Suchergebnisse

SINCE THE ELECTION OF THE LIBERAL-NATIONAL PARTY GOVERNMENT IN 1996, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS HAS BEEN DOMINATED BY CLAIMS AND COUNTERCLAIMS ABOUT ELECTORAL MANDATES. THIS PAPER PROVIDES A HISTORICAL RE-EXAMINATION OF THE MEANINGS AND MERITS OF MANDATE THEORIES, OUTLINES THE DIFFICULTIES POSED BY STRONG BICAMERALISM FOR ANY MANDATE THEORY, AND SHOWS HOW THE RISE OF SURVEY RESEARCH HAS STRENGTHENED SOME CLAIMS TO A MANDATE WHILE WEAKENING OTHERS.

DURING THE 1996 ELECTION CAMPAIGN, AUSTRALIA'S LIBERAL-NATIONAL PARTY COALITION PLEDGED THAT IF ELECTED IT WOULD PARTLY PRIVATIZE TELSTRA. THIS PAPER ARGUES THAT THE PROPOSAL CAME AT A TIME WHEN THE TIDE OF PUBLIC OPINION HAD MOVED AGAINST PRIVATIZATION. IT ALSO SHOWS HOW THE OPPOSITION USED POLL DATA BOTH TO PRESENT ITS OWN PROPOSAL IN THE MOST FAVORABLE LIGHT AND TO PORTRAY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ITS POSITION AND THAT OF LABOR GOVERNMENT'S AS MINIMAL. FINALLY, THE PAPER EVALUATES THE SUCCESS OF THIS STRATEGY. THIS ANALYSIS DEMONSTRATES HOW POLLS CAN BE USED BY PARTIES TO ESTABLISH NOT ONLY WHAT THE MAJORITY THINKS, BUT ALSO TO GALVANIZE SUPPORT, NEUTRALIZE OPPOSITION, AND CONVERT THOSE WHO ARE UNDECIDED.

A report about indigenous Australian children taken from their families recommended that the government apologize. Three polls (total N = 3,787 respondents) on the question of whether the government should apologize produced three quite different results: one definitively yes, one definitively no, & one that was more evenly divided. After showing why this happened, the results are related to three quite different understandings of what opinion polls should model: opinion expressed through plebiscites; "real" opinion; & opinion based on some sort of deliberation. Also explored is the relationship between what a poll-following Prime Minister might have done & scholarly judgments about quality in public opinion polls. 33 References. Adapted from the source document.

The most comprehensive survey of Australian attitudes to multiculturalism has been variously interpreted as showing that multiculturalism enjoys a high level of support or very little support at all. A re-analysis of the data suggests that both views are mistaken: while multiculturalists appear to outnumber monoculturalists, many Australians — perhaps most — are caught somewhere in between. Attitudes to multiculturalism correlate strongly with several things: views about assimilation, equal opportunity, government support for ethnic organisations and multicultural programs; the teaching of European as well as Asian languages; and the number, source and kinds of migrants Australia should accept. Attitudes are also related to age, party preference and place of birth. Support for multiculturalism is strongest amongst those who came of age after the official birth of multiculturalism, among those who support Labor or the Australian Democrats, and especially among those born in Europe or Asia. This suggests, other things being equal, that support for multiculturalism is likely to grow.

Since 1984, Australian public opinion (PO) polls on the rate of immigration in general & of Asian immigration in particular have generated a remarkably wide range of response. Differences between the 1984 poll figures & more recent polls may reflect changes over time, while other differences almost certainly reflect differences in the way the questions were worded. However, the most remarkable, if least obvious, cause of the difference seems to be the contexts in which the questions were asked; more precisely, differences in the length & focus of the various questionnaires in which questions on immigration were embedded. PO on the rate of immigration is not only "soft," but is created in the very attempt to measure it. Under these circumstances there is little point in trying to isolate majority opinion or establish which of the polls provides the most accurate reading. Where different readings are a product of differing contexts they may be best understood in terms of competing conceptions about PO itself. 2 Tables, 8 References. Adapted from the source document.