ss BREAKING NEWS 🔥 Pauline Hanson is shaking up Australian politics with a $90 billion national restructuring plan, considered her boldest move yet. The proposal includes Australia withdrawing from the United Nations, the World Health Organization (WHO), and the World Economic Forum (WEF), dissolving the Department of Climate Change, and tightening the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) to only support those truly deserving. In just 24 hours, support for the One Nation party has surged by 19%, reaching a record high. Hanson claims the $90 billion in annual savings will be returned to the people, invested in coal to reduce electricity prices by 30%, and used to build hydroelectric dams and a national rail system. Remarkably, her concise 12-word message has spread virally, creating deep divisions and putting the entire power structure on high alert

BREAKING NEWS  Pauline Hanson is shaking up Australian politics with a $90 billion national restructuring plan, considered her boldest move yet. The proposal includes Australia withdrawing from the United Nations, the World Health Organization (WHO), and the World Economic Forum (WEF), dissolving the Department of Climate Change, and tightening the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) to only support those truly deserving. In just 24 hours, support for the One Nation party has surged by 19%, reaching a record high. Hanson claims the $90 billion in annual savings will be returned to the people, invested in coal to reduce electricity prices by 30%, and used to build hydroelectric dams and a national rail system. Remarkably, her concise 12-word message has spread virally, creating deep divisions and putting the entire power structure on high alert. 

Australian politics has been thrust into turbulence after Pauline Hanson unveiled what she describes as a $90 billion national restructuring plan, a proposal already being labeled the most radical move of her political career.

Within 24 hours of the announcement, support for Hanson’s One Nation party reportedly surged by 19 percent, pushing it to a record high and sending shockwaves through Canberra’s political establishment.

The plan, outlined during a brief but highly charged appearance, proposes a sweeping overhaul of Australia’s institutional and economic priorities. Central to the proposal is Australia’s withdrawal from several major international bodies, including the United Nations, the World Health Organization, and the World Economic Forum.

Hanson argues that continued membership in these organizations has eroded national sovereignty and imposed financial and regulatory burdens that no longer serve the interests of ordinary Australians.

In addition to exiting international institutions, the plan calls for the dissolution of the Department of Climate Change. Hanson claims the department represents unnecessary bureaucracy and ideological policymaking that has driven up energy costs while delivering little tangible benefit to households and small businesses.

She argues that eliminating the department would immediately reduce government spending and allow Australia to refocus on what she describes as “practical energy solutions.”

Another highly controversial component of the proposal involves tightening the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Hanson insists the NDIS has become financially unsustainable and vulnerable to misuse.

Under her plan, eligibility would be narrowed to ensure that support is directed only to those deemed “truly deserving.” This aspect of the proposal has already sparked fierce debate, with supporters praising the focus on accountability and critics warning of potential harm to vulnerable Australians.

According to Hanson, the combined measures would result in approximately $90 billion in annual savings. She claims this money would not remain in government coffers but would instead be redirected toward projects aimed at lowering living costs and rebuilding national infrastructure.

Among the headline promises is a major investment in coal to reduce electricity prices by an estimated 30 percent. Hanson argues that coal remains Australia’s most reliable and affordable energy source and that abandoning it has unnecessarily inflated power bills.

The plan also includes the construction of new hydroelectric dams and the development of a national rail system. Hanson frames these projects as long-term nation-building initiatives designed to improve energy security, create jobs, and strengthen regional Australia.

Supporters say the emphasis on infrastructure reflects a return to traditional economic development policies, while critics question the environmental impact and financial feasibility of such large-scale projects.

Perhaps the most striking element of the announcement was not the length of the plan, but its brevity. Hanson delivered a concise 12-word message that quickly went viral across social media platforms.

While interpretations of the message vary, its simplicity and confrontational tone appear to have resonated strongly with a segment of the electorate. Within hours, the phrase was trending nationwide, fueling heated online debates and polarizing public opinion.

Political analysts say the sudden surge in support for One Nation reflects growing frustration among voters who feel alienated by mainstream parties and rising living costs. “This proposal taps directly into a sense of economic anxiety and distrust of global institutions,” one commentator noted.

“Whether it’s realistic or not, it’s emotionally powerful.”

At the same time, the reaction from established political parties has been swift and cautious. Senior figures from both major parties have warned that withdrawing from international organizations could damage Australia’s diplomatic standing and economic relationships.

Others have questioned the legality and complexity of dismantling entire government departments and renegotiating international agreements.

International observers are also watching closely. Australia’s potential exit from the United Nations and the World Health Organization would represent a dramatic shift in foreign policy, with implications for trade, health coordination, and global influence.

Diplomats have so far refrained from public comment, but sources suggest the proposal has raised concerns among allies.

Despite the criticism, Hanson appears undeterred.

She insists that the reaction proves her message is cutting through and that Australians are ready for what she calls “real change, not recycled promises.” She has framed the proposal as a direct challenge to what she describes as an entrenched power structure resistant to reform.

Whether the momentum behind One Nation can be sustained remains uncertain. Poll surges following dramatic announcements are not uncommon in Australian politics, and translating online enthusiasm into electoral success is notoriously difficult. Nonetheless, the scale and speed of the reaction suggest that Hanson has struck a nerve.

For now, one thing is clear: Pauline Hanson’s $90 billion restructuring plan has forced a national conversation. Supporters see it as a long-overdue assertion of sovereignty and fiscal discipline, while critics view it as risky and divisive.

As debates intensify and political leaders scramble to respond, Australia’s political landscape appears more unsettled than it has been in years, with the entire power structure now on high alert.