One Nation candidate poised to help Coalition in handshake deal has railed against climate science and Covid ‘little Hitlers’

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"One Nation Candidate Stuart Bonds Criticizes Climate Science and Public Health Officials Amid Electoral Deal"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 5.7
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

Stuart Bonds, a candidate from One Nation, has emerged as a pivotal figure in a handshake preference deal that could significantly benefit the Nationals in the Hunter seat. His recent remarks at a livestreamed forum have stirred controversy as he criticized public health officials, labeling them as 'little Hitlers,' and propagated conspiracy theories regarding the government's handling of climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic. Bonds argued against any governmental actions aimed at addressing climate change, asserting that such measures are merely tools for the government to exert control over citizens' lives. He claimed that the pandemic was a 'crime' against Australians, alleging that the government used the population as 'an experiment to sell pharmaceutical projects.' This rhetoric aligns with a broader strategy by the Coalition and One Nation, who have recently adjusted their preference arrangements to enhance their electoral prospects in the upcoming elections.

Bonds has a history of controversial statements and previously ran as an independent candidate, receiving 5.7% of the primary vote in the 2022 elections. This time, he is rejoining One Nation, which previously secured 10% of the primary vote in Hunter with a different candidate. The Coalition hopes that preference flows from Bonds and other right-wing parties will help Liberal and National candidates gain ground in key regional contests, despite some internal dissent regarding this strategy. The Nationals are now positioned to receive a more favorable preference from One Nation compared to previous elections, raising expectations for higher preference flows. Bonds reiterated his stance on climate change during the discussion, asserting that Australia has no influence over global temperatures and criticizing the government's regulatory measures as a means of control. His comments, coupled with the Coalition's electoral strategy, highlight the complex dynamics at play as the election approaches, with uncertainty surrounding the actual impact of these alliances on voter sentiment.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article presents a controversial figure in Australian politics, Stuart Bonds, who is associated with One Nation, a right-wing party. His recent statements have sparked outrage due to their extreme views on climate science and public health measures during the Covid pandemic. The timing of these comments coincides with a strategic political maneuver involving preference deals between One Nation and the Coalition, which raises questions about the motivations behind the coverage.

Political Strategy and Implications

The article highlights a last-minute preference deal that could significantly impact electoral outcomes in the Hunter region. The Coalition seems to be banking on the idea that aligning with One Nation will consolidate votes in key areas, particularly among right-leaning voters. However, this strategy may alienate more moderate voters in urban areas, suggesting a potential backlash. The shift in the preference list indicates a calculated effort to secure wins in tight races, but it also exposes the Coalition to criticism for potentially embracing extremist views.

Public Perception and Messaging

Bonds' inflammatory remarks about climate science and public health officials aim to resonate with a specific segment of the electorate that is skeptical of mainstream science and government authority. By labeling public health officials as "little Hitlers," he employs provocative language designed to evoke strong emotional reactions. This framing positions him and his party as defenders against perceived government overreach, which may attract support from anti-establishment voters.

Manipulative Elements and Hidden Agendas

The article may serve to distract from other ongoing political issues by focusing on Bonds' controversial statements. This tactic could be seen as a way to divert attention from criticisms of the Coalition's policies or its handling of the pandemic. The sensational nature of the comments, combined with the framing of the preference deal, suggests an attempt to stir public sentiment and rally support around the right-wing agenda, potentially overshadowing more nuanced discussions about governance and public health.

Credibility and Reliability

The reliability of the article hinges on the accuracy of the reported statements and the context surrounding them. While Bonds' comments are documented, the interpretation and implications drawn from them could be influenced by the publication's editorial slant. The article's focus on sensationalism may detract from a balanced exploration of the political landscape, raising questions about its overall credibility.

Broader Context and Potential Consequences

This news piece reflects broader tensions within Australian politics, particularly regarding climate change and public health. As Bonds' views align with a growing anti-science sentiment among certain voter blocs, the article could amplify divisions within society. If the Coalition's strategy proves successful, it may embolden similar tactics in future elections, potentially leading to a more polarized political environment.

Target Audience

The article seems to cater to audiences that are already inclined towards right-wing politics or skepticism of government interventions. By showcasing Bonds as a vocal critic of mainstream political narratives, it likely aims to galvanize support from those who feel disenfranchised or distrustful of established political norms.

Market Impact

While the article itself may not directly influence stock markets, it highlights underlying political dynamics that could affect economic policies. Sectors tied to climate change initiatives or public health could experience volatility based on the outcomes of upcoming elections and the prevailing political climate. Investors may pay closer attention to political developments as they could signal shifts in regulatory frameworks.

