By Jack Arnold
Voters in the Farrer NSW federal electorate face a clear choice on 9 May 2026. On one side is local Independent candidate Michelle Milthorpe – an educated, community-focused woman with family ties to the region who is committed to addressing long-standing neglect in the electorate after decades of support for the Liberals. On the other is the PHONey (Pauline Hanson’s One Nation) candidate, a 69-year-old former AACo executive and relatively new party member with a history of involvement across different political groups.
Michelle Milthorpe ran as an Independent in the 2025 election and significantly reduced the margin for the previous candidate from 18.2% to 6.8%. In this by-election, she represents a grassroots reform movement seeking to put local priorities first.
The PHONey candidate is backed by a party that has received substantial financial and in-kind support from some of Australia’s wealthiest individuals, including mining magnate Gina Rinehart and her associates. This includes:
• A Cirrus SR22 (or G7 variant) aircraft, reported to be valued at over $1 million, gifted to the party;
• Two donations of $500,000 each from executives associated with Rinehart’s companies;
• A further $1 million donation from Angus and Sarah Aitken.
Reports also mention additional support for ‘Puppet Pauline,’ such as previous flights on Rinehart-linked aircraft, a trip to CPAC in the United States aboard a Rinehart Gulfstream jet, and other campaign resources like branded vehicles. PHONey’s lead candidate in the March 2026 South Australian election, Cory Bernardi, is said to have received over $40,000 in air travel support for campaigning, which he has reportedly repaid.
Critics argue that such significant funding from a single prominent donor and her network raises questions about the party’s independence and whether its populist messaging fully aligns with its financial backers. Treasurer Dr Jim Chalmers has previously described Pauline Hanson as being closely aligned with Gina Rinehart’s interests, particularly on certain policy votes.
PHONey has a track record of candidates who sometimes sit as Independents once elected, rather than strictly following the party line. Voters in Farrer – particularly farmers, irrigators, and graziers – may consider whether a candidate from a party with these funding ties best represents their long-term interests, or whether a strong local Independent offers a more direct voice for regional concerns.
Regional Independents often deliver focused representation for their communities without the influence of major party or donor pressures.
* * * *’*
Jack Arnold is a retired academic polymath who commenced his professional career as a research scientist and ended as a lawyer, with too many decades of education between. To stay busy he has taken an active interest in all levels of local New England politics for the past 50 years, assisting in the election of three progressive candidates, the latter two being very busy Independent representatives for their communities.
Since the retirement of these politicians in 2013, New England has stagnated economically and socially with pre-selected Nationals being elected to Parliaments in the strange local belief that voting for 19th century ideals would yield the new government infrastructure projects that our kids will need to live in the electorates in this 21st century.
Regional Independents get things done for their communities.
Keep Independent Journalism Alive – Support The AIMN
Dear Reader,
Since 2013, The Australian Independent Media Network has been a fearless voice for truth, giving public interest journalists a platform to hold power to account. From expert analysis on national and global events to uncovering issues that matter to you, we’re here because of your support.
Running an independent site isn’t cheap, and rising costs mean we need you now more than ever. Your donation – big or small – keeps our servers humming, our writers digging, and our stories free for all.
Join our community of truth-seekers. Please consider donating now via:
PayPal or credit card – just click on the Donate button below
Direct bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
We’ve also set up a GoFundMe as a dedicated reserve fund to help secure the future of our site.
Your support will go directly toward covering essential costs like web hosting renewals and helping us bring new features to life. Every contribution, no matter the size, helps us keep improving and growing.
Thank you for standing with us – we truly couldn’t do this without you.
With gratitude, The AIMN Team
Clearly people like Rinehart are driven by some sort of ideology and a desire to influence decision making at a political level. One Nation don’t really seem to have an ideological base but are more concerned with causing disruption in our parliamentary processes.
They seem to enjoy pantomime in the Senate but have never had the balance of power to allow their disruptive ambitions to have any real impact.
