In our recent national survey of 4,549 Canadians, completed on August 28, we asked our usual political tracking questions. Here’s what we found:
LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES DEADLOCKED IN POPULAR VOTE
If an election were held at the time of the survey, the Conservatives (34%) and Liberals (33%) would capture the same amount of popular support, followed by the NDP at 17%, the Greens at 9%, and the BQ at 4%.
However, over time it’s become more challenging to understand the flow of the campaign without looking separately at the two provinces where the Conservatives enjoy very strong support and the rest of the country where more parties are involved in a tighter race.
In Alberta and Saskatchewan, the Conservatives have a massive 38-point lead over the Liberals. Over the year, the Conservatives have never been above 61% or below 50% in this part of the country, and the Liberals have never been above 23% or below 15%.
In contrast, in the rest of the country, the Liberals hold a five-point lead. Since the start of the year, they have never been above 38% or below 34%. The Conservatives have traded in the range of 27% to 31% through the year. The gap between the two parties narrowed to 3 points in April but has been 5 points or more since then.
The NDP has had a range of 15%-19%. The Green Party rose from a low of 8% to a high of 13% but more recently have been tracking a couple of points below that high.
Our latest numbers show the Liberals with a substantial lead (13 points) in Atlantic Canada, a 12 point lead in Quebec and a 4 point lead in Ontario. BC is a tie between the Liberals and Conservatives with the NDP and the Green parties together corralling 36% of the vote, considerably higher than their combined impact in any other region.
ACCESSIBLE VOTERS: LIBERAL POOL GROWING A BIT, CPC STEADY.
When we asked people whether they would consider voting for each of the main political parties, 52% would consider voting Liberal, up 4 points from April lows. 48% would consider voting Conservative unchanged since earlier this month. 44% would consider voting NDP, while 41% would consider the Greens. Comparing those living in Alberta and Saskatchewan and those living in other provinces, we find big differences in the voter pools.
In Alberta and Saskatchewan, 69% are open to voting Conservative, which is 29-35 points ahead of the other three parties. Elsewhere in the country, the Liberals have a 9-point advantage over the Conservatives and NDP. Since June, the Liberal accessible voter pool has recovered somewhat, almost to the levels seen before the SNC Lavalin issue emerged.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT APPROVAL: REMAINS MORE NEGATIVE THAN POSITIVE; HOWEVER, APPROVAL UP 5-POINTS SINCE APRIL
37% approve of the job the federal government is doing, compared to 46% who disapprove. Approval is up five points from a low point in April.
In Alberta and Saskatchewan, approval has never been above 30% since the end of 2018, while disapproval has ranged from 56% to 65%, and stands at 61% today.
Outside of Alberta and Saskatchewan, 38% currently approve of the federal government’s performance while 43% disapprove. The government’s approval hit a low of 34% in April but has improved by 4-points since then.
LEADER IMAGES SHOW LITTLE MOVEMENT
Preferred Prime Minister results show 35% preferring Mr. Trudeau and 32% for Mr. Scheer. Both Ms. May and Mr. Singh are preferred by 14%. In Alberta and Saskatchewan, Mr. Scheer has a 29-point lead over Mr. Trudeau. In other parts of the country, Mr. Trudeau leads by 12 points. Preference for Mr. Scheer’s as PM among Alberta and Saskatchewan residents are below his party’s vote share. Mr. Trudeau’s number fairly closely parallels his party’s level of support in the rest of the country.
Personal approval of Mr. Trudeau shows 35% positive, 45% negative, slightly improved over his 32-46 split in April. Ratings for Mr. Scheer are 33% positive, 37% negative. The trajectory for the Conservative leader has been to see his positives grow 14 points in two years and his negatives grow by 17. Over most of the last two years, the Opposition Leader’s negatives have been higher than his positives.
Ratings for NDP leader Jagmeet Singh are 26% positive, 26% negative, and have barely moved in months. Ratings for Green Party leader Elizabeth May are 29% positive, 19% negative, which is the best net rating of any of the leaders, but off the peak Ms. May saw in May of this year.
Positive impressions of Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Scheer also differ sharply regionally.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “The election of 2019 isn’t one race, and won’t turn on one issue. It will involve a mix of factors including the feelings about party leaders, and fears, anxieties and hopes about the cost of living, taxes, the environment, health and education, and economic opportunity. It might well be different depending on your generation, or gender, but it almost certainly will be different in different parts of the country.
The Conservative lead in Alberta and Saskatchewan is an important asset for Mr. Scheer but comes with risk. Opinions among conservative-inclined voters in those two provinces can be so different from those found among other Canadians (on issues such as climate change or in terms of feelings about Mr. Trudeau), that it may be tempting to campaign on messages and policies that turn out to limit opportunity elsewhere, where a great number of seats are in play. The Liberal voter pool is widening, while the Conservative tent is not.
For the Liberals, the picture in Alberta and Saskatchewan is obviously very challenging, but perhaps also reinforces the need to win key, and tight, battleground situations in Ontario and BC, and to nurture and strengthen their leads in Quebec and Atlantic Canada. At this moment, the challenge for the NDP and the Green Party may be to gain a bigger share of voice – which is never easy, but might be getting harder than ever given the disruptions in how people gather news that shapes their opinions.“
According to David Coletto: “Our latest read of the political landscape indicates a very close race nationally but one that is more nuanced and regionally based. While the Conservatives have a massive advantage in Alberta and Saskatchewan, the Liberals have been trending positively in other regions of the country.
We split out Alberta and Saskatchewan from the rest of the country because the election is so different in those areas. The Liberals, NDP, or Greens will be hard-pressed to win much in those two provinces. This election will ultimately turn on how the rest of the country feels and the polarization between Alberta and Saskatchewan and the rest of the country muddies the water in terms of anticipating how the public is reacting to the pre-campaign period.”
METHODOLOGY
Our survey was conducted online with 4,549 Canadians aged 18 and over from August 23 to 29, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 1.5%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
In our most recent national survey of 2,903 Canadian adults, we asked:
“If you had the choice between working in a job that was unionized or not unionized, which would you choose?”
