10 billion a year now. That’s a lot of money. There’s various agencies that can be scrapped, but the coalition hasn’t actually said yet how it would cut spending, and it’s difficult as soon as you talk about, say, the NDIS, which is out of control, as you know, soon to cost more than the military, you get accused of treating the disabled poorly. So it’s very hard politics, but it has to be faced up to.
Gabriella Power:
It certainly does. I want to turn to what’s happening in the United States. Interestingly, Stephen A. Smith, he appears to be floating the idea of a presidential run. The broadcaster political commentator has said that he’s giving strong consideration to a 2028 campaign. Here he is with Robert Costa on CBS News Sunday Morning.
Robert Costa:
Would you run as a Democrat?
Stephen A. Smith:
Yeah, because I couldn’t see myself running as a member of the GOP. I’m a fiscal conservative. I can’t stand high taxes, but I’m a social liberal in the same breath because I believe in living and let live. I pay attention to the desolate and the disenfranchised. Yes, I like strong borders. That’s absolutely true. We never needed open borders, but we don’t need it to be completely closed either. We’re a gorgeous mosaic.
Robert Costa:
It sounds like you’re getting a stump speech ready, Stephen.
Stephen A. Smith:
No, there’s no stump speech, but I can give it.
Robert Costa:
Could you be competitive in a Democratic primary? Some big names might run, Gavin Newsom, the California governor, among many others.
Stephen A. Smith:
I respect all of them in terms of their intellect, in terms of where their heart lies, in terms of the service that they want to provide to this country.
Gabriella Power:
It’s interesting. He was also asked about if he was going to run, would he be worried about racism? And he said no. Listen to his answer.
Robert Costa:
Do you worry about racism if you ran for president?
Stephen A. Smith:
No, I know it exists. I know that you can’t escape it, but I do not believe it is as prevalent as some on the left would like us to believe. I do believe a vast majority of Americans judge you on the content of your individual character rather than the colour of your skin.
Gabriella Power:
Yeah, Adam, I certainly agree with that. What do you make of what he had to say?
Adam Creighton:
Well, certainly he’s right there. I think the so-called intelligentsia media class obsess about racism in America as much in Australia, but it is actually far less prevalent. I think he’s right there. But look, I think he’d be a very formidable democratic candidate, and I think Republicans should be concerned. He’s basically a centrist. I mean, I think his trouble is going to be winning over the Democrat extremists in the party. He’s not left-wing enough. He’s not extreme enough. But I think in terms of the wider American electorate, he would be very competitive. I think those other names you mentioned, Gavin Newsom, I think he’s just very tainted by the basket case in some respects that California has become, and I think he’d be an easy target for a future Republican candidate.
Gabriella Power:
Yeah, it’s going to be interesting to see what plays out. Senior Research Fellow and Chief Economist at the Institute of Public Affairs, Adam Creighton, thank you so much for your time.
Adam Creighton:
Thanks, Gab.
This transcript of Adam Creighton on The Power Hour Sky News Australia from 12 February 2026 has been edited for clarity.
