Zoe Daniel

The gambling industry is accused of exploiting vulnerable Australian bettors through VIP programs involving bonus bets, lavish events and alleged offers of illicit drugs and sex workers. Former NRL player Luke Bateman told a Senate inquiry that inducements contributed to his loss of $1m and severe personal distress, while advocates said similar experiences are widespread. Sportsbet and Tabcorp denied the allegations. The commentary argues that the federal government’s proposed advertising restrictions and other reforms are inadequate, particularly compared with recommendations from the Peta Murphy committee for banning inducements and gambling advertising and establishing a strong national regulator. It links gambling-related harm to family breakdown, domestic violence, mental-health problems, financial collapse and suicide.

Pauline Hanson is portrayed as adopting Donald Trump’s strategy of exploiting mainstream media attention while simultaneously attacking journalists as dishonest or politically motivated. The column argues that her remarks about domestic violence, immigration and race form part of a longstanding pattern rather than isolated cases of misrepresentation. It also criticizes media organizations for amplifying Hanson as provocative clickbait, noting that such coverage can normalize One Nation and help its electoral prospects even as traditional media loses influence to social platforms. The central conclusion is that both Hanson’s manipulation of the media and the media’s pursuit of ratings raise questions about who is responsible for the party’s growing power.

Zoe Daniel welcomes Zali Steggall and Allegra Spender’s launch of Community Strong Australia, arguing that its promise of “reason over rage” could attract voters currently supporting One Nation. She acknowledges the risks of translating the independent community movement into a formal party, but says the party’s collective leadership model, flexible voting arrangements and centrist values offer a meaningful alternative to Labor’s dominance, the Coalition’s disintegration and growing political anger. Daniel argues that the new party can coexist with non-aligned independents and deserves a chance to develop.

Zoe Daniel argues that Australia’s media and major political parties failed to recognize One Nation’s long-term growth, much as US commentators underestimated Donald Trump. She compares One Nation’s rise with the stages of Trumpism: disproportionate media attention, social-media manipulation, attacks on journalism and the creation of a post-truth political identity immune to evidence. The party is benefiting from public anger at economic insecurity, migration, political disempowerment and distrust of established institutions, while borrowing organizational techniques from community independents. With Pauline Hanson due to address the National Press Club, Daniel argues that journalists should ask difficult questions but also listen more closely to the voters driving the upheaval.

Zoe Daniel argues that some Australian community independents could form a flexible, values-aligned party without surrendering their independence. She says independents have already influenced integrity, climate, tax and social policy, and that a coordinated party could expand their parliamentary influence, provide a centrist buffer between Labor and a possible Liberal–National–One Nation bloc, and improve their ability to compete under Australia’s electoral and donation rules. Daniel rejects claims that forming a party would split or assimilate the independent movement, arguing that members could retain conscience voting, local accountability and innovative structures while others remain outside the party.

Labor’s 2026 federal budget is presented as a pragmatic attempt by Jim Chalmers to address intergenerational inequality and win back voters attracted to One Nation. Measures affecting property investment and tax settings politically divide younger wage earners from older, wealthier investors, but grandfathered negative gearing, limited tax relief and the absence of a gas-export tax make the package incomplete. The budget could help Labor secure a durable political legacy only if it becomes the beginning of broader action on fairness, productivity, housing and public trust.

The Coalition's decision to preference One Nation in the Farrer byelection could help Pauline Hanson's party win its first federal lower-house seat. Zoe Daniel argues that the move abandons the bipartisan resistance to One Nation once represented by Tim Fischer and Gareth Evans, and instead rewards divisive, anti-multiculturalist politics. She says Angus Taylor and the Liberals are misleading voters by portraying independent Michelle Milthorpe as aligned with the Greens, while their own preferences may hand victory to One Nation candidate David Farley. The strategy is presented as evidence that moderate Liberalism has disappeared and that the Coalition risks both alienating urban voters and helping create the political force that could replace it.

Zoe Daniel argues that Liberal leader Angus Taylor is adopting Trump-style, hardline immigration rhetoric to win back voters from Pauline Hanson’s One Nation. She says proposals to scrutinize migrants according to group identity, particularly people fleeing Gaza and other conflicts, exploit fear and racism despite existing visa character checks and deportation powers. The column highlights migrants’ economic contributions and condemns the Coalition for abandoning a distinct political identity, arguing that its pandering threatens Australia’s fair-go values and social cohesion.

Zoe Daniel argues that the global fossil-fuel crisis and energy volatility have created an opening for clean-energy advocates to make a mainstream economic and security case for renewables. She urges Australia’s renewable sector to counter fossil-fuel misinformation through sustained public engagement, emphasizing that electric vehicles, home batteries, solar and other technologies can reduce fuel dependence, protect households from supply shocks and strengthen the electricity grid. Citing developments in Germany and the UK, she calls for Australia to accelerate its transition rather than return to pre-crisis energy policies.

The Iran war and the resulting Strait of Hormuz disruption are driving fuel-price and inflation pressures in Australia, hurting households and farmers while fossil-fuel exporters collect substantial windfall profits. Zoe Daniel argues that the Albanese government should introduce a stronger windfall tax on gas companies, reform the petroleum resource rent tax, fund targeted relief for fuel, energy and childcare, and support electric vehicles. The piece criticizes successive governments for allowing refining capacity and fuel reserves to remain inadequate, the opposition for encouraging panic buying, and subsidies that continue to entrench fossil-fuel use.

