According to Roy Morgan Research Prime Minister Scott Morrison is distrusted by a majority of the Australian public - along with US President Donald Trump, Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton and disgraced former deputy-prime minister Barnaby Joyce

Roy Morgan Research, Finding No. 8333 Topic: Public Opinion Press Release, Special Poll Country: Australia New Zealand United States, 19 March 2020:

New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern has highest ‘Net Trust Score’ of all political leaders while Australian PM Scott Morrison has a ‘Net Distrust Score’ to overcome

A special Roy Morgan survey on ‘Trust’ and ‘Distrust’ of government leaders shows New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern scores the highest ‘Net Trust Score’ of all – meaning the ‘Trust’ felt toward the New Zealand leader far outweighs the ‘Distrust’ – according to a special Roy Morgan Snap SMS Survey of 974 Australians aged 14+ conducted over the last two days.

People surveyed in Australia were asked ‘Which government leaders do you trust. List as many as you can think of?’ and also ‘Which government leaders do you distrust. List as many as you can think of?’ By subtracting distrust from trust we arrive at a Net Trust Score (if trust outweighs distrust) or Net Distrust Score (if distrust outweighs trust).

Women dominate the Net Trust Scores filling four out of the top five positions. Other leaders to score highly on Net Trust include Opposition Leader in the Senate Penny Wong, Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews, NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian and former ALP Deputy Leader Tanya Plibersek.

Top 10 Political Leaders by Net Trust Score

Source: Roy Morgan Snap SMS survey conducted on March 18-19, 2020.

Base: Australians aged 14+. n=974.

Scott Morrison has a ‘Net Distrust Score’ alongside colleague Peter Dutton

Prime Minister Scott Morrison is mentioned as a ‘Trusted’ leader by more Australians than any other. However, unfortunately for Morrison, there are far more Australians that have a ‘Distrust’ of the Prime Minister than ‘Trust’ him – leaving the Prime Minister with a ‘Net Distrust Score’

Other prominent political leaders that have ‘Net Distrust Scores’ include Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton, US President Donald Trump and former National Party Leader Barnaby Joyce.

Roy Morgan CEO Michele Levine says the New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s trust has been built on taking decisive actions in many challenging situations since becoming Prime Minister:

“New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has demonstrated impressive leadership since taking New Zealand’s top job in responding with empathy to the Christchurch mosque shootings a year ago and the tragedy caused by the eruption of White Island last year. Most recently, Ardern’s decisive leadership was demonstrated with New Zealand becoming the first country to impose harsh restriction on all foreign nationals from entering the country in response to the global COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic.

“In contrast our own Prime Minister Scott Morrison faced a ‘wall of criticism’ for his handling of the Summer bushfire crisis and this has continued for many with his handling of the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic.

“Given the current uncertainties, it is important Australians trust our Prime Minister. Although the results show Morrison is trusted by a wide variety of Australians there are far more that distrust the PM meaning he has a significant ‘Net Distrust Score’.

“One of the most striking results of this unprompted research assessing opinions of political leaders is the leading performance of many of Australia’s female politicians. As well as New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern on top, Opposition Leader in the Senate Penny Wong, NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian and former ALP Deputy Leader Tanya Plibersek are all in the top five. Former Prime Minister Julia Gillard is also not far behind in eighth position despite living in the United Kingdom for the past few years.

“Additional detail on the reasons Australians have given for ‘Trusting’ and also ‘Distrusting’ this diverse range of political leaders will be released in coming days.”

Morrison has now slumped to the lowest likeability of any Australian leader since Andrew Peacock in 1990

The Canberra Times, 18 February 2020:

Prime Minister Scott Morrison, whose popularity has taken a big hit over the summer. Picture: Karleen Minney

It will be no surprise to Scott Morrison that his handling of the bushfires was a major political setback, and the latest set of polling only confirms the extent. The question will be whether the mud sticks.

Morrison sailed through last year's election on a high, with a likeability rating of 5.1, not great by historic standards, but higher than any party leader since Labor's Kevin Rudd after winning the 2007 election.

He has now slumped to the lowest of any leader since Andrew Peacock in 1990, and below the record low that Bill Shorten put on the scoreboard as Labor leader last year. Shorten had a dismal likeability rating of 3.97 in the ANU Election Study; Morrison has now scored 3.92 in a January poll by the ANU's Centre for Social Research.

