How do we actually turn down the temperature in political debate?

Only two months ago, a group called Compassion in Politics Australia gained the first signatory to its "Civility Pledge".

Helen Haines.

The organisation, based on a similar foundation in the United Kingdom, aims to turn the tide of toxic debate and build a better politics.

As a start, it's asking elected officials to sign a simple pledge. "In my political life, I pledge to act with honesty, respect, and compassion," is all it states.

This week the independent MP was the victim of an attack widely described as shocking but unsurprising. Sadly predictable, was the common reaction amongst MPs who have been at the receiving end of increasing threats and harassment.

Yesterday, security agencies briefed MPs on the risks to their safety. Security will no doubt be improved as much as is practicable, without sacrificing the critical ability of MPs to interact in their communities.

The more difficult question is what, if anything, can be done about the increasingly hostile political environment. What can be done to restore the "civility" that Haines, at least, pledged to pursue?

Civility was the word emphasised by the Governor-General late yesterday, who stood alongside the husband of Helen Haines in an effort to calm a worried nation.

"We don't have to all agree, but we can wrestle with the issue not the person," Sam Mostyn said from Melbourne's Alfred Hospital. Her message echoed the call to turn the temperature down.

"Words matter, whether spoken or in written form or increasingly in the virtual world."

This call for civility is something ASIO boss Mike Burgess has been going on about now for years.

"I genuinely believe the temperature of our security environment would be several degrees lower if we recommitted to conversing with civility, debating with respect and disagreeing with restraint," he said after the attack on Haines.

Burgess draws a line between words and actions: "ASIO has seen direct correlations between inflamed language, inflamed tensions and acts of violence."

The intelligence chief must feel at times he's talking to a brick wall. He warned against "inflamed language" and called for a return to civility after the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel in 2023, again after lifting the terrorism threat level to "probable" in 2024, and again after the Bondi terrorist attack in 2025.

Will anyone listen this time? Will an attack on one of their own force politicians to re-think their part in setting the tone of political discourse?

For some, the answer is clearly yes. There is a degree of self-reflection this week.

"We should all, every single one of us, me included, find ways to minimise the temperature of these debates," said shadow minister Jono Duniam, who will soon depart the Senate.

"We could all do better. I don't exclude myself or any political party," acknowledged the prime minister who, like Burgess, has repeatedly called for a more civil debate.

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor, by contrast, is worried about limiting robust argument. While condemning anything that intimidates or incites violence, he defended the role of vigorous debate.

"We have, like so few other countries in the world, avoided political violence. This is part of the great Australian achievement, and we've done that by having vigorous and rigorous debate and choice at the ballot box," he said.

"This is what's worked for us. We need to make sure it stays there."

It's certainly true — Australia has long enjoyed robust political debate while largely avoiding political violence.

But this misses the point being made by the ASIO boss. Times have changed.

We're now in an environment, according to Burgess, where "politically motivated violence is more likely than previous years".

Angus Taylor's own colleagues can recognise the deterioration, too.

"It's clear that the political environment has become more heated in recent years," said shadow minister James Paterson.

"In the last few years things have gotten much worse," said independent MP Monique Ryan, adding that "the 2025 election was completely different to 2022", with more aggression and anger. It's a common view, particularly among female politicians.

MPs are worried. For themselves, for their families, and for the fate of Australia's democracy.

So, what does it take to turn the temperature down?

"Gosh, if only I could say what the answer to that is," One Nation's Barnaby Joyce admitted on Radio National yesterday. "I don't know," he said.

It's rare to hear Barnaby Joyce stumped for an answer on anything. He's certainly not accepting any blame on the part of One Nation for raising the temperature.

Many might agree with Joyce that there are no easy solutions to counter the powerful domestic and global forces driving voter frustration, political polarisation, toxic online discourse and hate.

Politicians are certainly limited in what they can control. But they're not entirely powerless.

As Burgess says, language matters: "By all means, disagree. But consider how you disagree."

Signing a "Civility Pledge" might seem like a mere symbolic gesture, but it's something. If it's good enough for Helen Haines, why not others?

Compassion in Politics Australia issued a statement after the horrific attack on Monday, calling it "a stark reminder that compassion and civility in public life are not abstract ideals. They matter profoundly".

The attack on Helen Haines may prove to be just another brief interruption before regular political mud-slinging resumes. Or it could see all sides of politics try to course correct.

David Speers is national political lead and host of Insiders, which airs on ABC TV at 9am on Sunday or can be streamed anytime on ABC iview.