Overall, slightly more Canadians would prefer to have a unionized job than one that is not unionized. 42% preferred a unionized workplace versus 39% who would want a non-unionized workplace. 19% were unsure.
When we compare results across different subgroups, some interesting differences (or not) emerge including:
There’s no gender gap on the question. The same proportion of men as women would prefer to be unionized, although women are 5-points more likely to say they are unsure.
There’s a slight relationship across age groups. Younger Canadians (18 to 29) are more likely to prefer to work in a unionized environment than older Canadians.
Those with a university degree are most likely to prefer working in a unionized workplace (46%) than those with college or those with high school or less. The difference those is more related to higher incidences of “unsure” responses among high school and college educated respondents.
Household income doesn’t seem to play much role either. Those in households making $50,000 or less are about as likely to want to work in a unionized environment as those living in a household earning $100,000 or more. In fact, those in the middle income bracket (earning between $50K and $100K) were the most likely to want to work in a unionized environment.
MOST UNION MEMBERS WOULD PREFER TO BE UNIONIZED.
We also find that a clear majority of those who are currently members of a union say they would prefer to work in a unionized workplace. 77% of those who say they are members of a public sector union and 67% of those in a private sector would rather be unionized than not, if given the choice.
Among those currently in the workforce and not in a unionized workplace, 27% would prefer to be unionized versus 53% who would rather not. 20% are unsure.
POLITICAL ORIENTATION DRIVES PREFERENCE FOR UNIONIZED EMPLOYMENT.
When we compare responses across federal party identification, we see more variation than across demographics or socio-economic status.
NDP partisans, not surprisingly, are the most likely to prefer working in a unionized workplace (51% vs. 31%). Although, noteworthy that about one in three NDP partisans would prefer a job that was not unionized. Liberal partisans are not far behind at 46%. Conservative partisans are the least likely to want to work in a unionized workplace, but a sizable minority (39%) would.
UPSHOT
We only have one question to analyze and no follow up questions, but the results point to a desire by many Canadians to work in a unionized workplace. Despite the fact that about 16% to 20% of Canadians are unionized, more would choose to be if they could.
Unfortunately, I don’t have any longitudinal data to assess whether this is higher or lower than in the past. But the lack of clear demographic or socio-economic drivers, but clearer political ones points to the politicized nature of union membership and the labour movement more broadly.
But with rising concerns about job security, precarious work, and the disruption in the economy, labour unions may have an opportunity to expand membership and reintroduce themselves to a new generation or workers who more than any other generation seem interested in unionizing.
METHODOLOGY
Our survey was conducted online with 2,903 Canadians aged 18 and over from August 14 to 20, 2019. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 1.9%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
Along with polling data, there are other data sources that can offer some insight into the dynamics of the election campaign.
Looking at what Canadians are searching for on Google is of particular interest. Not only because Google provides real-time, comparable data, but search behaviour can tell us what Canadians are interested in and looking for more information on. There’s some evidence in other domains that search data can be used to anticipate changes in public opinion.
We have create a few queries that we think you’ll find interesting.
These charts are automatically updated in real-time so check back often to see if, and how, things change over the course of the election.
PARTY LEADERS (Past 3o Days)
PARTY LEADERS – QUEBEC (Past 30 Days)
PARTY LEADERS (Past 7 Days)
TRUDEAU VS. SCHEER VS. DOUG FORD IN ONTARIO (Past 30 Days)
POLITICAL PARTIES (Past 30 Days)
TRUMP VS. TRUDEAU (Past 30 Days)
CANADIAN VS. AMERICAN ELECTION (Past 30 Days)
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
We were in the field immediately after the release of the Ethics Commissioners report on the SNC Lavalin matter, and through the following several days.
Here’s what our national survey of 2,152 respondents reveals:
SNC – LAVALIN: FEW MINDS CHANGED. MORE OF THOSE WHO DID SAW A STORY OF PM PROTECTING JOBS.
Just over a third (35%) had not heard of the Ethics Commissioners’ report, while 48% said they had heard something about it. Only 16% consumed a lot of news coverage on this topic. Those with the strongest desire for a change in government or the strongest desire to see the Liberals re-elected were paying the most attention.
Of those who followed the story of the Commissioners Report at all, 78% said it did not change their opinion of what happened, while 22% said it did.
Among all who followed the story, 43% say the SNC Lavalin matter seems to be about “a Prime Minister looking for ways to keep workers from losing jobs” while 57% say it is about “doing something inappropriate for a company that did not deserve help.”. In Quebec, opinion is evenly split, with 50% saying it was about protecting jobs, and 50% saying it was inappropriate.
However, what is perhaps most noteworthy in the results is this: among the 21% (equivalent to about 6 million voters) who said the Ethics Commissioner’s report altered their view of what happened, more (56%) came away thinking it was about protecting jobs than became convinced that the PM had done something inappropriate (44%). This effect was most notable among NDP and BQ voters.
Another way to look at the potential impact of the Ethics Commissioner’s report is to merge the three questions. 36% are unaware of the report, and another 50% are aware of the report, but it confirmed what they already thought about the issue. That represents 86% of the population.
For the remaining 14%, 8% said the report changed their mind about the issue, and they feel that the SNC-Lavalin controversy was about the Prime Minister trying to protect jobs while 6% said they changed their minds, but they see the issue as the Prime Minister doing something inappropriate to help a company.
Based on this, we can conclude that the net impact of the report so far was marginal.
Among the 8% who said their minds were changed because of the report and felt the Prime Minister was trying to save jobs, 73% would consider voting Liberal, and 54% of those decided would vote Liberal today.
Among the 6% who said their minds were changed because of the report and felt the issue was more about Prime Minister was doing something inappropriate, 42% are still open to voting Liberal, with 22% planning to do so if an election was today. 35% would vote Conservative, 23% NDP, and 12% Green.
And so given this, what impact has the report had on other indicators? Not much.
LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES REMAIN DEADLOCKED AT 32%
If an election were held at the time of the survey, the Liberals and Conservatives would each get 32% of committed voter support, followed by the NDP at 17%, the Greens at 10%, and the BQ at 4%. All these numbers are virtually unchanged since our last survey completed in early August.
