“THAT’S UNWORTHY, WHAT RIGHT DO YOU HAVE TO CRITICIZE ME?” 🚨 Pauline Hanson is shaking up Australian politics with her $100 billion grand plan, the most audacious move of her career. The proposal includes completely withdrawing Australia from the Paris Climate Agreement, severing all ties with the WHO and WEF, and dissolving the Department of Renewable Energy to shift all resources to coal and gas extraction. Just 48 hours after its announcement, support for the One Nation party surged 22%, setting an unprecedented record in the party’s history. Hanson promised that the massive annual savings would be used to reduce personal income tax by 25%, lower fossil fuel electricity subsidies to their lowest level in 20 years, and invest heavily in rural infrastructure and large-scale irrigation projects. Notably, her brief, defiant 14-word statement quietly spread on social media, creating deep divisions in public opinion and sowing fear among traditional political elites about the rise of populism. 👇👇👇

Pauline Hanson, leader of the One Nation party, has taken a bold and controversial step in Australian politics with the unveiling of a $100 billion plan that has captured the attention of both supporters and critics.

In a move that has sparked intense debate across the nation, Hanson has proposed a sweeping set of policies that include pulling Australia completely out of the Paris Climate Agreement, severing ties with the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Economic Forum (WEF), and dismantling the Department of Renewable Energy.

Her plan aims to shift the country’s focus back to coal and gas extraction, industries she argues will help revive Australia’s economy and provide much-needed energy security.

The announcement, made just days ago, has already caused a political earthquake. In the 48 hours following the proposal, support for One Nation surged by an astounding 22%, marking an unprecedented jump in the party’s popularity.

This surge in support reflects the growing discontent among a significant portion of the Australian population with the current political establishment and its handling of climate change, energy policy, and global economic cooperation.

Hanson’s audacious plan, which some critics have called reckless, has struck a chord with many Australians who feel that their interests have been sidelined in favor of globalism and environmentalism.

Hanson’s bold proposal also includes drastic fiscal measures that she argues will benefit everyday Australians.

She pledged that the savings from withdrawing from international agreements and dismantling the renewable energy infrastructure would be used to reduce personal income taxes by 25%, cut subsidies for fossil fuel-based electricity to their lowest level in 20 years, and invest heavily in rural infrastructure and large-scale irrigation projects.

Hanson’s supporters believe that these policies will provide a much-needed boost to struggling industries, particularly in rural and regional areas, and help revive Australia’s traditional energy sector.

At the heart of Hanson’s plan is a deep skepticism about international agreements and organizations that she claims undermine Australian sovereignty.

By withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement, severing ties with the WHO and WEF, and focusing on coal and gas extraction, she argues that Australia will regain control over its economic future and energy resources. “We can’t keep bowing to foreign pressures.

We need to take back control of our country’s energy and economy,” Hanson declared in her announcement, a sentiment that resonated with many who view global institutions as imposing unnecessary restrictions on Australia’s independence.

However, her proposals have been met with fierce criticism from a wide range of political figures, environmental groups, and global organizations. Critics argue that her plan is an outdated and dangerous approach that will hurt Australia’s long-term prospects by undermining global efforts to combat climate change.

Environmental activists have been quick to point out that withdrawing from the Paris Agreement would isolate Australia from the global community and send a harmful signal about the country’s commitment to reducing carbon emissions. “This plan is a step backward for Australia and the world.

Climate change is a global issue, and Australia cannot afford to sit on the sidelines,” said one environmental leader in response to Hanson’s proposal.

On the other hand, some of Hanson’s fiercest supporters see her plan as a refreshing change from the traditional political elites who they believe have failed to deliver for the Australian people.

Many of her supporters feel that mainstream political parties have been too focused on international diplomacy and climate policy at the expense of the domestic economy and job creation.

By championing coal and gas extraction, Hanson taps into the frustrations of working-class Australians, particularly those in rural areas, who feel that their livelihoods have been sacrificed in the name of environmental policy.

In a brief but defiant statement on social media, which quickly went viral, Hanson dismissed the criticisms and further solidified her populist stance. “That’s unworthy, what right do you have to criticize me?” she wrote.

The 14-word statement, though short, encapsulates the anger and defiance that has become a hallmark of Hanson’s political career.

Her response to the backlash has only fueled the fire of public debate, with some praising her for standing firm against what they perceive as an elitist, out-of-touch political establishment, while others accuse her of ignoring the bigger picture and putting the country’s future at risk.

The rapid rise in support for One Nation has sent shockwaves through Australia’s political landscape, prompting concerns among traditional political elites. Many have feared that Hanson’s rhetoric and policies represent the growing influence of populism in Australian politics, a trend that has been seen in other parts of the world.

While her plan may have resonated with a significant portion of the electorate, it has also exposed deep divisions in public opinion, with many questioning whether her vision for Australia aligns with the country’s long-term needs.

The debate over Hanson’s proposal is only just beginning, but it has already sparked a wider conversation about the direction of Australian politics and the role of populism in shaping national policy.

As the 2026 election season approaches, it is clear that Hanson and her party will continue to challenge the status quo, offering an alternative vision of Australian sovereignty, economic independence, and environmental policy.

Whether or not this vision will find lasting support in the broader electorate remains to be seen, but Hanson’s bold $100 billion plan has already left an indelible mark on the political landscape.