Australia

Jan 21, 2014

Essential: public backs Abbott’s asylum seeker ‘war’

An Essential poll has found the Coalition's tough line on asylum seekers is popular with the public, who don't think most are genuine refugees. And people remain fairly evenly split on whether anthropogenic climate change is real.

Cathy Alexander — Freelance journalist and PhD candidate in politics at the University of Melbourne

Cathy Alexander

Freelance journalist and PhD candidate in politics at the University of Melbourne

There may be passionate inner-city protests against Prime Minister Tony Abbott's hardline treatment of asylum seekers, but the silent majority of Australians agrees with him. An Essential poll over the weekend found just 22% of voters thought the Coalition was "too tough" on asylum seekers -- more people thought the government was "too soft" (25%). The most common response was that the Coalition was "taking the right approach" (35% of respondents). It's a vindication -- from the public at least -- of Abbott's approach. While the government has been reluctant to reveal what it's doing with asylum seekers, citing "operational reasons" for the gag, we know Australian authorities are trying to turn boats around and send them back to Indonesia (putting pressure on that bilateral relationship), and are sending other boats to facilities on remote Pacific islands. Some people are being sent back to the country where they started their journey. Applications for asylum are being processed very slowly. Abbott has likened his campaign to "a war". The online Essential poll of just over 1000 people was taken after Immigration Minister Scott Morrison apologised on Friday for Australian vessels breaching Indonesian sovereignty in the hunt for asylum seekers.

Do you think the Federal Liberal / National Government is too tough or too soft on asylum seekers or is it taking the right approach?

Free Trial

You've hit members-only content.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions

8 comments

Leave a comment

8 thoughts on “Essential: public backs Abbott’s asylum seeker ‘war’

  1. Dogs breakfast

    “Among Coalition voters, 29% thought human-induced climate change was real while 61% didn’t ”

    God help us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Stupidity is in the ascendance, deep thought and clear-headed analysis are losing the battle, actually, being beaten black and blue.

    The dark ages cometh.

  2. AR

    Why not include a creationism question so that we know just how off planet are our compatriots?

  3. Malcolm Street

    Dog’s breakfast – shows the Coalition is going down the road of the US Republicans in being the anti-science party.

  4. Roberto Tedesco

    26% said those fount to be refugees should be “sent back where they came from”. Stupid as well as heartlless. Meanwhile the same buffoons polish their souped-up utes, drink their long necks and piss on thir neighbours’ lawns.

  5. tonyfunnywalker

    Same response as under Howard – refugees are demonised and some of the blogs and on Facebook makes you wonder what sort of country is Australia becoming – nasty and xenophobic is an understatement. Same will Climate Change as The John McLean expose discussion soon became a vilification of Flannery rather than the core of the article is how was Fairfax hoodwinked by McLean who By the way has still not supported his claim of being enrolled in a Phd. Climate Change communication must change and the charlatans exposed for what they are. People do not understand science – but they do understand human interest stories – the also understand the hip pocket nerve – like spiralling insurance premiums/ growing number of exemptions in household policies – The insurance industry works on probability – and adverse climatic events is costing the industry dearly. The insurance unlike Maurice Newman would not hold a $10,000 bet. It would be interesting what odds you would get from one of these online betting shops.

  6. klewso

    This withholding of “intelligence” from their electors, and other people smuggles – is that a direct lifting of strategy from Murdoch’s “War on Democracy” campaign?
    Censoring/editing/deciding what information it will pass on?

    “We will decide what is in the public interest and in what circumstances they get it!”?

  7. Cathy Alexander

    AR, that’s not a bad idea. We could ask about creationism, about whether people believe in alien life, that kind of thing. It’s interesting because results are often more divided that one might assume – in this poll, Essential found 10% of Greens voters think climate change is not caused by humans and 10% said “don’t know,” so one in 5 Greens voters doubt the Greens line that climate change is real and caused by humans.

    Any other suggestions for questions we could ask via Essential to gauge Australians’ beliefs on key issues? Maybe whether smoking causes lung cancer.

  8. Gillh

    The headlines in the murdoch press and tony abbott’s mantras when he was in opposition have worked a treat – better than advertising. In the end everyone heard the same lines so frequently that it has become the truth. It was a perfect strategy for abbott in opposition. As he has no compassion and isn’t worried about life after the next election – what more could he want!

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...