Voters have given the thumbs down to the Turnbull government’s higher education changes, disapproving of cuts to universities and higher student fees, and fearing the impact on young people, according to the latest Guardian Essential poll.

The new survey of 1,795 voters released on budget day underscores the significant task ahead of the Turnbull government in boosting its political fortunes.

Labor remains comfortably ahead of the Coalition on the two-party preferred measure, 54% to 46%, and the opposition leader, Bill Shorten, has gained three points on the preferred prime minister measure since last month – although Malcolm Turnbull still leads Shorten 39% to 31%.

Universities attack Coalition's plan to increase fees and speed up repayments Read more

Thirty-seven per cent of the sample approved of the job Turnbull was doing as prime minister (up two points since April) and 48% disapproved (up one point). Shorten’s approval stands at 34% (up one point) and disapproval at 45% (down one point).

The government is hoping to use Tuesday’s budget to reset the government politically and finally cast off the spectre of the deeply unpopular 2014 budget, which contained harsh cuts and a number of broken promises, and established negative public perceptions of the government, which have lingered.

But while the government is looking to the budget to provide a circuit breaker, going into Tuesday’s annual economic statement, voters are already wary of the higher education changes that were unveiled by the Turnbull government last week as part of deck-clearing before the budget.

The new poll shows 56% of the sample disapproves of the new government commitment to reducing funding to higher education by $2.8bn and 60% disapproves of increasing student fees for their courses.

The survey is more evenly divided about whether or not students should have to repay their student debts earlier, once their salary reaches $42,000. Forty-seven per cent approved of that idea and 44% opposed it.

Voters were also split on whether the current funding split between students (paying 42% of the cost of their degree) and the government (paying 58%) was the right mix.

Thirty-one per cent of the sample thought students should pay less, 20% thought they should pay more, 37% thought the current share was about right and 12% didn’t know.

Perceptions about the package were broadly negative. Fifty-three per cent of the sample agreed with the proposition that the government changes would make it harder for young people to enter the housing market and 61% agreed with the idea that a combination of measures – a university fee increase, a reduction in penalty rates and expensive housing – meant “young people have cause to feel they are under attack”.

Fifty-seven per cent agreed with the statement “a government that cuts university funding while delivering business a tax cut has the wrong priorities”.

Forty-five per cent of people believed university education should be free. Twenty-nine per cent disagreed with that idea.

With the government intent on using Tuesday’s budget to try and reframe the conversation around debt and deficit – trialling a concept where “good” debt finances productive infrastructure and “bad” debt funds recurrent spending on health, education and welfare – voters were also asked about what priority they placed on returning the budget to surplus.

Why the Coalition's university changes are just a great big new income tax | Greg Jericho Read more

Seventy-one per cent of the sample said it was important to return the budget to surplus. Nineteen per cent said it wasn’t important.

Coalition voters were more likely than Labor voters to prioritise the return to surplus, with 87% rating that as important as opposed to 63% of Labor voters.

Asked a second question about whether it was more important for the government to return the budget to surplus as soon as possible – which could mean cutting services and raising taxes – or whether the government should delay the return to surplus and maintain services and invest in infrastructure, the priority on returning the budget to surplus shifted.

Eighteen per cent of the sample supported the idea that the budget should return to surplus as soon as possible, by cutting services and raising taxes, while 65% said it would be better to delay the return to surplus, while maintaining services and investing in infrastructure.

Last week’s Essential poll underscored the fact voters were going into Tuesday night with low expectations. Only 10% of the sample anticipated the budget would be good or very good for them and 30% feared it would be bad.

Only 12% of the sample believed the budget would be good or very good for working people, 11% thought good for people on lower incomes, 14% for families, 10% for older Australians and 11% for younger Australians.

By contrast, 43% of the sample of 1,801 voters said they believed the 9 May budget would be good for business and 54% thought it would be good for people on high incomes.