News
The notion of the Indian diaspora as a voting bloc for Labor needs closer examination, as people in migrant communities say the Coalition has worked hard to lose their support. By Megha Kapoor.
How Indian Australians are being politicised
When Vikram Sharma migrated to Sydney 50 years ago, he used to see ads, in the windows of buildings, that read: “Room to let, Asians should not bother.” That’s not what he chooses to dwell on.
“We used to have time for extracurricular activities like sport, and more time with the family, my wife didn’t have to work. Now there’s no time because of the cost-of-living pressures,” the 72-year-old tells me.
Sharma, who owns an Indian grocery in Surry Hills, says his family generally votes Labor but has also voted Liberal, and he now often votes for independents in local government elections. When I ask him what drives his decision-making, unsurprisingly he is motivated by policies, as are his friends. “It’s very diverse. A lot of my Indian-origin friends are very strong Liberals.”
Days after the March for Australia rallies called out Indian migrants in their calls to action, Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price made a false claim that Labor was prioritising Indian migrants to bolster its vote. What followed has been a well-documented political shitstorm: Price was sacked from the front bench and Sussan Ley eventually apologised and made a quick trip to Harris Park, home to Sydney’s “Little India” precinct.
Price insisted she won’t be silenced on the real issue at hand: “the damaging impacts of mass migration”. It’s a head-scratching stance, given the Northern Territory government’s recent bid to increase migration, and as the vice-chancellor of the Territory’s only university was in India to court international students. And given that net migration in Australia was down 37 per cent in 2024 compared with the previous year, according to government figures.
I scratched my head, too, at the idea of Indians as a homogenous Labor-voting bloc. My parents moved from Delhi to New Zealand when I was a baby. My dad votes for the National Party, much to the chagrin of my Labour-voting, Jacinda Ardern-loving mother. Dad voted Labor on the first ballot he cast here, but as our circumstances changed, his business grew and we became part of the community, so did his vote.
Pigeonholing this diverse and important cohort would be “silly if it wasn’t so sinister”, says Pawan Luthra, chief executive of Indian Link Media Group.
Luthra, who founded his diaspora-focused media outlet after migrating to Australia in 1985, says, “If you look at our election surveys, it’s clear we don’t vote as a bloc. We actually follow what’s happening in the mainstream and are quite reflective of Australia at large.”
The voting intentions of what is now Australia’s fastest-growing diaspora population “have always been as diverse as they themselves”, says Lisa Singh, chief executive of the Australia India Institute. “The last election was … a reflection of that and of the broader voting trends across the electorates.”
As for the statistic Price cited, that 85 per cent of Indian–Australian voters back Labor, the director of the polling company that furnished it has some qualifications. “The debate over just how many Indian Australians voted for Labor, and where they live, is a little misplaced,” says RedBridge Group director Kos Samaras. “The majority of Indian Australians reside in what are best described as safe or semi-safe Labor seats. Not marginal seats. With the exception of one or two electorates, they are hardly the community that some Coalition MPs should be singling out as the source of its electoral woes.
“The Coalition’s larger and more urgent problem lies elsewhere, in the inner and middle-ring urban electorates where large numbers of tertiary-educated professionals live alongside significant Chinese–Australian communities,” Samaras says. “It is in these seats, not in the Indian–Australian heartlands, where the electoral ground is shifting most decisively against them.”
Luthra believes Indian Australians are “fair game for any political party”. He notes the long journey to become an eligible voter in Australia, a process that generally takes up to five years, in which there is plenty of time to observe and interpret the political landscape. He adds that, given a decade of a conservative BJP Indian government, Indian migrants might be considered more attuned to the views of the Coalition. “I think the Coalition actually has to work quite hard to lose their vote, and at the last election they succeeded in doing this – much like they did with the majority of Australians.”
Bharat Desai, a retired hospitality professional and academic from Darwin, adds that Price’s comments triggered a sense of being undervalued. “Indians bring a lot of things to this country and contribute in a very big way – myself in the education field, all my friends are doctors and without them the hospitals here in Darwin wouldn’t be running. We do jobs that others don’t want to do, whether it’s driving taxis or working as cleaners at night. I’ve voted for both sides of politics – and for the Greens a couple of times depending on what their policies were – so that felt like a below-the-belt statement to make.”
Kirthana Selvaraj, 38, an artist and academic who grew up in Western Sydney, usually votes Greens. “I know Indians aren’t a monolith,” she says, testifying to a spectrum of views on issues from gender to caste to politics. “The flattening of a complex, diverse community into a single voting [bloc] doesn’t reflect my experience at all. Neither does the idea that we are going to remain in a vacuum and never change our minds, evolve or be influenced.”