Regionally, the Conservatives are well ahead in Alberta and lead in Saskatchewan. The Liberals lead by a wide margin in Quebec while the two parties are tied in British Columbia, Ontario, and Atlantic Canada. The change in the regional numbers from our last survey is within the margin of error.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT APPROVAL HOLDS STEADY
36% approve of the job the federal government is doing, compared to 47% who disapprove. These numbers are virtually unchanged since early in the month. Approval of the government remains 4-points higher than at its floor in April and consistent over the past three months.
ACCESSIBLE VOTER POOLS UNCHANGED
The accessible voter pool for the Liberals (50%) and the Conservatives (48%) is unchanged from the previous wave. The same is true for the NDP and Green party.
LEADER IMAGES SHOW LITTLE MOVEMENT
Preferred Prime Minister results showed a slight narrowing of the 6-point lead Mr. Trudeau had. In this wave, 33% picked the Liberal leader, compared to 31% who preferred Mr. Scheer. Elizabeth May and Jagmeet Singh continue to be neck and neck for third.
Personal approval of Mr. Trudeau shows 34% positive, 45% negative. The negative number is the same as the prior wave; the positive number is 2 points lower than earlier in August. Ratings for Mr. Scheer are 31% positive, 35% negative and unchanged since the previous wave. Ratings for NDP leader Jagmeet Singh are 26% positive, 26% negative, identical to the number we saw a month ago. Ratings for Green Party leader Elizabeth May are 31% positive, 19% negative, a slight improvement over the 29-21 split we saw in our previous wave.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “The SNC Lavalin issue definitely caused harm to the public opinion surrounding the PM and the Liberal government in the spring, but the Ethics Commissioner’s report did not trigger a new wave of unhappiness with Mr. Trudeau or the government. Most paid little attention, and said their minds were unchanged.
Mr. Trudeau’s unwillingness to apologize for trying to protect jobs appeared relatively well heard and accepted, especially by those whose minds were open to change. With that segment of the population, the Liberals actually appear to have had a better week than their opponents, on this issue.“
According to David Coletto: “The evidence from our survey indicates that the Ethics Commissioner’s report has not had much impact on Canadian public opinion overall. Vote intention, government approval, and the Prime Minister’s personal image are unchanged from the survey we conducted earlier this month.
It seems that views on the matter are polarized and to an extent baked into their wider views. The damage caused by the SNC-Lavalin controversy persists in that more people continue to view the Prime Minister negatively than positively, more disapprove of the government’s performance than approve, and the Liberal vote share is 4 to 5 points lower than it was in the final months of 2018. But there’s no evidence these indicators are substantially different than only a few weeks earlier.
If anything, the Commissioner’s report may have stalled some positive momentum the Liberals and Mr. Trudeau were likely experiencing over the previous few months, but it hasn’t fundamentally changed the nature of the election. The race is very close and still quite unpredictable at this stage.”
METHODOLOGY
Our survey was conducted online with 2,152 Canadians aged 18 and over from August 14 to 19, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.2%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
Abacus Data was commissioned by Seth Klein, adjunct professor with Simon Fraser University’s Urban Studies program (as part of research for a book he is writing on the climate emergency), with support from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives –BC Office, and the Corporate Mapping Project) to conduct a national public opinion survey of 2,000 Canadian adults on perspectives about climate change, positions on action, and attitudes and awareness of the Canadian version of the Green New Deal.
This was a comprehensive survey that asked a large number of questions. The full deck is available for download here, and Seth’s take on the poll is available here.
Here’s a summary of what the survey found:
82% SAY CLIMATE CHANGE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM, INCLUDING 47% WHO DESCRIBE IT AS AN EXTREMELY SERIOUS PROBLEM.
Before exploring the views on climate change in more detail, we asked respondents to rate to what extent, if at all, five issues were problems in Canada.
82% rated climate change as an extremely serious or serious problem, second only to the rising cost of living which was rated as a serious problem to 90% of Canadians. More striking, 47% of Canadians rated climate change as an extremely serious problem, 15-points higher than wealth or income inequality, 23-points higher than increasing automation of work and the loss of good-paying jobs, and more than double the number who felt increasing immigration to Canada was an extremely serious problem.
At the same time, 1 in 4 Canadians report thinking about climate change often and are getting really anxious about it. Another 49% say they think it about it sometimes and they are getting increasingly worried about what impact it will have.
While feelings about climate change are fairly consistent across demographic groups, younger Canadians (18 to 29) are more likely to say they think about it often and are getting really anxious about it. Quebecers are the most anxious about climate change while Albertans are the least anxious – although 58% of Albertans say they are either anxious and thinking about it all the time or think it about it sometimes but becoming increasingly worried about what impact it will have.
We find no difference in views across household income or education levels.
42% DESCRIBE CLIMATE CHANGE AS AN “EMERGENCY”.
Given this level of anxiety, it’s no surprise that a large number of Canadians describe climate as an emergency now (42%) with another 20% saying it is not yet an emergency but will likely become one over the next few years. Only 12% of Canadians report climate change as something we should not be that concerned about.
Similar patterns emerge to this question. About 6 in 10 Quebecers describe climate change as an emergency (59%) compared with 42% in BC, 39% in Atlantic Canada, and 38% in Ontario. In the prairies, the concern is less prevalent, but even in Alberta, 27% describe climate change as an emergency, and another 20% think it will become one in the next few years.
Across age groups, half of younger Canadians believe climate change is an emergency compared with about 4 in 10 among older age groups.
Looking at the issue through another framing lens, 81% agree that climate change represents a major threat to the future of their children and grandchildren, including 49% who strongly agree with the statement.
3 IN 4 SAY THEY OR SOMEONE CLOSE TO THEM HAVE EXPERIENCED THE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOME WAY.
This elevated level of concern and anxiety is at least partly caused by a sense that a clear majority of Canadians believe they or someone close to them has experienced the effects of climate change to some degree. 13% believe it has affected them in a major way, 37% to some extent, and 23% in a minor way. Only 21% say that climate change has not had any effect on themselves or people close to them.
