Good — I now have enough to give you a substantive analytical answer. Let me pull this together.
---
One Nation's Victorian vulnerability map — what the parliamentary record shows
The headline: One Nation now has a proof of concept
The single most important data point is the Farrer by-election. One Nation's David Farley won the seat — the party's first-ever elected member of the House of Representatives [TA-260609-tap-9836a1faeaa5]. Farrer is in NSW, not Victoria, but the dynamics are directly transferable. As Senator Dorinda Cox put it on 12 May, the Liberals "lurched further to the right, they chased One Nation votes, they copied One Nation policies and they handed One Nation their preferences. What was the result? They delivered One Nation its first-ever elected member of the House of Representatives" [TA-260512-senate-e62ae0e7f193:s023].
That result changes the calculus for Victorian seats. One Nation now has a demonstrated pathway: run in a rural or provincial seat where the Coalition primary vote is fragmenting, attract disaffected voters on cost of living, energy, immigration and cultural grievance, and benefit from preference flows in a three-cornered contest.
Which Victorian seats fit the pattern?
Tribune doesn't hold electorate-level polling or primary vote breakdowns beyond what's in the AEC data attached to the Flynn profile in my view. But the parliamentary record — what members are saying, what issues they're raising, and the demographic profiles available — lets us identify the seats where the conditions that produced the Farrer result are most likely to replicate.
The rural Nationals seats are the primary vulnerability zone:
1. Nicholls — Held by Sam Birrell (Nationals), who serves as Shadow Assistant Minister for Agriculture and Regional Education. His policy engagement profile is heavily concentrated in traditional energy, transport infrastructure, and agricultural production — exactly the issue set One Nation campaigns on. The seat is classified Rural by the AEC. Birrell has been active on energy costs, farm profitability concerns, and budget criticism — arguing the budget lacks new measures to improve farm profitability and questioning cuts to the Future Drought Fund . That's a member who knows his electorate is under pressure on the issues One Nation exploits.
2. Mallee — Held by Anne Webster (Nationals). The seat is Rural, covers a vast area of north-western Victoria, and Webster has been active across energy, water, and agricultural issues. The records show her contributing on matters of public importance and private members' business from the earliest sittings of this parliament.
3. Gippsland — Held by Darren Chester (Nationals), classified Rural. Chester has a long parliamentary record and is active on regional infrastructure, veterans' affairs, and community services. Gippsland's economic base — agriculture, forestry, energy — maps directly onto One Nation's issue set. The seat spans a large area (the geographic tool flags it crosses into the Monash electorate at its western edge).
The structural conditions these seats share:
- Rural AEC classification — isolated from metropolitan service delivery, higher cost-of-living sensitivity - Nationals incumbents — One Nation's primary vote comes disproportionately from Coalition voters, not Labor voters. The threat is a three-cornered contest where One Nation splits the right-of-centre vote or, as happened in Farrer, wins outright with Coalition preferences - Energy and cost-of-living exposure — the Coalition's Budget Reply centred fuel security, the Safeguard Mechanism, and cost-of-living relief [TA-260514-libera-4b28c7c909a2]. These are the same issues One Nation campaigns on, but One Nation positions itself as more radical — scrapping net zero entirely, as Senator Hanson proposed in the Senate - Immigration and housing pressure — Taylor's Migration and Housing Pledge explicitly caps migration to housing completions [TA-260514-libera-4b28c7c909a2], but One Nation's framing is sharper and more populist. Senator Whitten characterised government housing policy as "the definition of insanity" in the 12 May sitting
Outer metropolitan seats — secondary risk:
Victorian outer-suburban seats with high cost-of-living pressure and lower socio-economic profiles could also be contested, though One Nation's historical performance in metropolitan Victoria is weaker. The party's Senate vote in Victoria has historically been lower than in Queensland or NSW, and the Farrer model depends on a rural/regional base.
What the record does NOT tell us
I want to be clear about the limits here:
- Electoral margins — the AEC publishes these, and they're the critical variable. A seat with a 2% margin is vulnerable in ways a seat with a 12% margin is not, regardless of issue alignment. The AEC is the authoritative source for margin data. - State-level One Nation organisation — whether One Nation has candidates, branches, or campaign infrastructure in specific Victorian seats is outside the parliamentary record. - Preference deals — the Farrer result turned on preference flows. Whether the Coalition would preference One Nation (or vice versa) in Victorian seats is a strategic decision that hasn't been tested in the parliamentary record. - Primary vote data — we don't have sub-electorate polling or primary vote projections.
The strategic picture
Drawing on these records, the pattern is clear: One Nation's threat to the Coalition in Victoria concentrates in the rural Nationals seats — Nicholls, Mallee, and Gippsland — where the issue set (energy costs, agricultural viability, immigration, cost of living) aligns with One Nation's platform, and where the Farrer precedent demonstrates a viable pathway. The Farrer result showed that Coalition preference deals with One Nation can backfire catastrophically, delivering One Nation a seat the Coalition had held for decades. Victorian Nationals members are already campaigning on the same issues One Nation exploits, which means they're competing for the same voters.
The deeper question — which the parliamentary record raises but can't answer — is whether the Coalition's strategic response to Farrer will be to distance itself from One Nation (closing the preference pipeline) or to accommodate it (risking further seat losses). Senator Cox's characterisation of the emerging "new right-wing coalition" discussion between Liberals, Nationals and One Nation [TA-260512-senate-e62ae0e7f193:s023] suggests this is an active and unresolved question within the conservative movement.
---