immigration, population, skills shortage
Q. Do you think the levels of immigration into Australia over the past ten years have been…?
| Oct’21 | Jan’19 | Apr’18 | Oct’16 | |
| Much too low | 5% | 4% | 1% | 4% |
| A little too low | 11% | 7% | 4% | 8% |
| About right | 36% | 26% | 23% | 28% |
| A little too high | 17% | 23% | 27% | 22% |
| Much too high | 20% | 33% | 37% | 28% |
| Don’t know | 11% | 6% | 7% | 10% |
| TOTAL: Too low | 16% | 12% | 5% | 12% |
| TOTAL: Too high | 37% | 56% | 64% | 50% |
| Total | Gender | Age Group | Federal Voting Intention | |||||||
| Male | Female | 18-34 | 35-54 | 55+ | Labor | TOTAL: Coalition | Greens | TOTAL: Other | ||
| Much too low | 5% | 6% | 4% | 6% | 5% | 4% | 7% | 3% | 7% | 7% |
| A little too low | 11% | 12% | 10% | 14% | 8% | 12% | 13% | 9% | 16% | 11% |
| About right | 36% | 37% | 35% | 40% | 36% | 34% | 38% | 39% | 43% | 31% |
| A little too high | 17% | 16% | 17% | 16% | 17% | 17% | 16% | 21% | 9% | 13% |
| Much too high | 20% | 20% | 20% | 13% | 20% | 26% | 18% | 23% | 10% | 28% |
| Don’t know | 11% | 8% | 14% | 11% | 13% | 8% | 8% | 5% | 15% | 9% |
| TOTAL: Too low | 16% | 18% | 14% | 20% | 13% | 15% | 20% | 12% | 23% | 19% |
| TOTAL: Too high | 37% | 37% | 37% | 29% | 38% | 43% | 34% | 44% | 19% | 41% |
| Base (n) | 1,781 | 875 | 906 | 533 | 601 | 647 | 636 | 610 | 157 | 220 |
dominic perrotet, immigration, NSW, premier
Q. The NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet recently called for an increase in Australia’s immigration levels.
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 | |
| Increasing immigration levels would add more pressure on the housing system and infrastructure | 63% | 11% | 31% | 32% | 25% | 8% | 4% |
| Immigration is vital for Australia’s business and economy | 51% | 20% | 18% | 33% | 29% | 11% | 9% |
| Increasing immigration levels would equip businesses with the skilled workers they need to reopen as Covid-19 restrictions are eased | 50% | 22% | 16% | 33% | 28% | 13% | 9% |
| Increasing immigration levels would help to address Australia’s growing skills shortages as the population ages | 49% | 22% | 14% | 35% | 29% | 13% | 9% |
| Increasing immigration levels would create more competition for jobs and slow wage growth | 48% | 21% | 18% | 30% | 31% | 13% | 7% |
| TOTAL: Agree | Total | Gender | Age Group | Federal Voting Intention | ||||||
| Male | Female | 18-34 | 35-54 | 55+ | Labor | TOTAL: Coalition | Greens | TOTAL: Other | ||
| Increasing immigration levels would add more pressure on the housing system and infrastructure | 63% | 62% | 64% | 54% | 65% | 70% | 66% | 65% | 59% | 64% |
| Immigration is vital for Australia’s business and economy | 51% | 54% | 48% | 53% | 50% | 50% | 56% | 54% | 60% | 39% |
| Increasing immigration levels would equip businesses with the skilled workers they need to reopen as Covid-19 restrictions are eased | 50% | 52% | 47% | 50% | 47% | 51% | 54% | 52% | 56% | 42% |
| Increasing immigration levels would help to address Australia’s growing skills shortages as the population ages | 49% | 51% | 46% | 48% | 46% | 52% | 53% | 51% | 57% | 39% |
| Increasing immigration levels would create more competition for jobs and slow wage growth | 48% | 51% | 45% | 50% | 50% | 46% | 51% | 48% | 45% | 51% |
| Base (n) | 1,781 | 875 | 906 | 533 | 601 | 647 | 636 | 610 | 157 | 220 |
| TOTAL: Agree | People who say the levels of immigration have been
too low |
People who say the levels of immigration have been
about right |
People who say the levels of immigration have been
too high |
| Increasing immigration levels would add more pressure on the housing system and infrastructure | 47% | 62% | 76% |
| Immigration is vital for Australia’s business and economy | 74% | 60% | 34% |
| Increasing immigration levels would equip businesses with the skilled workers they need to reopen as Covid-19 restrictions are eased | 77% | 58% | 34% |
| Increasing immigration levels would help to address Australia’s growing skills shortages as the population ages | 75% | 56% | 34% |
| Increasing immigration levels would create more competition for jobs and slow wage growth | 47% | 48% | 53% |
| Base (n) | 277 | 645 | 694 |
immigration, overseas migration, skill shortages, temporary visas, work visas, Working conditions
Q. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about temporary work visas in Australia?