There is a clear relationship between feeling anxious about climate change and believing that it has affected their lives or someone close to them. Among the 75% of Canadians who think about climate change at least sometimes and are worried about the issue, 61% also believe they have personally experienced the effects of climate change. Among those who say they don’t think about climate change all that much, 40% report no impact on their lives and another 33% say climate change has only impacted them in a minor way. This suggests that as the effects of climate change increase on people’s lives, we should expect to see a rise in concern about the issue.
8 IN 10 CANADIANS SUPPORT A SHIFT TOWARDS CLEAN AND RENEWABLE ENERGY, INCLUDING 44% WHO SAY IN THE FUTURE, CANADA SHOULD PRODUCE ENERGY USING 100% CLEAN AND RENEWABLE SOURCES.
When we start asking respondents about possible solutions and action to climate change, it’s clear that the public understands and supports what’s required to deal with climate change. 44% believe that in the future, “we should produce energy and electricity using 100% clean and renewable sources” while another 37% aren’t convinced that 100% of energy and electricity can be renewable and clean but support a shift towards cleaner technology. Only 11% of Canadians believe that “shifting to clean and renewable energy sources like hydro, solar, and wind are costly and unnecessary.”
Surprisingly, these views are fairly consistent across the country. While Albertans are less likely to support a full transition to clean and renewable energy sources, 28% do while another 47% think that a transition is required but that 100% may not be possible.
We also find a generational divide on this question. Again, while overall Canadians of all ages support a transition to clean and renewable energy sources, younger Canadians (under 45) are about 10 points more likely to think we should produce energy entirely from clean and renewable sources.
In another question, we tell respondents:
“In order to combat climate change, scientists say we must substantially reduce the amount of fossil fuels we use in all aspects of our lives, in society, and in the economy. This includes oil, coal, and natural gas.”
When we follow up that statement and ask, by how much should fossil fuels be reduced to effectively combat climate change, 24% believe we need to move away from fossil fuel use almost completely while 38% say we need to reduce fossil fuel use a lot, change how we produce energy, how we get around, and how our economy works. 6% don’t think we need to reduce the use of any fossil fuels while 22% think we need to reduce some fossil fuel use, but don’t need to fundamentally change the way we live or how the economy works.
Albertans stand out as different from other Canadians on this question. 50% of Albertans think that we don’t need to change our use of fossil fuels or we may need to reduce them but don’t need to fundamentally change how we live or how our economy works. This compares to about one in four Canadians in other parts of the country.
HALF THINK IT’S POSSIBLE TO CUT GHG EMISSIONS BY 50% BY 2030 AND TO BE CARBON-ZERO BY 2050.
When we tell respondents that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the world’s top climate scientists) recently issued a report warning that carbon pollution – global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions –must be cut in half by 2030 and that the world must be carbon-zero by 2050, 53% think it is definitely or probably possible to achieve those targets.
But there is still some convincing to be done as most of those who think it is possible are not completely convinced. Only 16% of Canadians at this point think its definitely possible to achieve those targets.
As we’d expect, there is a relationship between perceptions about what’s doable and concern about climate change. Among those who think climate change is an extremely serious or serious problem (52% of Canadians), 59% say it is definitely or probably possible to achieve the IPCC’s targets. But a sizeable group of those most concerned about the issue are less convinced. 28% think it is probably not possible, and 5% think it is not possible at all while 7% are unsure.
This points to the importance of connecting clear and realistic action and solutions with the increasing concern people are feeling.
ABOUT 6 IN 10 FEEL THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS DOING TOO LITTLE TO COMBAT CLIMATE CHANGE.
Given the extent of concern about the issue, there’s a sense among a majority of Canadians that the federal government is not doing enough to combat climate change. 57% think the federal government is doing too little, 18% think it is doing enough, while 9% think it is doing too much.
This view is shared in most parts of the country and among all demographic groups. Younger Canadians are more likely to think the federal government isn’t doing enough than older Canadians while women are 7-points more likely than men to feel this way.
FRAMING CLIMATE ACTION: 1 IN 3 THINK WE SHOULD MOBILIZE AS WE DID DURING WWII WHILE 47% THINK GOVERNMENTS NEED TO BE MEASURED AND CAUTIOUS.
Despite the clear concern about most Canadians and the feeling that the federal government is doing too little, only a minority of Canadians feel that mobilizing action as we did during war comes closest to how they see the issue.
33% feel their view is best reflected in the statement:
“Like we did in WWII, our governments need to be ambitious and mobilize everyone to do what is necessary to combat climate change and quickly move our society and economy off fossil fuels.”
While 47% preferred the statement:
“Governments need to be measured and cautious, making sure that moving our society and economy off fossil fuels is not too costly and doesn’t displace too many jobs.”
The remaining 20% said neither statement came closest to their view.
However, when we rephrased the question and asked whether they agree or disagreed that “the climate emergency requires that our governments adopt a wartime-scale response, making major investments to retool our economy, and mobilizing everyone in society to transition off fossil fuels to renewable energy,” 58% either strongly agreed (21%) or agreed (37%) with the statement.
Younger Canadians (under 45) were more likely to agree than older Canadians. Those in Quebec, Ontario, Atlantic Canada, and BC were more likely to agree than those in Alberta. There was no difference across gender, household income or educational groups.
PERSPECTIVES ON SPECIFIC CLIMATE ACTIONS
To understand support and perspectives on several bold actions that the government could take to deal with climate change (ambitious actions that go beyond what the government has currently proposed), we asked respondents two questions about a series of options. First, we asked whether it is possible or not to accomplish a set of goals and then asked whether they support or oppose the action.
Majorities felt it was at least probably possible to transition all government vehicles in its fleet to electric vehicles over the next 5 year; to require all new building and homes in Canada to heat space and water using electricity and not a fossil fuel by 2022; to phase out the extraction and export of fossil fuels over the next 20 to 30 years; to require all existing buildings to switch their fuel source for heating off of fossil fuels by 2040; to end the use of all coal, gas, and oil-generated electricity by 2030; and to ban the sale of all new gas-powered vehicles by 2030.
