Essential Report
Download this week's Report
Responsibility for the Ruby Princess
Q. You may be aware that there is a special commission of inquiry into the docking of the Ruby Princess cruise ship during the Covid-19 outbreak. Many people were involved during the decision-making process, to varying degrees.
At the end of the day, who do you think is most responsible for the decision to dock the Ruby Princess?
| Gender | Age Group | |||||
| Total | Male | Female | 18-34 | 35-54 | 55+ | |
| New South Wales Health public officials | 25% | 29% | 22% | 21% | 26% | 29% |
| The ship’s captain and medical officers | 18% | 18% | 17% | 12% | 17% | 23% |
| New South Wales Port Authority | 13% | 12% | 14% | 14% | 14% | 11% |
| Border Force officials | 13% | 14% | 12% | 14% | 15% | 10% |
| The individual passengers | 5% | 6% | 5% | 10% | 4% | 2% |
| No one person or group is to blame | 26% | 22% | 29% | 29% | 24% | 25% |
| Base (n) | 1,067 | 532 | 535 | 341 | 341 | 385 |
| Federal Voting Intention | ||||
| Labor | Coalition | Greens | TOTAL: Other | |
| New South Wales Health public officials | 26% | 27% | 22% | 25% |
| The ship’s captain and medical officers | 14% | 22% | 16% | 19% |
| New South Wales Port Authority | 12% | 14% | 11% | 16% |
| Border Force officials | 15% | 11% | 15% | 15% |
| The individual passengers | 4% | 6% | 8% | 4% |
| No one person or group is to blame | 29% | 20% | 28% | 21% |
| Base (n) | 306 | 418 | 86 | 143 |
- A quarter of participants say no one person or group is most responsible for the decision to dock the Ruby Princess (26%) but an equal amount (25%) say the New South Wales Health public officials are most responsible. One-fifth (18%) believe that the ship’s captain and medical officers are most responsible.
- Men (29%) and those over 55 years old (29%) are more likely to say New South Wales Health public officials are most responsible, compared to women (22%) and 18-34 (21%).
- Coalition voters are most likely to say the ship’s captain and medical officers are most responsible (22%) compared to other voters (16%).
Attitudes towards Temporary Migrants
Q. Temporary migrants include people on skilled worker visas (which are used to cover jobs where there are skill shortages including engineers, nurses and scientists), most New Zealand citizens living in Australia, and international students.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
| TOTAL: Agree | TOTAL: Disagree | Strongly agree | Somewhat agree | Neither agree, nor disagree | Somewhat disagree | Strongly disagree | Don’t know | |
| Temporary migrants support the economy by spending their money in Australia | 57% | 17% | 19% | 39% | 23% | 12% | 5% | 3% |
| Businesses should hire Australian citizens where they can, even if they’re not as skilled as candidates who are temporary migrants | 54% | 21% | 26% | 28% | 22% | 13% | 8% | 3% |
| If temporary migrants pay the same taxes as Australian citizens, they should be entitled to the same government support | 52% | 20% | 21% | 31% | 24% | 11% | 9% | 4% |
| It’s realistic to expect temporary residents who lose work in Australia to go back to their home countries | 52% | 20% | 21% | 31% | 24% | 13% | 7% | 4% |
| Without temporary migrants, Australia would face skill shortages | 48% | 23% | 15% | 33% | 24% | 12% | 11% | 5% |
| Australia would be better off if we had fewer temporary migrants | 41% | 27% | 18% | 23% | 28% | 14% | 12% | 4% |
| TOTAL: Agree | Employment Status | Federal Voting Intention | ||||||
| Total | In paid employment | Not in paid employment | Retired | Labor | Coalition | Greens | TOTAL: Other | |
| Temporary migrants support the economy by spending their money in Australia | 57% | 60% | 51% | 64% | 59% | 62% | 56% | 50% |
| Businesses should hire Australian citizens where they can, even if they’re not as skilled as candidates who are temporary migrants | 54% | 53% | 46% | 67% | 50% | 61% | 40% | 75% |
| If temporary migrants pay the same taxes as Australian citizens, they should be entitled to the same government support | 52% | 57% | 48% | 52% | 56% | 51% | 55% | 51% |
| It’s realistic to expect temporary residents who lose work in Australia to go back to their home countries | 52% | 52% | 44% | 63% | 51% | 59% | 32% | 65% |
| Without temporary migrants, Australia would face skill shortages | 48% | 51% | 47% | 48% | 48% | 57% | 45% | 34% |
| Australia would be better off if we had fewer temporary migrants | 41% | 43% | 31% | 52% | 41% | 46% | 22% | 57% |
| Base (n) | 1,067 | 550 | 254 | 212 | 306 | 418 | 86 | 143 |
- More than half of participants agree with any of the statements about temporary migrants – except without temporary migrants, Australia would face skill shortages (48%) and Australia would be better off if we had fewer temporary migrants (41%).