| TOTAL:
Agree |
TOTAL:
Disagree |
Strongly agree | Somewhat agree | Neither agree nor disagree | Somewhat disagree | Strongly disagree | |
| Temporary work visas should be used to cover genuine skills shortages, not to provide cheap labour | 72% | 8% | 41% | 31% | 20% | 5% | 3% |
| Everyone who works in Australia should be entitled to the same pay and working conditions regardless of their visa status | 67% | 10% | 34% | 33% | 24% | 7% | 3% |
| Temporary work visas are essential for Australian businesses to fill skills shortages | 59% | 14% | 19% | 40% | 26% | 8% | 6% |
| Temporary work visas have been used to drive down wages and working conditions in Australia | 47% | 16% | 17% | 30% | 37% | 12% | 4% |
| TOTAL: Agree | Total | Gender | Age Group | Federal Voting Intention | ||||||
| Male | Female | 18-34 | 35-54 | 55+ | Labor | TOTAL: Coalition | Greens | TOTAL: Other | ||
| Temporary work visas should be used to cover genuine skills shortages, not to provide cheap labour | 72% | 71% | 73% | 60% | 70% | 85% | 74% | 77% | 74% | 64% |
| Everyone who works in Australia should be entitled to the same pay and working conditions regardless of their visa status | 67% | 67% | 66% | 57% | 66% | 75% | 71% | 70% | 75% | 55% |
| Temporary work visas are essential for Australian businesses to fill skills shortages | 59% | 61% | 58% | 55% | 57% | 66% | 63% | 66% | 63% | 46% |
| Temporary work visas have been used to drive down wages and working conditions in Australia | 47% | 50% | 44% | 49% | 50% | 43% | 53% | 44% | 51% | 46% |
| Base (n) | 1,781 | 875 | 906 | 533 | 601 | 647 | 636 | 610 | 157 | 220 |
| TOTAL: Agree | People who say the levels of immigration have been
too low |
People who say the levels of immigration have been
about right |
People who say the levels of immigration have been
too high |
| Temporary work visas should be used to cover genuine skills shortages, not to provide cheap labour | 71% | 73% | 75% |
| Everyone who works in Australia should be entitled to the same pay and working conditions regardless of their visa status | 78% | 67% | 64% |
| Temporary work visas are essential for Australian businesses to fill skills shortages | 71% | 66% | 52% |
| Temporary work visas have been used to drive down wages and working conditions in Australia | 49% | 44% | 56% |
| Base (n) | 277 | 645 | 694 |
australia firts hiring, employment, immigration, kristina kenneally, migrants, work visa
Q. Last weekend Kristina Kenneally, a NSW senator, called for the federal government to reduce the number of temporary migrant worker visas permitted after the Covid-19 outbreak. She argues that Australian businesses should prioritise training and hiring Australians for roles, rather than seeking temporary workers to fill skill-shortages.
To what extent, do you support or oppose this idea of “Australia first” hiring?