Zoe Daniel argues that Anthony Albanese’s support for US and Israeli action against Iran risks drawing Australia into an expanding conflict and undermining its commitment to international law. She portrays Donald Trump’s rejection of legal constraints as evidence that the global rules-based order is breaking down, with potentially dangerous consequences for middle powers such as Australia. The government says Australia is not a party to the war and supports preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, but Daniel contrasts that position with Labor’s opposition to the 2003 Iraq invasion. She warns that mission creep, the absence of an exit strategy and domestic political pressure could lead Australia into another strategic failure.

Zoe Daniel argues that the Australian Liberal Party’s shift toward Trump-style nationalism, protectionism and One Nation-aligned populism will alienate voters in diverse coastal cities rather than restore its electoral prospects. She says the party is neglecting young people and women while offering no credible plans on housing, climate, renewable energy, integrity, health, education or technology. The column criticizes Tim Wilson’s stance on inflation and housing tax reform, Angus Taylor’s rejection of Labor’s net-zero agenda and the party’s apparent resistance to universal early childhood education. Daniel concludes that the Coalition needs bold policies centered on fairness, economic opportunity and a credible future for younger Australians.

Zoe Daniel argues that infighting within the Liberal-National Coalition and Labor’s reluctance to pursue difficult structural reforms are creating an accountability and policy vacuum in Australia. She warns that One Nation could exploit public frustration over living costs, housing, immigration, climate disasters and declining trust, potentially gaining decisive influence over the Coalition or the Senate. Daniel criticizes the Coalition’s climate retreat, culture-war politics and candidate-selection processes, while also faulting Labor for complacency and short-term measures. She argues that community independents have emerged because major parties failed to provide credible alternatives, and cautions that tighter election-donation laws could further weaken them.

Donald Trump’s threats over Greenland and his broader disregard for alliances and international norms signal the collapse of the old rules-based global order, according to Zoe Daniel. The weakening of the US-European alliance has direct implications for Australia because its defence, security, technology and economic systems are deeply tied to Washington. Australia’s reliance on AUKUS and traditional US guarantees may therefore leave it more exposed, while Canada’s efforts to diversify through closer ties with China illustrate the need for middle powers to act collectively and respond to geopolitical realities rather than rely on past alliances.

Eating disorders among Australian adolescents have risen sharply alongside the growth of social media, while research indicates that platforms can disproportionately direct diet and eating-disorder content toward vulnerable users. Zoe Daniel argues that Australia’s under-16 social media ban does not adequately address these algorithmic harms and shifts responsibility onto young people, parents and communities. She supports stronger platform obligations, including a statutory duty of care, algorithm controls and transparency, risk mitigation and enforceable penalties.

Domestic and family violence services in Australia remain severely underfunded, with police and justice systems often missing warning signs and leaving women and children exposed. The article argues that policymakers must better connect domestic violence with the documented effects of alcohol misuse, gambling losses and major sporting events. It highlights research showing that problem gambling substantially increases the likelihood and severity of family violence, and criticizes the government for resisting gambling-ad restrictions despite an official recommendation for a phased ban. The piece calls for stronger prevention and response funding, tighter alcohol and gambling regulation, and a free parliamentary vote on gambling advertising.

Zoe Daniel argues that the Coalition, particularly the Nationals and Liberals, is successfully portraying climate action and net zero as drivers of higher energy costs despite evidence that renewables are cheaper than coal and gas. She attributes current price pressures to international energy markets, gas pricing, the retirement of coal plants and years of policy obstruction, rather than the renewable transition itself. Daniel criticizes Labor and the renewable-energy sector for failing to counter fossil-fuel misinformation, warns that public support for net zero is weakening, and says delaying climate action will impose greater economic and environmental costs, especially on regional communities.

Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is outdated amid accelerating species loss and major economic and technological change. The proposed reforms could improve environmental protection while delivering faster, more certain project approvals, but the absence of a clear climate trigger and broad ministerial discretion remain serious risks. Labor, the Coalition and the Greens are urged to compromise, allow time for constructive amendments, and ensure that national-interest provisions cannot enable environmentally destructive projects.

Anthony Albanese faces a difficult balancing act in securing Donald Trump’s attention without turning Australia’s interests—particularly AUKUS and critical-minerals cooperation—into a domestic political liability for the US president. AUKUS could be presented as beneficial to America and the Israel-Hamas deal offers shared diplomatic cover, but Albanese must also preserve Australian values while overlooking or managing disagreements over immigration, climate policy, foreign aid, press freedom, Ukraine and other issues. The author argues that Albanese will need to be more decisive and carefully read Trump’s cues to achieve meaningful outcomes.

Australia’s Labor government and Liberal–National Coalition are both failing to provide the ambition and policy certainty needed for a successful net-zero transition. Labor’s proposed 2035 emissions target and continued fossil-fuel support are judged inadequate, while the Coalition’s climate denial and opposition to net zero threaten investment in renewable energy. Treasury, CSIRO and Deloitte modelling indicate that weak or disorderly action could reduce economic growth, wages and living standards, whereas a stronger emissions target could generate hundreds of billions of dollars in additional GDP and support new industries. The risks extend beyond the economy to public health, food security, national security and regional stability.

The March for Australia rallies exposed deepening anger, distrust and political polarization in Australia, but parliamentary leaders responded with partisan attacks rather than constructive debate. Zoe Daniel argues that culture-war rhetoric, misleading political advertising, social-media amplification and policies targeting migrants are worsening social division and creating opportunities for extremist forces. She criticizes Labor's removal of procedural fairness for some non-citizens and calls for greater accountability and transparency from social-media platforms. The central conclusion is that political leaders must model civility and evidence-based discussion if they are to rebuild public trust and address issues such as immigration, housing, crime and labor shortages.