It was personal. Half the people polled were asked to think about the performance of Scott Morrison when judging how good or bad a job the government had done on the bush fires; the other half was told to think about the performance of the government. You guessed it. When prompted by reference to Morrison, 64 per cent said the government had done a bad or very bad job, compared with 59 per cent when thinking about the government more broadly.

Anthony Albanese moved up in popularity, from 4.87 in June to 5.04 now - the highest of any Labor leader since Kevin Rudd at his peak in 2007, and higher than Mark Latham and Paul Keating.

The same message came from the Newspoll, which showed Labor overtaking the Coalition in the preferred prime minister ranks in January, for the first time since a brief hit from the Liberal leadership turmoil in August 2018. In September last year, 50 per cent of voters preferred Morrison for prime minister, against Anthony Albanese's 31 per cent, according to Newspoll. By January, Albanese was on 43 per cent and Morrison 39. Worse, Morrison's satisfaction rating went through the floor.

"I've got a thick skin," Morrison said on Monday when asked about criticism of him at the bush fire relief concert. "And I understand that over the period of the summer, you know, that people felt really raw about things ... My response is just to do things and get things done."….

But to date, Morrison has essentially failed to present any kind of ambitious reform agenda or coherent plan. As a result his Prime Ministership has turned into an endless round of inadequate and misguided responses to disaster, crisis and scandal…...

In the ANU survey just after the election last year, 45 per cent of people said the government should allow new coal mines; now only 37 per cent think so. As banks and big investors stop lending to thermal coal and turn their attention also to reducing investments in oil and gas, Morrison needs to align himself with the inevitable and start leading on new ideas for regional and remote communities.

He needs a better idea than the only one he seems to have rattling around in the top drawer - throwing more cash at the regions. Cash is handy, but it is not a reason for confidence or hope.

It appears that almost singlehandedly Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison may have sunk his own government.

"Around 77.8 per cent of the population reported indirect exposure, by having a friend or family member that had property damage; friend/family that had property threatened; had their travel/holiday plans affected; were exposed to the physical effects of smoke; or felt anxious or worried. This equates to around 15.4 million adults." ["Exposure and the impact on attitudes of the 2019-20 Australian Bushfires" 2020]

In January 2020 the ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods and the Social Research Centre collected data from more than three thousand Australian adults from the probability sample ‘Life in Australia’ about their exposure to the bushfires that occurred across the spring and summer of late 2019 and into early 2020. 

Researchers also asked about a range of attitudes towards the environment, institutions, and political issues. 

Data from the January 2020 ANU poll was able to be linked to previous polls at the individual level.

This is the result........

Biddle, N, Edwards, B, Herz, D & Makkai, T, (2020) "Exposure and the impact on attitudes of the 2019-20 Australian Bushfires":

Abstract 

The bushfires that occurred over the 2019/20 Australian spring and summer were unprecedented in scale and wide in their geographic impact. 

Between 20 January and 3 February 2020, the ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods and the Social Research Centre collected data from more than three thousand Australian adults about their exposure to the bushfires, as well as a range of other attitudes and beliefs. 

We estimate that the vast majority of Australians (78.6 per cent) were impacted in one way or another either directly, through their family/friends, or through the physical effects of smoke. 

Furthermore, we estimate that around 2.9 million adult Australians had their property damaged, their property threatened, or had to be evacuated. 

This is the first estimate of self-reported impacts on that scale from a nationally representative, probability-based survey. 

Our survey findings also show that subjective wellbeing amongst the Australian population has declined since the start of spring 2019, people are less satisfied with the direction of the country, and have less confidence in the Federal Government. 

People are more likely, however, to think that the environment and climate change are issues and a potential threat to them, with a significant decline in the proportion of people who support new coal mines. 

By linking individuals through time, we are also able to show that some of these changes are attributable to exposure to the bushfires.

DOCUMENT Exposure_and_impact_on_attitudes_of_the_2019-20_Australian_Bushfires_publication.pdf (PDF, 685.59 KB):


General satisfaction with life before and after the bushfire season 

In the October 2019 ANUpoll 65.2 per centsaid they were either satisfied or very satisfied with the way the country is heading. By January 2020 this had declined to 59.5 per cent of adult Australians. 

Over the same period, there was a small (but significant) average decline in life satisfaction from 7.05 (on a scale from 0 to 10) to 6.9. 

Levels of confidence in institutions 

Confidence in the federal government declined by 10.9 percentage points from October 2019 to 27.3 per cent by January 2020. 