At the same time, there was broad support or acceptance for all of these goals with support correlated with expectations about whether it was possible or not to achieve them.
We also asked whether several outcomes would make respondents more or less supportive of a bold and ambitious climate action plan. In all cases, respondents said the outcomes would make them more supportive, including 78% who said they would be more supportive if their own income taxes didn’t increase as a result of the plan, 78% who said they would be more supportive if the wealthy and large corporations were required to contribute more in taxes to help pay for plan, and 79% who said they would be more supportive if governments provided financial support to low and modest-income households to help them transition away from fossil fuels.
PERSPECTIVES ON “A GREEN NEW DEAL”
There has been a lot of discussions both in Canada and the United States of a “Green New Deal” that would both seriously tackle climate change and restructure the economy to support those impacted by the transition.
In Canada, only a minority are aware or think they have heard of the term “Green New Deal.” 14% say they have definitely heard something about it while 19% think they have heard something. Awareness is higher among younger Canadians and those with a university degree. Among those aware of the term, about half say they are at least somewhat familiar with it and 69% either strongly (29%) or somewhat support (40%) a made-in-Canada Green New Deal.
When those unaware of the concept or term were told about it, support was very high with 72% either strongly or somewhat supportive. Only 12% were opposed while 17% say they do not have clear views on the issue.
Support for “A Green New Deal” finds support across all demographic, socio-economic, and regional groups. Even in Alberta, 56% who were unaware of the term say they support it based on the description we provided in the survey. Support is highest in Atlantic Canada (79%) and Quebec (77%) and among younger Canadians.
Support for made-in-Canada Green New Deal exists among:
28% of those who oppose phasing out the extraction of all fossil fuels in Canada over the next 20 to 30 years.
35% of those who don’t think climate change is a serious problem.
37% of those who don’t often think about climate change.
48% of those who think shifting to clean and renewable energy is costly and unnecessary.
40% of those who believe we don’t need to reduce the use of any fossil fuels.
72% of those who say the rising cost of living is a serious problem.
68% of those who say they currently work in the oil, gas, or coal industry, or in a job closely related to those sectors.
UPSHOT
For years climate change has been discussed and debated. I remember talking about the Kyoto Accord in my grade 11 geography class over 20 years ago. But this survey confirms what we have seen in other research – Canadians are increasingly concerned about climate change, and many feel they are feeling the effects of it on their day-to-day lives.
What was less clear was whether the public is ready for serious action to deal with the issue. This survey finds broad support for action, including clear majority support for the concept of a made-in-Canada Green New Deal.
There is sufficient public support and acceptance for serious action for political leaders to lead.
But a few points are worth considering for those advocating for serious climate action.
First, while anxiety and worry about climate change is growing, how action is described and communicated matters. While most Canadians feel the federal government is doing too little to tackle climate change, instinctively many Canadians don’t buy into the idea that we need to mobilize action like we did during World War II. At the same time, majorities support aggressive policy outcomes like phasing out all oil and gas extraction within 20 to 30 years, banning the sale of gas-powered vehicles by 2030, or requiring all existing buildings and homes to switch their fuel sources for heating from oil, gas, or propane.
Second, while climate change is seen as a serious issue by most Canadians, there’s also a deeply felt concern about the rising cost of living. Effectively dealing with this issue and addressing it head-on by showing how climate action won’t increase costs substantially or better, will help reduce costs over time, needs to be part of the communicators’ toolbox.
Finally, there is clear evidence that the idea of a made-in-Canada Green New Deal is supported by a majority of Canadians, including many who we might otherwise think would be opposed outright. The merits of the Green New Deal – supporting workers impacted by the transition and investing heavily in achieving the goals – likely help to quell concerns about climate action, even in regions of the country dependent on the oil and gas sector and especially among those currently employed in it.
METHODOLOGY
Our survey was conducted online with 2,000 Canadians aged 18 and over from July 16 to 19, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.1%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
This poll was commissioned by Seth Klein, an adjunct professor with Simon Fraser University’s Urban Studies program (as part of the research for a book he is writing on the climate emergency), with support from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives –BC Office, and the Corporate Mapping Project.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
In an election held today, the Conservatives (33%) and the Liberal Party (32%) would match each other in national support. The regional breakdowns of support tend to favour the Liberals at this moment, with Justin Trudeau’s party leading east of Manitoba and tied with the Conservatives in BC. The Conservative vote is heavily concentrated in the Prairies.
The accessible voter pools continue to show the Liberals, Conservatives and NDP all having potential to win support of 45% to 50% of voters nationally. The Green Party potential pool remains higher than in previous years but down a bit from May of this year.
MOOD OF THE COUNTRY
There’s a four-point uptick in the number of people who think the country is on the right track (39%) and a drop in those who say the opposite (41%). The current reading is similar to what we saw in February of this year.
We are also seeing a slight upward movement in performance assessments of the federal government, from a low of 32% approval in April to 36% today.
In the three provinces where the largest number of seats are in play, net government approval went from -13 to -8 in BC, -13 to -5 in Ontario and -2 to +4 in Quebec.
PARTY LEADERS
Feelings about the party leaders show a slight upward movement for Justin Trudeau from March. Today, 36% have a positive feeling about the Liberal leader, while 45% are negative. For Andrew Scheer, the trend lines show that over the last year, positive impressions have climbed by 7 points, but negative impressions have climbed by 9 points. Since April of this year, Mr. Scheer’s negatives are higher than his positives.
NDP leader Jagmeet Singh has 26% positive and 28% negative opinion, and stable patterns for the last few months. Compared to August of last year, the NDP leader has seen a 4-point gain in positive feelings and a 2-point rise in negatives.
For Green Party leader Elizabeth May our latest result shows a 4-point increase in negative feelings. Today 29% say they have a positive view of Ms. May, and 21% negative.