Price’s politically reductive views were all the more hurtful given the very real pressure felt by many Indians to assimilate into a model minority – often as conservatives. A widely viewed video on YouTube shows a young Indian–Australian man wearing an Australian jersey addressing a flag-waving crowd at one of the anti-immigration rallies last month. Even as he expresses support for their argument – that immigrants must contribute and assimilate – he is shoved off the podium to chants of “Aussie, Aussie, Aussie”. The footage was as heartbreaking as it was confusing for some. This idea of having to be seen to be a “proper Aussie” is something Selvaraj can relate to: “I remember at high school, if you said you didn’t love things like Australia Day, it being an issue.”
Selvaraj talks of the “pressure to acculturate so as not to be seen as a problem. So there’s a feeling that if I do enough, if I aspire to the same things that are considered Australian, then I will be absorbed and won’t be considered the racialised other. There’s a lot of internalised racism to assimilate, just so you can feel safe. Often what’s presented as safe and stable is the status quo. Anytime someone would say, ‘But you’re not that Indian’, you would think, Yes, I’ve succeeded in this disguise”.
Price’s comments need to be understood in the context of a far-right echo chamber of anti-Indian sentiment linked to American economic policies. “It’s very clear to many across the Indian diaspora that they are suddenly a target across the Anglosphere by the far right, because of rising tensions between Trump and India,” says Samaras.
Bharat Desai initially thought the senator’s words were misguided, then changed his view. “When she refused to apologise I thought there must be a deeper political force, working to find a particular community to blame. She was making a point by not apologising.”
“What makes it sinister,” adds Pawan Luthra, “is that she’s put a target on the back of Indian–Australians. The community was already feeling vulnerable for being called out in the anti-immigration flyers, and then her comments just act like a dog whistle to fringe elements to pick them out.”
He’s noticed feedback supportive of Price on articles published by Indian Link. The posters, with largely Anglo-Saxon names, declare she “has nothing to apologise for”, that “what she’s saying is absolutely correct” or “we support her and we stand behind”.
“So obviously there is a vacuum in the far right of politics which she is hoping to fulfil,” Luthra says. “This makes her stand out as a champion of the far right and a platform for future positioning.”
Armaan Singh, a 20-year-old nursing student in Melbourne, says he avoids working at night due to fears about his safety, which were greatly compounded by the March for Australia rallies. “When the protests happened, I couldn’t leave the house for two days because I was so scared. I’m away from my family, my parents were worried – they called me and asked me not to go out for those two days.”
So what can politicians do to embrace this important demographic? Pay attention to policy issues that affect most Australians, for a start. Then, says Lisa Singh, have “a strong bipartisan position in support of multiculturalism”.
Luthra says that Indian Australians want to be recognised for their contributions beyond leaders dressing up in saris and achkans and coming to Diwali parties and talking about how great the food is. “I would like to hear more talk about the value of migration, what the contribution is, backing the soft statement with hard numbers … That would make them more endearing to the Indian community and give pride to Indian Australians who are feeling vulnerable right now.”
That’s a view in line with the future voters of Australia, if people like Satyam Verma, a 20-year-old civil engineering student, decide to stay. “I’ve recently heard some words of positivity from the prime minister, who claims he also is the son of an immigrant and shows respect towards immigrants.”
Verma says he doesn’t “lean strongly toward any party at the moment” but if he does stay in Australia, “I would prefer a party that respects everybody and does not put the blame of any problem in the country directly on ‘mass immigration’.”
This article was first published in the print edition of The Saturday Paper on September 20, 2025 as "‘Suddenly a target’".
For almost a decade, The Saturday Paper has published Australia’s leading writers and thinkers. We have pursued stories that are ignored elsewhere, covering them with sensitivity and depth. We have done this on refugee policy, on government integrity, on robo-debt, on aged care, on climate change, on the pandemic.
All our journalism is fiercely independent. It relies on the support of readers. By subscribing to The Saturday Paper, you are ensuring that we can continue to produce essential, issue-defining coverage, to dig out stories that take time, to doggedly hold to account politicians and the political class.
There are very few titles that have the freedom and the space to produce journalism like this. In a country with a concentration of media ownership unlike anything else in the world, it is vitally important. Your subscription helps make it possible.
Subscriber exclusive
Send this article to a friend for free.
Share this subscriber exclusive article with a friend or family member using share credits.