As I’ve noted previously, if Farley were to win the Farrer Bi-election he would only join Barnaby Joyce in the Lower House until the next federal election at which time Barnaby will be seeking a Senate seat and that would leave just Farley representing One Nation in the Lower House, were he to hold on to that seat, which is not guaranteed.
So what does Gina Rinehart gain? Is she playing a long game to act as an irritant to elected governments through her anointed members? Clearly she wants power and influence but will our political system grant her that ambition?
Lady Lardybotty, the fat frau of zer west, wants a show of being active, a picket line or political sentry effect, She would surely fear attack if passive, so must selfinflate as a cat can, to “scare” or intimidate, for she has no actual or potential political power, having no soul or intellect. B Joyce, a booby prize, is it. Farrer electorate needs plenty, and, if a former opposition leader failed here, what hope is there for success from any leech, dud, bludger, passive fanatic? Harpy Hanson cannot talk, argue, assert, teach, nothing there. Ginarosity means nought, planes may offend, policy remains absent, who can win here? It is a delicate electorate, where water criminality needs outing.
You can answer that headline with one word. Power.
I read something recently that theorised that the very wealthy, when greed becomes boring and they have more money than they could spend in a lifetime, will go for the next big thrill. Power.
Gina has enjoyed being the Trump fan girl so now she wants to be the god.
Pauline’s a useful idiot who can be cheaply bribed when you are a billionaire.
A.W.P. won’t go for media because she hasn’t the wit to understand it.
She screams and whines about how unfair Australia is to our only true-born princess. Herself. So now she has Pauline to do it for her.
Let’s hope the good folk of Farrer are smart enough to see through the “l stand with the workers” BS and instead cast their vote for someone who sees their role as a representative of the people. Not a mouthpiece for the Australia’s wealthiest person.
Why? Because billionaires only get one vote each, like the rest of us, but their egos say they deserve much, much more. So they let their money increase their voting power. Something the rest of us can’t. So much for “democracy.”
Citizens of Farrer: if you think that Farrer will prosper under the influence of Barnaby Joyce’s compadre Farley then consider how New England has (NOT) prospered in recent decades. Take a walk through Armidale cbd, as I recently did, and take note of the empty shop fronts.
As for political donations; the chief beneficiary will be the Rupertoire of meddling media outlets otherwise known as the Murdochracy.
Who owns PHONey Puppet Pauline?? Who purchased the aeroplane??
The Guardian has a view:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/ng-interactive/2026/apr/30/gina-rinehart-one-nation-pauline-hanson-donations-ntwnfb
It must get really boring and lonely at night, after the days efforts of defiling the countryside and denying ones workers their proper earnings. Wealth is an interesting and debatable quality, but Australia’s richest person has obviously got nothing to take up her spare time, so she has decided to play with our politicians. Strike that, play around with the fishandchipshoppe chick.
Our Poorlen has the intelect of a gatepost and the integrity of a canetoad, but she possesses rat cunning in spades. Burquas into parliament and rousing the rabble with other similar stunts is simply about increasing her personal wealth, which currently stands at somewhere around $20M. Plus new plane and other shiny toys.
She has no interest in “the common good”, but has found her path to riches walking the path of spreading discontent among normal struggling folk who “need” to be pointed in the direction of “who is to blame” for our plight.
Aunty Gina has decided to aid the One Notion bandwagon lest We the Voter realise that our neighbours, be they black, brown, funny hattted, tattooed single mum or two dads types should not be the target of our ire, but that instead we should direct our rage and upset towards those with too much. Too much money, influence and power, and too little concern for the damage they enable.
If We the Voter stop fighting sideways, and fight upwards instead, the ivory towers might fall, and that scenario must be avoided at all costs. (A bit like requiring the gas producers to pay for their product, but that is another story)
The more that PHONey is enabled, allowed to spout drivel and point its bony finger at us and our neighbours, scream that “THEY” are the ones to blame for our misery, and misdirect reality, the safer Ms Reinhart et al will be, so …….