Regionally, Mr. Trudeau’s net approval is -6 in BC, -41 in the Prairies, -7 in Ontario, +5 in Quebec, and +7 in Atlantic Canada. For Mr. Scheer, it’s -3 in BC, +24 in the Prairies, -11 in Ontario, -6 in Quebec, and -10 in Atlantic Canada. NDP Leader is above water in BC at +5, -16 in the Prairies, +2 in Ontario, +1 in Quebec, and -11 in Atlantic Canada.
In April, 34% preferred to see Mr. Trudeau win this fall’s election, compared to 33% for Mr. Scheer. Today’s numbers reflect a slight shift towards Mr. Trudeau, who now leads by 6 points on this indicator, although the numbers have been holding pretty steady since June.
We continue to measure the reputation of several provincial premiers, in part to help understand the impact they may have on the federal campaign this fall. The latest results for Doug Ford show that he remains notably unpopular on a national basis and that his negative ratings in Ontario have continued to rise. Today, just 20% of Ontarians surveyed say they have positive feelings about Premier Ford, compared to 65% who are negative.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “After a rough winter for the Liberals and a period of opportunity for growth for the Conservatives, the race remains very close. There were more headwinds from the Liberal standpoint in March and tailwinds for the Conservatives, and now this may have changed a bit. The safest bet at this point is to assume that more shifting and volatility is likely – but also that the focal point last winter of SNC-Lavalin is no longer a preoccupying topic and major influence on political choice.”
According to David Coletto: “The stalemate continues for another month. The level of stability in the horserace overshadows some movement over the past few months in some of the key leading indicators favouring the incumbent Liberals. The mood of the country may be starting to come out of its post-SNC funk and comparison with what’s happening in other parts of the world, especially in the US and the UK, may be lifting Canadians’ spirits.
All bets are off on how this election ends, but the regional picture gives the Liberals a slight advantage with leads in Ontario and Quebec.”
METHODOLOGY
Our survey was conducted online with 1,422 Canadians aged 18 and over from August 2 to 6, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.7%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
Anyone who has rented a place in a major Canadian city knows how much of a hassle it can be. It takes time to find a suitable place for a price that you can afford, and most of the time you’re given the choice of settling for less or paying more. As rent prices continue to increase, the cost of living becomes a stumbling block for young Canadians who seek to establish their independence. As a third of Canada’s millennials are choosing to save on rent or mortgages by living with their parents (more than any other living generation), it suggests that quality affordable housing remains unattainable for many.
Adjusted for inflation, homes are 7-8 times more expensive now than when the Boomers were buying their first homes in the 1980s. Conversely, wages have stayed flat and where a home would have cost approximately 1.6 times a family’s annual income it can now be higher than 8 times in the hottest housing markets. While millennials may choose to blame a number of things for high rents and housing prices, the increase of short-term rental websites like Airbnb is not one of them. In our latest survey, we found that many Canadians (62%) believe that Airbnb makes rental housing more affordable or has no impact on the prices of housing. Millennials, at 67% are even more likely to say that Airbnb’s or short-term rentals have no impact on housing affordability.
These numbers are particularly surprising considering the amount of research demonstrating Airbnb’s effects on the housing market. In the report titled Short-Term Cities: Airbnb’s impact on Canadian housing markets, David Wachsmuth found that Airbnb has as many as 13,700 units available for renting in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver that are rented for more than two months. These rentals likely do not have full time renters with year-long leases, thus significantly reducing the number of homes available for full-time occupancy especially in the rental market. These homes lay dormant for weeks at a time and are often leased to out-of-town occupants leaving local residents in the cold. Furthermore, a paper published in the Social Science Research Network titled, The Effect of Home-Sharing on House Prices and Rents: Evidence from Airbnb, has found that a 1% increase in the number of Airbnb listings leads to a 0.018% increase in rent prices.
As demand for housing rises in these major cities, a shortage of supply affects affordability. Thus, if Airbnb is limiting the supply and presumably increases the regional price of homes, then why do millennials and all other generations think otherwise?
We offer a few explanations below.
1. Millennials are more likely than other generations to use the service. According to Airbnb’s own data millennials make up approximately 60% of all guests who have ever booked on the app. Further, 80% of millennials say they’re looking for unique travel experiences offered by sites like Airbnb. Plain and simple, Airbnb provides a service that aligns with millennial wants. My experience with Airbnb is likely very similar to that of other millennials – annoyed about it when it exists in the city I live in (especially when apartment hunting), but ready to use it for cities that I’m temporarily visiting for vacation. This slight annoyance is not enough for millennials to see Airbnb as a real threat to the rental market.
2. It’s convenient. The millennial desire for convenience has shaped many behaviours, and Airbnb is no exception. Millennials are known for wanting to travel and explore the world, and Airbnb is a convenient option for those wishing to stick to a budget and live like the locals. Millennials are not willing to give that up any time soon, which might be causing them to view Airbnb through rose-coloured glasses.
3. Airbnb makes an impact in the rental market, but that difference is a mere drop in the housing bucket. The effects of Airbnb aren’t particularly obvious unless you’re directly exposed to it (ie. you have an Airbnb unit in your building). Rent prices can increase for many other reasons, making Airbnb one of the lesser known contributing factors.
Despite the evidence that Airbnb increases renting prices, Canadians do not see eye-to-eye with the experts. For as long as affordable housing stays a prominent issue at the top of everyone’s minds, millennials and Canadians would do well to recognize some of the factors affecting the short-term rental market.
In our most recent national survey of 1,500 Canadian adults, we asked respondents about whether being part of Canada has been a good or bad thing for their province and whether they would vote to leave or stay in Canada if given an option to do so. Here’s what we found:
84% SAY CANADA HAS BEEN GOOD FOR THEIR PROVINCE
The vast majority of Canadians (84%) believe that being part of Canada has been good for their province. Younger Canadians are the most enthusiastic, but almost eight in 10 of those over 60 are convinced that the benefits of their province being in Canada have been greater than the drawbacks.
BC (90%), Ontario (90%) and Atlantic Canada (92%) pull the national average up. Three-quarters of Quebecers think being part of Canada has been good for La Belle Province.
But today, Alberta and Saskatchewan lead the country in terms of dissatisfaction: 29% in each province say being part of Canada has been bad for their province. However, a sizeable majority in those provinces believe Canada has been a net positive.
