Do Australians Want Less Immigration? What the Polls Really Say
Guardian Australia political reporter Josh Butler spoke with Essential Media chair Peter Lewis about what Australians think about immigration and where the votes sit.
The chat was published on 1 October 2026 as an Australian Politics podcast called 'Guardian Essential report: what do Australians really think about immigration' Guardian Australia. The description calls immigration the hot-button issue in this month's polling. It also says the Coalition hit their equal-lowest ever primary vote.
That polling comes from September 2026 Guardian Essential reporting Guardian Australia. The Coalition's primary vote — the share of voters who put them first — fell four points to 22% since the month before. Angus Taylor led the Coalition at the time. One Nation rose to 25%. More than half of Australians want the migrant intake lowered.
A separate Guardian comment piece on 30 September 2026 looks at the same debate differently. It says a majority of Australians still support immigration Guardian Australia.
The broader context here is both results can be true at once. People can back immigration and still want fewer arrivals. Think of it like barracking for your footy club but wanting a smaller crowd at the ground. That split is well known in Canberra. It gives parties room to move.
Looking at what this means for party strategy, the contest on the right is close. The Coalition on 22% against One Nation on 25% is not normal. It is a direct fight over who owns migration. Canberra will have noticed.
In my view, the Butler-Lewis chat is more about who can say what than about one single policy. Who can call for fewer arrivals and keep suburban moderates? Who can defend the program and still sound serious on housing, wages and services? Those calls shape shadow cabinet lines, Senate tactics, crossbench talks and what backbenchers say at home.
The broader context here is wobble, not a settled shift, on these numbers alone. Equal lows come and go. Low first votes can lift again. What lasts is the double message to the big parties. Cut the intake, keep the program. A party that holds both keeps options open. One that picks a single side hands the other half to a rival.