| Gender | Age Group | ||||||
| Total | Male | Female | 18-34 | 35-54 | 55+ | ||
| Strongly support | 41% | 36% | 46% | 27% | 42% | 53% | |
| Somewhat support | 26% | 28% | 23% | 25% | 26% | 25% | |
| Neither support, nor oppose | 21% | 21% | 21% | 30% | 24% | 10% | |
| Somewhat oppose | 6% | 7% | 4% | 10% | 3% | 5% | |
| Strongly oppose | 6% | 8% | 5% | 9% | 5% | 6% | |
| TOTAL: Support | 67% | 64% | 70% | 52% | 68% | 78% | |
| TOTAL: Oppose | 12% | 15% | 9% | 18% | 8% | 12% | |
| Base (n) | 1,067 | 532 | 535 | 341 | 341 | 385 | |
| Federal Voting Intention | ||||
| Labor | Coalition | Greens | TOTAL: Other | |
| Strongly support | 41% | 44% | 23% | 61% |
| Somewhat support | 22% | 31% | 26% | 21% |
| Neither support, nor oppose | 24% | 15% | 34% | 12% |
| Somewhat oppose | 7% | 4% | 7% | 4% |
| Strongly oppose | 6% | 5% | 10% | 2% |
| TOTAL: Support | 63% | 75% | 50% | 82% |
| TOTAL: Oppose | 13% | 10% | 17% | 7% |
| Base (n) | 306 | 418 | 86 | 143 |
Q. When a family applies to migrate to Australia, should it be possible for them to be rejected purely on the basis of their religion?
|
|
Total
|
|
Vote Labor |
Vote Lib/Nat |
Vote Greens |
Vote other |
|
Feb 2011 |
| Should be rejected on basis of religion |
21% |
16% |
27% |
9% |
29% |
19% |
||
| Should not be rejected on basis of religion |
63% |
71% |
53% |
84% |
56% |
65% |
||
| Don’t know |
17% |
13% |
20% |
7% |
15% |
15% |
63% believed that when a family applies to migrate to Australia, they should not be rejected purely on the basis of their religion and 21% think it should be possible to reject purely based on religion. These figures are similar to when this question was asked in 2011.
There were no substantial differences across age and gender groups.
Liberal voters were a little more supportive of being able to reject based on religion (27%) and Greens voters were strongly opposed (84%).
asylum seekers, Essential Report, immigration, Polling
Q. From what you have read and heard, what percentage of Australia’s annual immigration intake are asylum seekers arriving by boat?
| 7 Jun 2010 | This week | Vote Labor | Vote Lib/Nat | Vote Greens | |
| 50% or more | 10% | 12% | 11% | 13% | 10% |
| About 25% | 15% | 11% | 10% | 12% | 6% |
| About 10% | 13% | 10% | 9% | 10% | 8% |
| About 5% | 15% | 16% | 18% | 17% | 16% |
| 1% or less | 18% | 25% | 26% | 24% | 39% |
| Don’t know | 30% | 27% | 25% | 23% | 21% |
Twenty three per cent (23%) of respondents think that the proportion of asylum seeker intake by boat is 25% or more of the annual immigration intake.
Ten per cent (10%) of respondents think that the percentage of boat arrivals is about 10% of annual immigration intake and 16% believe it to be about 5%.
Twenty five per cent (25%) of respondents believe that the proportion of asylum seekers arriving by boat constitutes 1% or less of our annual immigration intake and 27% of respondents don’t know.
Greens voters are the most likely to think that the percentage was 1% or less, with 39% of Greens respondents selecting this response.
The proportion of respondents believing the proportion to be ‘1% or less’ has shifted 7 points up from 18% to 25% since 7 June 2010.
EMC, ER, Essential Media, Essential Report, Greens, immigration, Immigration and Religion, Labor, Liberal, migrate, Polling, polls, Religion, Religion Issues
Q. When a family applies to migrate to Australia, should it be possible for them to be rejected purely on the basis of their religion?
| Total | Vote Labor | Vote Lib/Nat | Vote Greens | |
| Should be rejected on basis of religion | 19% | 17% | 24% | 10% |
| Should not be rejected on basis of religion | 65% | 67% | 63% | 85% |
| Don’t know | 15% | 16% | 13% | 5% |
65% believed that when a family applies to migrate to Australia, they should not be rejected purely on the basis of their religion and 19% think it should be possible to reject purely based on religion. There were no substantial differences across age and gender groups.
Liberal voters were a little more supportive of being able to reject based on religion (24%) and Greens voters were strongly opposed (85%).
ALP, asylum seekers, Chris Bowen, detention centres, EMC, Federal Labor Government, immigration, Immigration minister, Julia Gillard, Labor, peter lewis, The Drum
First Published on The Drum 26/10/2010
If political progressives want to stop the ALP from drifting to the Right, energetically backing the decision to move women and children out of immigration detention looks like a good place to start.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Immigration minister Chris Bowen took the new minority government’s first truly brave decision last week, yet all they got was a sullen acceptance from a Left still acting like jilted lovers after the disappointments of the election campaign.