Conservatives are the least satisfied (79%) while supporters of the NDP (86%), the Green Party (91%) and the Liberal Party (95%) are most positive.
JUST 14% WOULD VOTE TO LEAVE CANADA; 25% IN ALBERTA, 28% IN QUEBEC
Relatively few Canadians (14%) say they would vote for their province to separate. In Quebec, where there have been two referendums (one of which found 40%, the other 49% support for separation), the number of people who say they would currently vote to separate stands at 28%.
In Alberta, one in four (25%) would vote to separate, while 75% would reject this idea. In Saskatchewan, 18% would vote to leave.
Support for separating from Canada is much lower in other parts of the country: 10% in Manitoba, 10% in BC, 6% in Ontario, and 5% in Atlantic Canada.
Within Alberta, those who would vote to separate from Canada tend to be supporters of the United Conservatives provincially and the Conservative Party federally. Having said that, a majority of both parties’ supporters say they would vote to remain rather than exit.
WESTERN VS QUEBEC SEPARATISM
Separatists in Quebec and Alberta/Saskatchewan are different attitudinally.
Quebec separatists see climate change as a crisis while Western separatists (in this case meaning Alberta and Saskatchewan) tend to see climate change as something we can’t do anything about, or a hoax.
The majority of Western separatists see immigrants as a burden, while the majority of Quebec separatists see immigrants as a factor that strengthens the country.
Most Quebec separatists say regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest while most Western separatists say government regulation of business usually does more harm than good.
Note: Sample sizes of both groups of separatists is small but the differences are statistically significant.
IF NOT CANADA, WHAT ABOUT JOINING THE UNITED STATES?
Only a fraction of Canadians (8%) say they would vote for their province to join the United States if they had the option to do so. In Quebec, Ontario, and Atlantic Canada, 6% or less would join the US. In Alberta, 17% would vote to join the United States. Conservative Party supporters (14%) are more likely than Liberals (3%) or NDP voters (7%) to support this idea.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “The state of unity within Canada is overall fairly positive, and nationalist separatism in Quebec seems to have ebbed over recent years.
The conversation about Alberta separatism that has been in the news lately clearly has some roots within the province, but it is very much a minority view at the moment and almost exclusively within the UCP and federal Conservative Party voter group.
Most people in Alberta don’t believe that Canada has been a bad deal for the province, including most of those who voted for Jason Kenney and most of those intending to vote for Andrew Scheer. There are political hazards in stoking resentment: while a minority of Alberta conservatives cheer talk about separation; for most, it’s a project they reject.
As for joining the US, people may see the US as having virtues – but they see more here.”
According to David Coletto: “Regionalism has always been part of the Canadian political experience, and that continues today, three months before the 2019 federal election. The threat of Quebec separatism is fairly low, and although 1 in 4 Albertans would vote to leave Canada, it is not at a level to cause serious concern.
What’s most striking about these results is the attitudinal differences between separatists in Quebec and those in Alberta and Saskatchewan and how they compare to the rest of Canada. Quebec separatists share many of the same broad policy and issue positions as Canadians in general. Their desire for independence is historical and rooted in a shared civic and, to some extent, ethnic nationalism.
For Alberta and Saskatchewan residents who would vote to leave Canada, the push seems to be more about how different their views and ideologies are compared to other Canadians, and less about what is shared among them.”
Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from July 12 to July 17, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
In our latest national survey, we asked a few questions about the Canada-China relationship.
Here’s what we found:
CHINA TRYING TO BULLY CANADA, AND SHOULD STAND DOWN
The relationship between Canada and China has been going through a challenging period and while many Canadians may not be following all the details of this issue, most people have a sense about which country is more to blame for the current difficulties.
When asked if the problems stemmed from “China trying to bully Canada” or “Canada has done things to offend China”, 3 out of 4 people said China was to blame. This result was pretty consistent across party lines, regions, genders, and generations.
When asked what they would prefer to see happen, only 18% said “Canada should apologize and take the actions that China is asking for” while 82% said “China should back down and stop taking actions that harm Canada”. Conservatives (82%) Liberals (81%) and New Democrats (83%) were again very aligned on this question.
CANADIANS PREFER A DIPLOMATIC EFFORT TO A WAR OF WORDS
When asked what they would prefer to see as the approach of the Canadian government, 37% said “Canada should loudly protest China’s behaviour and demand better treatment” while 63% said “Canada should work diligently and behind the scenes to try to solve the situation.” Conservatives (41%) were a little more likely than average to want a more voluble protest, but the majority of all parties’ supporters favoured a lower profile, diplomatic approach.
BUT PARTISANSHIP MOSTLY DRIVES OPINION ON WHETHER THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT IS DOING ENOUGH TO HANDLE THE SITUATION
When asked to assess the approach the Canadian government is taking on China, 54% say they “the Government of Canada is probably doing what it should be doing to handle the situation as well as can be done” while 46% say “The Government of Canada isn’t doing enough to stand up to China.” Liberal, NDP, and Green supporters are more likely to think the government is doing what it should to handle the situation while most Conservatives feel the government isn’t doing enough to stand up to China.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “Canadians have generally been in favour of broadening trade relations with China in recent years, but their reactions to recent events is a reminder that the level of trust in China as a partner has been somewhat qualified. The clear instinct on the part of Canadian voters is to assume that China is trying to throw its weight around in the relationship. This causes voters to adopt a pro-Canada stance.
It’s also fair to imagine that most people haven’t heard a compelling counter argument be as to why Canada shouldn’t have made the arrest that we did, pursuant to an agreement with the US. Finally, partisanship seems to have only a modest impact on how people see the problem or their preferred approach to a solution – most want to put more trust in a quieter diplomatic approach than a more belligerent style.
Whether Canada “can do more” produces a split opinion, which in part probably reflects that people aren’t sure that more can’t be done, and in part a reflection of Conservative voter antagonism towards the Trudeau government”
According to David Coletto: “The Canada-China relationship is certainly complicated but most Canadians, regardless of political stripe or demographics, have a shared impression on how its developing and the best approach to dealing with it.