Farrer will be an interesting litmus test for everyone. Sadly, excepting Labor.
Why Does a Billionaire Provide Major Funding to a Political Party?
(a) Because she can, with little or no ramifications.
(b) Because it suits her whim, per her beliefs and purpose.
(c) Because it soothes and strokes her ego when she exercises this degree of influence over a political party.
(d) Because the ‘powers that be’, viz., the government, permits such activity.
(e) Because the government has an operational philosophy of ‘I’m alright, Jack,’ and they just don’t care enough to institute and adhere to best-practice policies around rules & regulations in relation to donorships.
(f) Because the government has an unstated position that says ‘don’t rock the boat’ when it comes to engaging with the big mining corporations and its entities.
(g) Because the government, self-evidently, cares little about the majority views and opinions of the greater Australian community, instead, as is so often the case, it panders to power just as power panders to it.
Agree with all that Canguro.Maybe the friendless, fat ugly git gave hatchet face her own plane because of the stink left behind in her major flying ride.In fact, it all stinks, but we have another, gutless, malleable government.
Turns out that the duopoly has been the political front for all the wealthy vested interests.Despite the bullshit they shower us with.Who knew?
“This is a purchase of a political party in Australia and it is done in a way to absolutely dominate and influence a party
Anthony Whealy, Centre for Public Integrity
The slick social media video that accompanied the announcement suggests Hanson is no longer afraid of parading her party’s new cashed-up status as it seeks to take on Labor and the Coalition.
There are many questions about the extent of Rinehart’s involvement in the party’s expansion plans. Will she be personally involved in choosing potential candidates for the party across the country? Or is her support confined to providing the corporate support needed to go mainstream?
Australia’s political fundraising laws will be tightened in July and in December, with Hanson saying on Wednesday: “We have a lot of additional fundraising to undertake between now and the cut-off in December.”
But the Centre for Public Integrity chair, Anthony Whealy, said the revelations of Rinehart’s patronage of One Nation exposed the “state of absolute chaos” of Australia’s electoral laws.
“The net result has been that very wealthy companies and people have been able to donate large sums of money to get access, and once they get access they use that to get influence,” Whealy said.
“[Rinehart] is entitled to do whatever she likes with her money but she is not allowed to own a party, and that is what this amounts to; this is a purchase of a political party in Australia and it is done in a way to absolutely dominate and influence a party.
“One Nation’s ownership by Gina Rinehart and her friends is a very uneasy alliance for Australia because the views of One Nation, now emboldened by this colossal gift of money – and no doubt more will be coming – does not augur well for the preservation of what I would describe as true Australian values: kindness, fairness, equality, tolerance and genuine concern for others.”
Whealy added that under Australia’s electoral laws it would “be very easy to mask” a donation through a third party, while he also criticised the lack of transparency surrounding fundraisers.”
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/ng-interactive/2026/apr/30/gina-rinehart-one-nation-pauline-hanson-donations-ntwnfb
What drivel, who gives a flying xxxx about a rich donor ruling one nation, a minor political party led by a drip?
Billionaires like Gina, Pratt Wall all bought the Nats and the libs, Clive has his ‘trump…’ and gina helped labor to defeat the loonies.
The bottom line is pauline is easily controlled and cheap.
Wam seemingly overlooks the risk of big money infiltrating political parties and the consequent outcomes of political parties, i.e., actual people, politicians and their hangers-on, becoming compromised and favourably inclined to act for the donor’s benefit and best interests.
Wam may think it is mere drivel; perhaps he hasn’t been paying attention to how politics degrades from perhaps ‘good intentions’ to something akin to criminal cabals. International political organisations provide myriad examples of the road towards corruption and carpetbaggery based on acceptance of largesse from sinister types, of which the iron ore queen surely fits within that descriptor.