Confidence in other institutions was quite stable over the period, and higher than for the Federal Government. In January 2020: 

• 48.8 per cent of the population had confidence in the public service (52.1 per cent in October 2019); 

• 73.8 per cent had confidence in the police (75.8 per cent in October 2019); 

• 40.4 per cent had confidence in the State/Territory Government where they lived (not asked in 2019); and 

• 93.0 per cent reported confidence in organisations responsible for firefighting in regional or rural areas (not asked in 2019). 

Voting patterns between October 2019 and January 2020 

The per cent of people who said they would vote for the Coalition if an election was held that day declined from 40.4 per cent in October 2019 to 34.8 per cent in January 2020. 

The largest relative increase (8.8 per cent to 10.5 per cent) was for those who would vote for a party other than the Coalition, Labor, or the Greens. 

Views on party leaders between June 2019 and January 2020 

Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s average rating declined from 5.25 to 3.92 out of 10. 

Leader of the Opposition Anthony Albanese’s average rating increased from 4.87 to 5.04. 

Changes in attitudes towards the environment 

49.7 per cent of people reported aspects of the environment as the most important issue or second most important issue facing Australia in January 2020 compared to 41.5 per cent in October 2019. 

Reporting fires, natural disasters or extreme weather as the most or second most important issue were close to non-existent in October 2019. This increased to 10.2 percent by January 2020. 

Concern about most specific issues increased from 2008 to January 2020, with the greatest increase for: 

• loss of native vegetation or animal species or biodiversity (a 13 percentage point increase); 

• drought and drying (a 9 percentage point increase). 

Support for new coal mines have declined since the May 2019 election. In June 2019 45.3 per cent said yes to the question ‘In your opinion, should the Government allow the opening of news coal mines?’. This had declined to 37.0 per cent in January 2020.

Capital cities versus the rest 

There is majority support by residents in both capital and those living outside of capital cities that global warming is very serious, and that global warming will be a threat to them. These views are more strongly held by capital city residents. 

Only 35.6 per cent of capital and 40.1 per cent of non-capital city residents support new coal mines and there is no statistically significant difference in views between the two. 

Did exposure to the bushfires affect changes in satisfaction, confidence or voting intentions? 

Direct or indirect exposure to bushfires did not statistically affect changes in life satisfaction between October and January. 

Indirect exposure to the bushfires affected levels of confidence in government and satisfaction with the direction of the country. Those exposed reported greater declines in both confidence and satisfaction. 

Although there was no significant direct affect from the bushfires on reporting a change in voting intention, exposure to the bushfires was associated with a significant decline in the likeability of Prime Minister Scott Morrison......

It appears that almost singlehandedly Australian Prime Minister & Liberal MP for Cook Scott John Morrison - aka #ScottyFromMarketing - may have sunk his own government.

Australian Newspaper Cross-Platform Audience Numbers for the 12 months to December 2019 are not good news for News Corp

This Roy Morgan survey of Cross-Platform Audiences covers the number of Australians who have read or accessed individual newspaper content via print, web or app from December 2018 to December 2019.

Print is calculated as net readership in an average 7 days and digital as net website visitation and app usage in an average 7 days. 

Of the 14 prominent mastheads in this cross-platform survey all had experienced readership decline in the 12 months to December 2019, with the exception of the Financial Review (up 14.1%), The Sydney Morning Herald (up 4.1%) and The Age (up 1.2%).

The worst decline in audience numbers occured in the News Corp mastheads.

Percentage Change In Cross-Platform Audience

Adelaide Advertiser  -4.4%
Canberra Times  -14.1% 
Courier-Mail  -1.4% 
Daily Telegraph  -15.5% 
Financial Review  14.1% 
Herald Sun  -7.7% 
Mercury  -3.5% 
Newcastle Herald  -5.3% 
Sunday Times  -4.0% 
Sydney Morning Herald  4.1% 
The Age  1.2% 
The Australian  -4.3%
The Saturday Paper  -7.6% 
West Australian  -6.6%

In the period December 2018 to December 2019 the print versions of all 14 mastheads experienced a degree of readership decline.

News Corp has reported a decline in global revenue and profits in the last quarter ending 31 December 2019, with revenue falling by 5.6% to $2.8 billion. 

According to Mumbrella, advertising revenue was down 5% across the business, with News Corp putting the blame largely on a “weakness in the print advertising market, primarily in Australia”.

Australia Institute Survey Reveals: Bushfires Cost 1.8 million Work Days, Leave 5 Million Sick from Smoke

The Australia Institute, media release, 23 January 2020: 

Survey Reveals: Bushfires Cost 1.8 million Work Days, Leave 5 Million Sick from Smoke 

New national survey research from The Australia Institute reveals most Australians have been personally impacted by the bushfires and smoke, including millions missing work or suffering health impacts. 

Additionally, the research shows concern about the impacts of climate change are especially high among those directly affected by the fires, as is the wish for the Government to do more to reduce carbon emissions. 

Key points 

- 57% of respondents reported some kind of direct impact from the bushfires and smoke. 

- 26% of survey respondents experienced negative health impacts from the fires’ smoke, representing 5.1 million Australian adults. 

• Health impacts were more widely reported in NSW (35%) and Victoria (29%). 

- 17% of full time workers and 8% of part time workers, representing 1.8 million Australians, reported they had missed work due to the fires. 

• This alone is estimated to have costed more than $1.3 billion in lost economic production, assuming only one lost day per worker. 

- Direct experience of impacts was associated with stronger concern about climate change. 

“Australia is in the grip of a national climate disaster. The social, economic and medical impacts are vast and only just starting to become clear,” said Tom Swann, senior researcher at the Australia Institute. 

“Our research shows that it’s likely more than 5 million Australian adults, along with many children, have suffered negative health impacts as a result of the fires and at least 1.5 million have missed work. 

“Even looking simply at lost work days, the bill is in the billions of dollars. The broader impacts and recovery efforts will cost many billions more and take many years. That is why it is so concerning that rising emissions threaten to make events like this even more common in the future. 

“Putting a levy on fossil fuel producers and establishing a National Climate Disaster Fund would move some of the financial burden of these events from the households, businesses and taxpayers that are currently forced to pick up the tab. 

“This research suggests that, as Australians face the escalating impacts of climate change in their own lives, calls for policies that reduce carbon emissions will continue to grow.” 

A polling brief, including detailed results, is available here.

Just in time for Christmas the Morrison Government's risible greenhouse gas emission projections up to 2030 have been released

Well the federal parliament closed its doors for the year in early December so there is going to be no questioning of the Morrison Government on the floor of the House of Representatives until 4 February 2020.

It follows that it was time to release some of the government untruths packaged between paper covers or boxed in a PDF - just in time for Christmas.

On the first Tuesday of December the Morrison Government released
Australia’s emissions projections 2019, accompanied by a misleading fanfare from the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction & Liberal MP for Hume, Angus Taylor.

In part this emissions fairytale tells us that:

Australia’s 2030 target (26–28 per cent below 2005 levels) 

• Emissions in 2030 are projected to be 511 Mt CO2 -e, 52 Mt CO2 -e lower than the 2018 estimate for 2030 of 563 Mt CO2 -e. 

• To achieve Australia’s 2030 target of 26 to 28 per cent below 2005 levels, emissions reductions of 395 to 462 Mt CO2 -e between 2021 and 2030 are required. When overachievement of 411 Mt CO2 -e from previous targets is included, Australia will overachieve by 16 Mt CO2 -e (26 per cent reduction) and will require 51 Mt CO2 -e of cumulative emissions reduction between 2021 and 2030 to meet the 28 per cent reduction target. 

• Compared to the 2018 projections, the downward revision in the 2019 projections reflects: 

– the inclusion of the Climate Solutions Fund which will reduce emissions by 103 Mt CO2 -e, particularly in the Land Use Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector;

 – the inclusion of other measures in the Climate Solutions Package including energy efficiency measures in the electricity and direct combustion sectors; 

– stronger renewables deployment – due to increased uptake of small and mid-scale solar photovoltaics (PV) projected by the Clean Energy Regulator (CER) and Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO), and the inclusion of 50 per cent renewable energy targets in Victoria, Queensland and the Northern Territory; and 

– updated forecasts of electricity demand.

Sounds good until you look at the numbers.

In the original Kyoto Agreement Australia's baseline for accounting greenhouse gas emissions was 1990 and total national greenhouse gas emissions for that year were recorded as 610MT CO2-e.

Australia came away unhappy with the conference outcome, so bitched and griped at every turn until the baseline was moved, eventually being extended out to 2005.

