Burqas, Bans and the Ban on Debate

Pauline Hanson walked into the Senate wearing a burqa — and was promptly banned from the chamber.

Fine. Agree or disagree with her stunt, that’s politics. But what happened next says far more about Australia in 2025 than it does about Hanson.

Because apparently, we’re now at the point where the issue itself can’t even be discussed.

Let me be clear: my concern here isn’t whether the burqa should be banned (though I personally think it should).
My concern is that the debate is being banned.

Avi Yemini captured the moment perfectly: outside the political media bubble, most people weren’t outraged by Hanson — they were laughing at the senators clutching their pearls. These are the same politicians who routinely use parliament as a stage for their own divisive props and lectures. Yet the moment they get a taste of their own medicine, suddenly they cry “unconstitutional!” and demand silence.

Unconstitutional?
For wearing a burqa?
If anything, the implied right to political communication protects exactly this kind of protest. The argument was so backwards it almost sounded like they were the ones wanting the burqa banned.

And here lies the hypocrisy:
The Senate had just shut down Hanson’s bill — the very bill that would have made her stunt illegal. In other words, they want the right to use parliament for their own theatrics, but they want to block others from making their point in the same way.

This isn’t about respect.
It isn’t about religion.
It isn’t even about Pauline Hanson.

It’s about the slow creep of cancel culture into the halls of parliament — a growing belief that certain topics simply cannot be discussed because the public might think the “wrong” thing if they’re allowed to hear the arguments.

A mature democracy debates ideas.
A fragile one bans them.

And judging by this episode, we’re heading in the wrong direction.

Here is Avi Yemini's take.