Australians still believe in the ideals of their democracy and government, but their declining faith in politicians and the political system is putting that trust at "profound risk".
A clear majority of voters think ordinary citizens should have a greater say in setting the country's policy priorities, with many feeling politicians prioritise their own self-interest and the interests of lobby groups and corporations over the community's desires.
Those are some of the key findings from the latest annual Purpose of Government Pulse, published by the centre-left Centre for Policy Development (CPD) think tank this month.
"It is clear that voters are losing patience with politics as it has always been done," the report warned.
"People are voicing their frustration with the traditional two-party system by branching out to independents and minor parties like One Nation.
"People increasingly feel like the current political system doesn't listen to their concerns and that major decisions are made without their input or consultation.
"[But] despite this frustration, Australians have not given up on their vision for what government and democracy can, and should, deliver," it found.
The data is drawn from ten survey waves conducted by Essential Research between October 2015 and February 2026.
Huge support for universal healthcare
The report was published on Friday, but the media didn't cover it widely.
Perhaps its findings weren't considered newsworthy enough, since you can only say the same thing so many times before it loses its novelty, and "everyone knows" Australians are increasingly frustrated with their political system.
But the report had important insights.
First, it found that, despite decades of political messaging about the need for smaller government and less intervention, the overwhelming consensus is that government should play a direct role in improving people's long-term wellbeing.
It found the vast majority of Australians say health, education, and childcare must be free or affordable for all, with targeted extra support provided to those who need it most, and that government must maintain the capability to deliver social services directly.
Second, it showed two-thirds of Australians have consistently said for the past decade that voters should have a greater say in setting the government's core policy priorities.
Third, it found that while Australians have clear expectations of what they want government and democracy to deliver, they are increasingly sceptical that politicians will deliver it.
Little say over strategic future
Now, if you look for evidence of voters' growing frustration with Australia's political system, you won't be short of examples.
The CPD report didn't mention it specifically, but an obvious example of voters' concerns about their lack of control over Australia's future is manifest in the current public inquiry into the AUKUS deal.
That inquiry is an extremely unusual phenomenon.
Loading...
If you haven't heard about it, the public hearings, which began in June, have no backing from the federal government and are not funded by taxpayer money. The Australian Peace and Security Forum has coordinated them, with former Labor minister Peter Garrett as lead commissioner.
Former public officials, retired military and naval officers, strategists and academics, and lawyers and union leaders have been dedicating their time to the inquiries to try to uncover basic information about the AUKUS "security partnership" that will lock Australia into a particular security arrangement with the United States for decades.
They want to know why ordinary Australians have been largely excluded from one of the biggest defence decisions in Australia's history.
"The AUKUS deal was conceived in secret and with deception — and continues to be shrouded in secrecy despite the incredibly high stakes and massive cost," the inquiry's website says.
It has been asking questions like: Will AUKUS jeopardise our sovereignty? Why are we joining the US to go to war against China potentially, our major trading partner? Will AUKUS make us safer or turn us into a nuclear target?
In a society more responsive to citizens' concerns, one would expect a publicly funded inquiry (rather than a crowd-funded one) to ask such heavy questions about Australia's strategic future.
Loading...
Concerns about AI, data centres, and surveillance
Other examples of voter unease include:
For instance, anxiety is growing across the political spectrum about the pace at which data centres are being built and how little say local communities have over their construction.
"Increasingly, I'm hearing from people from all walks of life how concerned they are with the pace of AI growth," former Labor industry minister Ed Husic told the ABC's Patricia Karvelas in June.
"Again, if we think new One Nation voters are attracted to the idea of giving the system a kick, look how we're managing [the] massive wave of data centre construction.
"Most local communities have absolutely no say about the construction of these centres in their area, leaving average residents fuming.
"When they resist, they're told these data centres are important for the economy. So if they're so important, why aren't they being built in Bellevue Hill instead of Blacktown?" he said.
Concerns about government contracts
And what about the concerns people have about controversial companies winning major government contracts?
In April, the journalist Cam Wilson, writing for Crikey (he now works for the ABC) reported that the federal government had spent $60 million on contracts with the Trump-aligned surveillance and intelligence data company Palantir Technologies, with little public scrutiny, and the Future Fund held $165 million worth of the company's shares.
"The company has been mired in controversy for alleged human rights violations, its close association with the Trump administration, and the outspoken pro-American political rhetoric of its co-founder, Alex Karp," Wilson wrote.
It would be interesting to see how Australians would vote, given the opportunity, on whether Australian governments should sign contracts with companies like that, or whether the Future Fund should invest in them.
But Australian voters rarely get a say over that kind of thing.
Last week, Nine newspapers broke the story that Coles Supermarkets will cut ties with Palantir after its three-year contract ends in 2027, following a pressure campaign from the activist group GetUp and growing public concerns about the company.
We need more than minor policy tweaks
At any rate, when it comes to formal politics, the CPD report said voters' scepticism about Australia's political system was clearly being reflected in the declining primary vote share of our two major parties and the rising popularity of minor parties and independents.
It also said the "core challenge" for governments and politicians was to address the widespread belief that Australia's political system was failing to deliver on the vision voters had for the future.
When the report was released, CPA chief executive Andrew Hudson said voters wanted to be heard.
"They want to know that their concerns are being listened to and that their long-term interests are being prioritised," he said.
"Unfortunately, the majority of Australians currently don't feel that is the case."
And the report said fixing that "disconnect" would require far more than minor policy tweaks.
"The historic fall in the primary vote share for the major parties is a clear, direct message from voters that they are losing patience with government as it has always been done," it said.
"They want a system that prioritises the needs and concerns of communities in decision-making, and a distinct shift away from a system they see as increasingly captured by powerful, vested interests."