Interestingly, Simon Holmes à Court’s climate 200 vehicle has donated about $10,000,000 to Teal candidates
AC, I think there’s a difference between donating towards a principle and donating for a purpose
Hand out truckloads of “donations” and in return at some stage in the future when Gina wants to tear down forests and destroy the landscape to mine all she will have to do is snap her fingers and the recipients will fall to their knees in joyous worship and grant her every greed driven desire.
Possibly Roswell, but Holmes a Court has a lot of money invested in the industry he politically supports.
I can see your point, but I’m not persuaded his only motivation is principle or altruism.
I’m not as sanguine about human nature when it comes to $10,000,000 of political donations
Clearly and lazily replicates the US ‘architecture of influence’ (Jane Mayer ‘Dark Money’), fossil fuel ‘segregation economics’ of Koch Network (IPA, CIS etc.), MAGA anti-immigrant Tanton Network (SusPopAus, NewsCorp ON) supported by wealthy donors.
Then Fox News the fulcrum for PR and nudging RW MSM ecosystem (& NewsCorp editorial locally), while in US and QLD add Evangelical conservative Christians, ageing, regional and low info voters, being catered to.
The issue for ON, LNP etc. is US mid western strategy does not translate to a compulsory and preferential voting system that neither rewards insurgent campaigns nor urban votes like FPTP in UK or referendums; ‘the great replacement’ is about to start, and cut a swathe through this faux Oz MAGA base.
Related Fox Board Abbott’s chum ex Hungarian PM ‘mini Putin’ Orbán had his arse handed to him by young, old, urban and regional turning out 82%+, motivated by corruption, Russian influence, decline in PS delivery & economic situation vs EU, Ukraine and the west which the vast majority prefer vs eastern Europe and Russia……
Interestingly due to our lax laws the media, hence voters, are not informed about donors eg. mace to think tank, networks and parties.
However, reverse engineering via DeSmog US investigating US foundation donors’ official submission records, to find that allegedly Hancock was a major donor to the IPA (Atlas Koch), preceded decades before ’80-’90s by a couple of major US donors.
Uhm ….. The AC troll has once again cast his COALition misogynistic misrepresentations into this discussion, this time casting unsupported assertions against Simeon Holmes a Court, the founder of the Teal movement for thinking voters. It is common knowledge that the Teals are Independent candidates agreeing with the need to have government policies that counter the COALition denial of human caused climate change.
Moreever, the Teals Movement has funded mainly ladies fed up with how the male COALition politicians have forgotten that they are expected to support the best interests of the voters rather than kow-tow to foreign owned multinational corporations.
The Independent community candidate Michelle Milthorpe has announced that the Teals have contributed about 2% of the political campaign budget, which can be found after suitable researching (not an AC strength). How does that compare to ”any party will do” Farley this time buying his representation of PHONey after a corporate management career screwing workers?? In speculation, the Rinehart gifts totalling $2 MILLION are enormously larger than the Independent total budget.
To misquote your post, ”Rinehart has a lot of money invested in [the mining industries she] politically supports”.
Wow extrapolation from a simple statement through ‘seemingly’.
Predictively, Cangaru has pulled an assumption from his pouch. Is ‘verisimilitude’ or ‘specious’ applicable or is it just windy rhetoric, Canga??(10 to the 0.3010)
The “misogynistic ” comment is demonstrable garbage. Did he notice the target of much of his criticism (Hanson and Rinehart) are both women?
I’ve simply noted that it is convenient when a rich guy’s business and financial interests align with their political interests, and $10,000,000 of political donations follow.
No-one seems happy about past, present or outlooks. We’ve said it all and with a week to go. Ley held high positions in govt. and opposition, knew everyone, issues, needs, mechanics of achieving…”policy bullshit” abounds. Hansonism, Canavanism, Taylorism, Tealism will all achieve nothing better, even tolerable. Water criminality might grow. Wine and environment will decline. The whole electorate faces decline and obscurity, from now. The red bat in the hat can ditch the broom and stare down from on high in a plane, donated so detachedly generously.