Global Relevance

Though primarily focused on Australian politics, the themes of skepticism towards science and government authority resonate globally. As similar narratives arise in various countries, this article contributes to the discourse surrounding populism and anti-establishment sentiments that are shaping contemporary political landscapes worldwide.

In conclusion, the article combines sensationalist reporting with strategic political commentary, presenting a complex picture of the current state of Australian politics. The reliability of the information, while rooted in actual statements, is ultimately colored by the broader implications and motivations behind the coverage.

Unanalyzed Article Content

AOne Nationcandidate who could hand the Nationals the seat of Hunter, thanks to a handshake preference deal, has called public health officials “little Hitlers” and promoted a conspiracy theory alleging the government has used the climate crisis to control every aspect of people’s lives.

Stuart Bonds told a livestreamed forum with rightwing activists last week that the federal government should not do anything to address climate change. He also claimed “a crime” was committed against Australians during the Covid pandemic, alleging they were used “as an experiment to sell pharmaceutical projects”.

The comments were made after the Coalition and One Nation agreed to a “last minute” change to how-to-vote cards, moving each other up the preference list. At the 2022 election, the Nationals placed One Nation fourth. They are now second. One Nation is now preferencing the Nationals third, behind Trumpet of Patriots, which is preferencing the Nationals above Labor.

Bonds, who in 2019 wasreported by Channel Nineas saying “the only thing worse than a gay person with power is a woman”, won 5.7% of the primary vote in 2022 when he ran as an independent. The then One Nation candidate, Dale McNamara, won 10% of the primary vote in 2022. Hunter, in New South Wales, is held by Labor’s Dan Repacholi with a margin of 4.8%.

At the time, Bonds responded that he was “absolutely not” a homophobe or a misogynist, and his spokesperson denied the accuracy of the report, saying Nine had “failed to show the videos in full”.

TheCoalitionbelieves preference flows from One Nation and other rightwing candidates could push Liberal and National candidates over the line in tight regional and outer suburban contests. But some Coalition insiders have criticised the decision, arguing they could damage support among metropolitan voters and help independents in at-risk seats.

Sign up for the Afternoon Update: Election 2025 email newsletter

Bonds was also the One Nation candidate for Hunter in 2019, when he secured 21.5% of the primary vote. He fell 1,900 votes short of the then Nationals candidate, Josh Angus, with 22,029 first preferences. After running as an independent in 2022, he has returned to the One Nation fold.

The Coalition does not expect Pauline Hanson’s party to win lower house seats but hopes that Liberals and Nationals will benefit from preference flows from One Nation above the national average of 61.3% recorded in 2022.

At the 2022 election, 72.5% of One Nation preferences in Hunter went to the Nationals candidate. Flows of above 80% are expected to help its candidate, Sue Gilroy, this time.

Bonds told the livestreamed discussion on the social media platform X that One Nation and the Nationals had reached a “deal” in Hunter.

“We took those minor parties and we pushed them down the ticket, we pushed the Nationals up,” Bonds said.

When asked to outline his position on climate change, Bonds said the Australian government should not do anything to lower global carbon emissions.

“I just do not accept that we here in Australia can affect the temperature of the planet,” Bonds said. “I don’t think there’s anything we can do about it. And nor should we.

Sign up toAfternoon Update: Election 2025

Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key election campaign stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters

after newsletter promotion

“All it is, therefore, is so the government can control and manipulate your life. That is the only purpose of what this is, so that they can regulate, control, tax, monitor every single thing that you do.”

Bonds, who has a long history of opposing vaccine mandates, said his “main issue with the whole coronavirus thing was the little Hitlers that came out, the little mid-level bureaucrats” who monitored people for social distancing and mask wearing.

“The large crime behind the whole thing was the vaccine itself,” Bonds told the live stream. “That was the big crime. They used us as an experiment to sell pharmaceutical projects.”

Bonds was contacted for a response. A One Nation spokesperson said Bonds had the party’s “full support” after being shown a transcript of his comments.

A One Nation source told Guardian Australia it reached a handshake agreement with the Nationals leader, David Littleproud, which included preferencing the party above Liberal candidates in three-cornered races.

The Coalition was also contacted with questions about why it had decided to preference this candidate above other parties including Labor, the Greens, Family First and the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers.

On the campaign trail,Peter Duttonwas asked if he would deal with One Nation in any possible minority government. He claimed there was no prospect of any of the party’s candidates being elected in the lower house, saying “the only independents who are in prospect in the lower house are those who are already there, or some in teal seats or Greens seats”.

Dutton did not answer whether the Coalition would seek One Nation support in the Senate. “I wouldn’t be mucking around with independents and third parties at this election. I really wouldn’t,” he said.

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian