‘Frosty on Trump': Australians eager for more independence from the US
The latest Resolve Political Monitor survey of more than 2300 people, conducted for this masthead, found that most Australians continue to have strongly negative views of Trump six months after he re-entered the White House.
Fewer than one in five Australian voters believe Trump's election was a good outcome for Australia.
When asked whether it would be a good or a bad thing for Australia to become more independent from the US on foreign policy and national security, 46 per cent of respondents said they believed it would be a good thing, compared to 22 per cent who said it would be a bad thing.
When compared along political lines, 56 per cent of Labor voters said they supported Australia adopting a more independent foreign policy and just 12 per cent opposed the idea.
Coalition voters were evenly split, with 34 per cent favouring more distance from its closest security partner while 35 per cent said it would be bad to become more independent of the US.
Since returning to the White House, Trump has imposed a 10 per cent tariff on all Australian goods, as well as a 50 per cent tariff on steel and aluminium imports.
The Trump administration has also called for Australia to dramatically increase defence spending to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product, while launching a review into the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarine pact.
Since his re-election, Albanese has stressed the importance of Australian sovereignty and said his government would not commit to joining the United States in a hypothetical war with China over Taiwan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
West Australian
13 minutes ago
- West Australian
Hope for tariff carve-out wanes as Trump strikes deals
Australia's hopes for a total tariff exemption are dwindling as Donald Trump's deals with other nations lay bare the limits of trade negotiations. Since pushing his tariff deadline to August 1, the US president has struck trade agreements with Japan, and on Monday, the European Union. While the deals landed on tariffs lower than Mr Trump's initial threats, both were higher than the 10 per cent baseline levy imposed on Australian goods. No US trading partner has managed to completely dodge tariffs on their items. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Trade Minister Don Farrell have maintained Australian products should not be hit with any tariffs, but the latest deals show an exemption could be off the table. "Trump really does see tariffs as something that is good in themselves," University of Sydney US politics expert David Smith told AAP. "Even though there were a lot of hopes at the beginning of this process that countries could negotiate their way out of tariffs altogether - that's not really happening." Australia, like other nations, might instead have to pivot approaches and try to strategically position its industries within these deals. For example, the US pharmaceutical sector has long taken issue with Australia's drug subsidy scheme and urged the president to act. In early July, Mr Trump threatened a 200 per cent tariff on pharmaceuticals, which could be seen as a way for the US to chip away at the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in exchange for a trade deal. Both of Australia's major parties have maintained the program is not up for negotiation. Instead, the federal government revealed it would lift restrictions on certain US beef imports. "Australia is thinking about other areas where we would be prepared to make concessions, because we were not going to be making concessions on (the PBS)," Associate Professor Smith said. Mr Albanese has maintained his government is engaging in Australia's national interest. While the government said its decision to lift restrictions followed a decade-long scientific review and noted the measure would not compromise biosecurity, the opposition and figures within the cattle industry have called for an independent examination of the issue. "If we have created a brand new threat, we should be very clear about that," Liberal senator Jane Hume told parliament.
Perth Now
13 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Banks forced to take action on high-fee accounts
Banks will refund more than $93 million to low-income customers who were charged high fees on their accounts. More than a million people have already been moved to low-fee accounts, saving an expected $50 million in annual fees, according the the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's (ASIC) Better and Beyond report released on Tuesday. The review follows the Better Banking for Indigenous Consumers report, released in July 2024, which revealed at least two million low-income Australians, who relied on Centrelink payments, had bank accounts charging high fees. There were 21 banks included in the latest report, which found even larger numbers of low-income Australians paying too much. "What started as an initiative focused on addressing avoidable bank fees for low-income customers in regional and remote locations, particularly First Nations consumers, revealed a much wider problem affecting customers nationwide," commissioner Alan Kirkland said. Since July 2024, the four banks involved in the initial report- ANZ, Bendigo Bank, Westpac and the Commonwealth Bank (including Bankwest) have paid more than $33 million in refunds to the customers identified. Three-of-those-four banks have committed to refunds to a broader group of low-income customers who have been in high-fee accounts. The Commonwealth Bank and Bankwest have indicated they don't intend making payments to customers outside the initial cohort, ASIC's report said. Several other banks have also reviewed the impact of high-fee accounts on low-income customers and have committed to remediation. A further $60 million will be refunded to more than 770,000 customers as a result. ASIC Chair Joe Longo said, while banks had made improvements during the commission's surveillance, there was still work to be done. "It should not take an ASIC review to force $93 million in refunds or make banks assess their processes to ensure the trust and expectations placed in them are justified," he said. "Banks need to truly hear the messages in this report - read it, review it, and ask themselves some difficult questions about what led to this situation." Nine banks had made it easier to access low-fee accounts, while another seven had improved processes for moving customers to those types of accounts. Six more banks were now collecting data to identify First Nations customers, following a recommendations from the commission's initial review. "Our intervention has forced many banks to take action, but more needs to be done to ensure financially vulnerable consumers are not put in this position again," Mr Kirkland said. "We encourage consumers to challenge their banks to ensure that they are in the best account for their needs. "More importantly, we encourage banks to do more to proactively identify low- income customers and move them to low-fee accounts."
Perth Now
13 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Hope for tariff carve-out wanes as Trump strikes deals
Australia's hopes for a total tariff exemption are dwindling as Donald Trump's deals with other nations lay bare the limits of trade negotiations. Since pushing his tariff deadline to August 1, the US president has struck trade agreements with Japan, and on Monday, the European Union. While the deals landed on tariffs lower than Mr Trump's initial threats, both were higher than the 10 per cent baseline levy imposed on Australian goods. No US trading partner has managed to completely dodge tariffs on their items. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Trade Minister Don Farrell have maintained Australian products should not be hit with any tariffs, but the latest deals show an exemption could be off the table. "Trump really does see tariffs as something that is good in themselves," University of Sydney US politics expert David Smith told AAP. "Even though there were a lot of hopes at the beginning of this process that countries could negotiate their way out of tariffs altogether - that's not really happening." Australia, like other nations, might instead have to pivot approaches and try to strategically position its industries within these deals. For example, the US pharmaceutical sector has long taken issue with Australia's drug subsidy scheme and urged the president to act. In early July, Mr Trump threatened a 200 per cent tariff on pharmaceuticals, which could be seen as a way for the US to chip away at the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in exchange for a trade deal. Both of Australia's major parties have maintained the program is not up for negotiation. Instead, the federal government revealed it would lift restrictions on certain US beef imports. "Australia is thinking about other areas where we would be prepared to make concessions, because we were not going to be making concessions on (the PBS)," Associate Professor Smith said. Mr Albanese has maintained his government is engaging in Australia's national interest. While the government said its decision to lift restrictions followed a decade-long scientific review and noted the measure would not compromise biosecurity, the opposition and figures within the cattle industry have called for an independent examination of the issue. "If we have created a brand new threat, we should be very clear about that," Liberal senator Jane Hume told parliament.