- Retirees are more likely to agree that businesses should hire Australian citizens where they can, even if they’re not as skilled as candidates who are temporary migrants (67%), Australia would be better off if we had fewer temporary migrants (52%) and it’s realistic to expect temporary residents who lose work in Australia to go back to their home countries (63%) than other participants (51%, 39% and 49% respectively).
- Similarly other or independent party voters are most likely to agree that businesses should hire Australian citizens where they can, even if they’re not as skilled as candidates who are temporary migrants (75% v 55% all other voters) and Australia would be better off if we had fewer temporary migrants (57% v 41% all other voters).
- Coalition most likely to agree without temporary migrants, Australia would face skill shortages (57% v 44% all other voters).
- Greens voters are least likely to agree that businesses should hire Australian citizens where they can, even if they’re not as skilled as candidates who are temporary migrants (40% v 59% all other voters), Australia would be better off if we had fewer temporary migrants (22% v 45% all other voters) and it’s realistic to expect temporary residents who lose work in Australia to go back to their home countries (32% v 57% all other voters).
- Participants who support Kristina Kenneally’s “Australia first” approach more likely to agree that businesses should hire Australian citizens where they can, even if they’re not as skilled as candidates who are temporary migrants (68%) and Australia would be better off if we had fewer temporary migrants (52%).
Coronavirus concerns
Q. To what extent are you concerned about the threat of Covid-19 (coronavirus) in Australia?
| 04/05 | 27/04 | 20/04 | 13/04 | 06/04 | 29/03 | 22/03 | 09/03 | 10/02 | |
| Very concerned | 32% | 39% | 44% | 45% | 51% | 53% | 39% | 27% | 25% |
| Quite concerned | 46% | 44% | 43% | 43% | 37% | 35% | 43% | 36% | 43% |
| Not that concerned | 18% | 13% | 11% | 9% | 10% | 10% | 14% | 28% | 26% |
| Not at all concerned | 4% | 3% | 2% | 3% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 9% | 6% |
| Base (n) | 1,093 | 1,054 | 1,051 | 1,068 | 1,069 | 1,086 | 1,034 | 1,096 | 1,057 |
| Age group | Location | |||||
| Total | 18-34 | 35-54 | 55+ | Capital | Non-Capital | |
| Very concerned | 32% | 27% | 34% | 34% | 34% | 27% |
| Quite concerned | 46% | 49% | 43% | 47% | 47% | 46% |
| Not that concerned | 18% | 18% | 20% | 15% | 16% | 22% |
| Not at all concerned | 4% | 6% | 4% | 3% | 4% | 4% |
| Base (n) | 1,093 | 341 | 372 | 380 | 734 | 359 |
- Concern about the threat of Covid-19 has lessened this again week, with 32% saying they are very concerned (down from 39% last week) and 46% saying they are quite concerned.
- Those aged 18-34 have a lower concern (24% not that/not at all concerned) to those aged over 55 (18%).
Likelihood of developing Coronavirus
Q. How likely do you think it is, that you will develop Covid-19?
| 04/05 | 27/04 | 20/04 | 13/04 | 06/04 | 29/03 | 22/03 | 09/03 | |
| Very likely | 5% | 5% | 7% | 5% | 8% | 8% | 8% | 7% |
| Somewhat likely | 26% | 21% | 25% | 28% | 33% | 36% | 34% | 24% |
| Somewhat unlikely | 46% | 50% | 52% | 49% | 45% | 45% | 45% | 43% |
| Very unlikely | 23% | 23% | 17% | 18% | 14% | 12% | 13% | 26% |
| Base (n) | 1.093 | 1,054 | 1,051 | 1,068 | 1,069 | 1,086 | 1,034 | 1,096 |
| Age group | Location | |||||
| Total | 18-34 | 35-54 | 55+ | Capital | Non-Capital | |
| Very likely | 5% | 8% | 5% | 1% | 5% | 3% |
| Somewhat likely | 26% | 31% | 28% | 20% | 29% | 19% |
| Somewhat unlikely | 46% | 38% | 43% | 57% | 43% | 54% |
| Very unlikely | 23% | 23% | 25% | 22% | 23% | 24% |
| Base (n) | 1.093 | 341 | 372 | 380 | 734 | 359 |
- The likelihood of catching Covid-19 has remained steady this week, with 31% saying they are very/somewhat likely to contract the virus (27% last week).
Government response to Covid-19
Q. Overall, how would you rate the Government’s response to the Covid-19 outbreak?
| 04/05 | 27/04 | 20/04 | 13/04 | 06/04 | 29/03 | 22/03 | |
| Very poor | 4% | 4% | 5% | 6% | 6% | 11% | 9% |
| Quite poor | 9% | 9% | 10% | 12% | 15% | 21% | 20% |
| Neither good, nor poor | 20% | 17% | 21% | 20% | 21% | 24% | 26% |
| Quite good | 38% | 44% | 42% | 40% | 37% | 34% | 33% |
| Very good | 28% | 26% | 23% | 23% | 21% | 11% | 12% |
| TOTAL: Poor | 14% | 13% | 15% | 17% | 21% | 31% | 29% |
| TOTAL: Good | 66% | 70% | 65% | 63% | 58% | 45% | 45% |
| Base (n) | 1,093 | 1,054 | 1,051 | 1,068 | 1,069 | 1,086 | 1,034 |
| Gender | Age Group | Location | |||||||
| Total | Male | Female | 18-34 | 35-54 | 55+ | Capital | Non-Capital | ||
| Very poor | 4% | 6% | 3% | 5% | 6% | 3% | 5% | 4% | |
| Quite poor | 9% | 10% | 8% | 14% | 9% | 6% | 10% | 7% | |
| Neither good, nor poor | 20% | 21% | 20% | 32% | 22% | 9% | 20% | 21% | |
| Quite good | 38% | 36% | 40% | 37% | 39% | 39% | 38% | 39% | |
| Very good | 28% | 28% | 28% | 12% | 25% | 44% | 27% | 30% | |
| TOTAL: Poor | 14% | 16% | 11% | 19% | 14% | 8% | 15% | 11% | |
| TOTAL: Good | 66% | 63% | 68% | 49% | 64% | 82% | 65% | 69% | |
| Base (n) | 1,093 | 539 | 554 | 341 | 372 | 380 | 734 | 359 | |
State Government response to Covid-19
Q. How would you rate your state government’s response to the Covid-19 outbreak?
| 04/05 | 27/04 | 20/04 | 13/04 | |
| Very poor | 4% | 4% | 5% | 5% |
| Quite poor | 8% | 9% | 9% | 11% |
| Neither good, nor poor | 18% | 17% | 20% | 20% |
| Quite good | 38% | 41% | 39% | 38% |
| Very good | 31% | 30% | 26% | 26% |
| TOTAL: Poor | 12% | 13% | 14% | 16% |
| TOTAL: Good | 70% | 70% | 66% | 64% |
| Base (n) | 1,093 | 1,054 | 1,051 | 1,068 |
| State | |||||||
| Total | NSW | VIC | QLD | SA | WA | ||
| Very poor | 4% | 5% | 3% | 6% | 3% | 2% | |
| Quite poor | 8% | 8% | 8% | 9% | 7% | 5% | |
| Neither good, nor poor | 18% | 19% | 17% | 21% | 13% | 14% | |
| Quite good | 38% | 45% | 32% | 43% | 31% | 30% | |
| Very good | 31% | 23% | 40% | 22% | 45% | 48% | |
| TOTAL: Poor | 12% | 13% | 11% | 15% | 10% | 7% | |
| TOTAL: Good | 70% | 68% | 72% | 65% | 76% | 79% | |
| Base (n) | 1,093 | 352 | 275 | 220 | 85 | 106 | |
- Across the country, the overall perception of states’ handling of the crisis is in line with government rating their own state’s handling as Very/Quite good (70% states, 66% federal). Rating of the state government in NSW increased from 63% to 68%, while in Victoria, the rating decreased from 77% to 72%.
Easing restrictions
Q. When do you think governments should start to ease the restrictions on travel and gatherings to allow offices, shops, restaurants, other workplaces, and public spaces to start operating again?
| 04/05 | 27/04 | 20/04 | |
| As soon as possible | 10% | 10% | 9% |
| Within the next 1 to 2 weeks | 9% | 7% | 6% |
| Within the next month | 21% | 18% | 14% |
| By the end of next month | 15% | 15% | 13% |
| It is too soon to consider easing restrictions | 37% | 42% | 49% |
| Unsure | 8% | 8% | 10% |
| Base (n) | 1,093 | 1,054 | 1,051 |
| Gender | Age Group | Location | |||||||
| Total | Male | Female | 18-34 | 35-54 | 55+ | Capital | Non-Capital | ||
| As soon as possible | 10% | 12% | 9% | 11% | 13% | 8% | 10% | 12% | |
| Within the next 1 to 2 weeks | 9% | 11% | 7% | 12% | 9% | 7% | 9% | 10% | |
| Within the next month | 21% | 21% | 20% | 26% | 18% | 18% | 22% | 17% | |
| By the end of next month | 15% | 15% | 15% | 12% | 17% | 17% | 16% | 14% | |
| It is too soon to consider easing restrictions | 37% | 32% | 42% | 28% | 37% | 44% | 36% | 38% | |
| Unsure | 8% | 8% | 7% | 10% | 7% | 6% | 7% | 9% | |
| Base (n) | 1,093 | 539 | 554 | 341 | 372 | 380 | 734 | 359 | |
- People are becoming increasingly open to easing the lockdown restrictions. Those who think it’s too soon to lift restrictions has fallen from 49% two weeks ago to 37%.
- One in five people think restrictions should be eased within the next month (21%).
- Those aged over 55 are least likely to consider easing restrictions (44% say it’s too soon, compared to 28% of those aged 18-34).
- Women are more likely than men to think it’s too soon to consider lifting restrictions (42% to 32%).
Opening schools following Covid-19
Q. Which of the following is closest to your views on the reopening of schools?
| Parent/Guardian Status | ||||
| Total | I am a parent/guardian of
school-aged children |
I am not a parent/guardian of school-aged children | ||
| Schools should only open for children of essential workers | 32% | 36% | 30% | |
| Schools should re-open for all children | 45% | 44% | 46% | |
| Schools should remain closed with all teaching conducted online | 23% | 20% | 24% | |
| Base (n) | 1,093 | 291 | 802 | |
COVID-19 RESEARCH
Read Essential's ongoing research on the public response to Covid-19.
Download this week's ReportEssential Report
Two Party Preferred: 14 May 2019
Labor
51.5%-0.5
Coalition
48.5%+0.5
In this week's report:
Essential Tags
2PP
Abbott
ALP
Approval of opposition leader
Approval of Tony Abbott
asylum seekers
Australian economy
Better Prime Minister
Bill Shorten
Carbon Tax
climate change
coronavirus
covid-19
economy
Education
Election
EMC
environment
ER
Essential Media
Essential Report
Federal Government
federal politics
federal politics voting intention
Gillard
Greens
Julia Gillard
kevin rudd
Labor
Labor Party
leadership
Liberal
Liberal Party
Liberals
media
mining
Nationals
peter lewis
Polling
polls
Prime Minister
tony abbott
two party preferred
voting
Voting intention
Recent Comments