In 2005 Australia's total greenhouse gas emissions were 611MT CO2-e if land use is included. The total changes to 522MT CO2-e if land use is excluded. 

The predictions for 2030 in the recent emissions projections are 511MT CO2-e land use included and 521MT CO2-e land use excluded.

There is a 100 point drop in the 2030 projection including land use and a 1 point drop with land use excluded.

It's  still a reduction right? Even if the Morrison Government got there by using an accounting trick?

Well no. Because - even with the carryover 'carbon credits' accounting trick which allows the the Morrison Government to subtract a total of 411MT CO-e from greenhouse gas emissions across selected annual totals - Australia is not meeting the undertakings made to the international community at the U.N. 2015 Paris climate change conference (COP 21).

In fact we have spent the six years between 2013 (when emissions total was 530MT CO2-e) and 2019 (when emissions total was 532MT CO2-e) just treading water, while the days and nights became hotter, our rivers ran dry and our forests burned. 

Next year emissions are expected to rise again to what they were in 2014, 534MT CO2-e.

In Paris Australia agreed to reduce national greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28 per cent by 2030.

That would mean that Australia's emissions target in 2030 should be somewhere between 440MT CO2-e and 450MT CO2-e.

There is a shortfall in meeting those targets.

With land use included the target shortfall in projections is between est. 59MT CO2-e and 71MT CO2-e. With land use excluded the shortfall is between est. 69MT CO2-e and 81MT CO2-e.

That is a lot of mega tonnes. Especially if we were to correct the Morrison Govenment's creative accounting and remove this carryover credits from the equation.

Then the 2030 emissions reduction target shortfall would probably grow by arround est. 80-84 per cent.

Angus Taylor attended the 2-13 December 2019 UN Madrid Climate Change Conference (COP25) armed with his copy of that creative government accounting - probably believing that representatives of other nations would find his spiel believable. Though I rather suspect whenever he was at the other end of the room a number would have had their heads together quietly laughing at him. 

Notes:

Emissions are recorded as totalling 532MT CO2-e In 2018 and 2019. However using Morrison & Co's accounting trick it is reduced to a total of 328MT CO2-e in 2018 and -6MT CO2-e in 2019. See http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/4aa038fc-b9ee-4694-99d0-c5346afb5bfb/files/aust-emissions-projects-chart-data-2019.xlsx.

All data the Australia's emissions projections 2019 relies on can be found at -
http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/publications/emissions-projections-2019.

If readers want emissions totals & projections per year from 1990 to 2030 in a more digestible form, there is currently an interactive graph at -
https://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2019/dec/10/the-coalition-isnt-being-honest-about-the-climate-crisis-but-neither-is-labor.

Australian Election Study survey conducted after 2019 federal election found Scott Morrison is most popular leader since 2007 - but not as popular as Kevin Rudd in his heigh day

The Australian Election Study (AES) has surveyed voters since 1987. With the exception of 1987 and 2007 the survey has been funded by the Australian Research Council and its predecessors.

AES surveyed a nationally representative sample of 2,179 voters after the 2019 Australian federal election to find out what shaped their choices in the election.

The respondents were composed of two groups - those who originally took part in the 2016 Australian Election Study and those who were newly surveyed for the 2019 study.

apo.og.au, Australian Election Study, 6 December 2019, Sarah Cameron, Ian McAllister, 2019 Australian federal election: results from the Australian Election Study, Description, excerpt: 

Highlights: 

Policy issues 

• A majority of voters (66%) cast their ballots based on policy issues. 

• The most important issues in the election identified by voters include management of the economy (24%), health (22%) and environmental issues (21%). 

• Voters preferred the Coalition’s policies on management of the economy, taxation, and immigration. 

• Voters preferred Labor’s policies on education, health, and the environment. 

Leaders

• Scott Morrison is the most popular political leader since Kevin Rudd in 2007, scoring 5.1 on a zero to 10 popularity scale. [Note: In 2007 AES recorded Kevin Rudd as 6.3 on a zero to 10 popularity scale**]

• Bill Shorten is the least popular leader of a major political party since 1990. 

• A majority of voters (74%) disapproved of the way the Liberal Party handled the leadership change in 2018, when Scott Morrison replaced Malcolm Turnbull. 

Political trust 

• Satisfaction with democracy is at its lowest level (59%) since the constitutional crisis of the 1970s. 

• Trust in government has reached its lowest level on record, with just 25% believing people in government can be trusted. 