Whether this becomes a political issue that impacts voting behaviour remains to be seen. While Canadians are split on the whether the government has done enough to stand up to China or not, many Canadians understand that China is likely trying to bully Canada and loudly protesting will have little impact on the Chinese.”
Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from July 12 to July 17, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
This week we completed another national survey of 1,500 Canadian adults. With less than 100 days to go before Canadians select their next parliament, we updated our political tracking.
Here’s what we found:
LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES DEADLOCKED AT 32%
If an election was held at the time of the survey, the Liberals and Conservatives would each get 32% of committed voter support, followed by the NDP at 16%, the Greens at 11%, and the BQ at 4%. All these numbers are virtually unchanged since our last survey at the end of June.
Regionally, the Conservatives hold big leads in the Prairies (30 points in AB and 21 points in SK/MB) while the Liberals have comfortable leads in Quebec (17 points) and Atlantic Canada (9 points). Ontario and British Columbia both remain very competitive with the Liberals and Conservatives statistically tied.
The NDP finds itself without a region where its support is concentrated with about 17% to 19% in all regions save for Quebec where it trails in fifth place behind the Greens at only 8%. Green Party support is similarly spread out across the country with a higher concentration in BC (especially on Vancouver Island where the Greens are polling at 27% compared with 14% in the rest of the province).
Demographically, the Liberals lead by 4 among women while the Conservatives lead by 4 among men. Women are 7-points more likely to support the NDP than men. They are also 6-points more likely to support the Greens than men.
We also find some, but not substantial generational differences at this point in time. The Liberals have a small, 4-point lead among Millennials, the Conservatives and Liberals are tied among Gen X, while the Conservatives have a small 3-point lead among Baby Boomers. The NDP does better among younger generations than older ones.
The Liberals lead by 23 among those who self-identify on the left of the spectrum while the Conservatives lead by almost 50 among those on the right. Among those in the centre (representing about 50% of the electorate), the Liberals and Conservatives are basically tied with about 30% each.
ACCESSIBLE VOTER POOLS REMAIN PRETTY STABLE
Accessible voter pools for the Liberals (50%), Conservatives (48%) and NDP (44%) are largely unchanged from our June survey. The Green Party pool remains elevated at 40% but is 4 points lower than in May. In Quebec, 29% would consider voting for the BQ, down two since June.
TRUDEAU & SCHEER STEADY, SINGH’S NET APPROVAL IMPROVES
Today, 35% say they have a positive view of Mr. Trudeau and 46% negative, unchanged from June. For Mr. Scheer, 35% viewing him negatively compared with 30% positively. This is largely unchanged since June.
For Mr. Singh, we see 26% positive and 26% negative, a slight improvement in his numbers overall over the past few months, but largely unchanged since June. For Ms. May, we find 29% positive, 17% negative, a 4-point deep in positive impressions since May.
When we ask who respondents would prefer to be Prime Minister after the next election, Mr. Trudeau continues to lead Mr. Scheer. This too is largely unchanged from June.
HOW WILL PROVINCIAL PREMIERS IMPACT THE ELECTION?
There has been a lot of discussion about the impact provincial premiers may have on the federal vote coming out of the Council of the Federation meeting earlier this month. Going forward we will track impressions of four premiers – Ontario’s Doug Ford, Quebec’s Francois Legault, Alberta’s Jason Kenney, and BC’s John Horgan.
In our latest survey, Ontario Premier Doug Ford has by far the highest national profile and the most negative impressions. Over half of Canadians have a negative view of him compared to less than 1 in 5 who view him positively. In Ontario, 62% have a negative view compared with 23% who view him positively.
The other three premiers are less well known nationally with Jason Kenney the next most known (65% say they have an impression of him). 21% have a negative impression of Mr. Kenney while 14% view him positively. In Alberta, 41% view him positively compared with 33% negatively.
For Mr. Legault, his national profile isn’t that high (43% don’t know enough about him to have an impression) with about equal numbers viewing him positively and negatively. In Quebec, Mr. Legault is relatively popular with 49% having a positive impression compared with 22% who view him negatively.
For BC Premier John Horgan, his national profile is the smallest (half of Canadians don’t know enough about him to assess). He’s viewed fairly positively with 36% have a positive impression of him compared with 23% negative.
WHAT ABOUT TRUMP?
And then there’s US President Donald J. Trump. He is by far the most unpopular political leader we have tracked in a long time. Only 14% of Canadians have a positive impression of him compared with 73% who view him negatively. He’s least popular in Quebec (81% negative) and “most” popular in Alberta (17% positive) although even most Albertans don’t like him either (69% negative).
A majority of all Canadian party supporters have a negative view of Trump, including 84% of Liberal, 92% of NDP, 83% of Green, but just 52% of Conservative supporters.
WHO WILL WIN THE ELECTION?
As we get closer to the election, expectations become increasingly important. And while vote intention and impressions of the party leaders really haven’t changed over the past few weeks, the expected outcome of the election has.
Canadians are still more likely to think that the Conservatives will win the election (33%), but this expectation is down 3 points since June. 27% think the Liberals will win, up 2, while 7% think the NDP will win the election, down 2 since June. Almost a third (29%) think the election is still too close to call.
UPSHOT
According to Bruce Anderson: “This election year started with downward momentum for the Liberals and growth for the Conservatives. Both those patterns have arrested, and the race is especially tight in Ontario and BC. In Ontario, the impact of Doug Ford’s unpopular policies and style is a headwind for Andrew Scheer. In BC, the role of the Green Party is something of a spoiler for the Liberals right now. What happens with Green and NDP support levels may ultimately determine how this election turns out.”
According to David Coletto: “It’s pretty clear at this point that the 2019 election may start like the 2015 one: with little clarity and a very tight race. Structurally, the Liberals have an advantage in that they are leading in seat-rich areas and are competitive in more parts of the country. But the Conservatives benefit from a slightly more motivated voter base which if it holds, could be enough to win more votes than the Liberals.”
Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from July 12 to July 17, 2019. A random sample of panellists was invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20. The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.
We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and exceptional value.