• 56% of Australians believe that the government is run for ‘a few big interests’, while just 12% believe the government is run for ‘all the people’.  [my additional notation]

According to AES in 2007 eighty-six per cent of Australians were satisfied with the way democracy was working. However since then democratic satisfaction has fallen by twenty-seven per cent and “there has been a pattern of declining citizen trust in the political system. Trust has not declined significantly since the 2016 election, but nor has it recovered from record low levels”. 

That 2019 record low trust level represented a twenty percent decline after 2007.

In the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison years the perception that people in government look after themselves rose from 66% in 2013 to 74% in 2016 and 75% in 2019.

After the 2019 federal election only 1 in 4 Australians believe that people in government can be trusted to do the right thing.

The complete study can be read and downloaded here.

** other leaders besides Kevin Rudd who have gone to an election with an AES popularity score higher than that of Scott Morrison were; Bob Hawke (1987 & 1990), Kim Beazley (1988 & 2001), John Howard (1993,1996, 1998, 2001, 2004) and John Hewson (1993).

Australian political leaders and voter perception at the end of 2019

On 8 December 2019 The Australian published its final Newspoll survey for the year.

This YouGov poll of voter intentions/attitude is now an online survey of 1,519 respondents.

It is interesting to note that although both leaders' net satisfaction ratings are in negative territory (Anthony Albanese -1 and Scott Morrison -3) it is Scott Morrison who has been trailing since 10 November 2019.

One has to wonder if the prime minister's underwhelming performance during this unprecedented bushfire season has begun to change voter perceptions.

The Australian, 9 December 2019, p.4:

While Mr Morrison was regarded as being a stronger and more decisive leader than Mr ­Albanese, voters believed he was also more arrogant....

On this measure, 58 per cent of people described the Prime Minister as arrogant compared with 40 per cent assigning this attribute to Mr Albanese.

Both leaders were regarded as being more or less equally trustworthy, which reverses the trend between Mr Morrison and Mr Shorten where the gap was seven points in favour of Mr Morrison. Mr Albanese also levelled the playing field on likeability, with Mr Morrison previously holding a large margin over Mr Shorten.

On the measures of being in touch with voters and understanding the major issues, there was little daylight between the leaders.

But Mr Albanese was regarded as being more caring for people, while Mr Morrison was regarded as being more experienced.....

So who do Australian trust the least these days?

Between 20 July and 29 July 2019 fifty-four thousand nine hundred and seventy (54,970) Australia Talks National Survey respondents were shown eleven professional categories and asked to rank them by level of trust.

The online survey question was; "How much do you trust each of the following?"

This was the result based on the proportion of respondents supporting each political party who answered "somewhat" or "a lot".

ABC News, 27 November 2019

It seems that the least trusted professions are:

1. Celebrities - 8%
2. Politicians - 19%
3. Corporate Exectutives - 20%
4. Religious Leaders - 29%.

The most trusted professions are:

1. Doctors & Nurses - 97%
2. Scientists - 93%
3. Police & Law Enforcement - 84%
4. Judges 80%.

Religious belief is rated the least important attribute that defines Australians' sense of who they are

Australia Talks is an Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) project that was created in collaboration with Vox Pop Labs's data scientists and social scientists. A panel of local academics also guided its creation and the University of Melbourne is an academic partner.

What stands out clearly in this online survey is that personal political belief is what principally drives a sense of identity for the majority of Australians who participated over nine days in July 2019.

The importance of political belief was closely followed by nationality.

Gender (with a marked difference between male & female scoring) and language were ranked third and fourth in order of importance to a sense of self.

Religion came in at a solid last with only 0.192 of a point difference between how males and females scored its low importance with regard to their own identity.
According to ABC News on 6 November 2019; Religious leaders were distrusted by a full 70 per cent of the population, with 35 per cent saying they did not trust them "at all" and Only 15 per cent of respondents thought the country would be better off if more people were religious.

While 60 per cent of the July 2019 respondents; would prefer that people keep their religious views to themselves.

The 29 April 2019 published results of a Vox Pop Labs Vote Compass survey revealed that Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison only scored 3.45 out of 10 when it came to "trustworthiness".

Given this former advertising executive increasingly publicly positions himself as a religious political leader and is quite vocal concerning his Pentecostal faith, one wonders if there is now a class of person who actually ranks lower in the general public's esteem than politicians, pollsters and advertising executives did in the September 2019 IPSOS survey