In a study commissioned by Spirits Canada, Abacus dove into how Canadians view alcohol, whether they trust Health Canada’s official guidelines for low-risk drinking, and what impact discrepancies in alcohol advice have on Canadians’ trust in health guidelines. 2,000 Canadians were interviewed between May 17th and 21st, 2023.
Most Canadians Are Moderate Drinkers; Understand Drinking Should Be Enjoy Sparingly
When asked what they think about beverage alcohol, most Canadian adults believe it is something to be enjoyed sparingly (35%), or in moderation (53%). Very few are teetotalers (8%) or believe alcohol is something to be enjoyed in excess (4%). With regard to health, Canadians take a more conservative view than Health Canada’s official low-risk alcohol drinking guidelines, with 72% assuming between 0-6 standard drinks a week is what healthy adults can consume safely.
How well do these attitudes and assumptions align with their reported lived experiences? Even accounting for possible under-reporting, the vast majority of the 2 in 3 Canadians who drink alcohol at least once per month say they drink within Canada’s official guideline of 10-15 drinks per week (78% consume 1-6 drinks per week), with only a minority drinking at the upper range of the Health Canada recommendations of 10-15 drinks a week.
Trust in Government, Institutions is High on Health-Related Matters
Trust in knowledge generating institutions, experts, and even government is quite high among the public when it comes to health. Most Canadians at least somewhat trust in Health Canada, NGOs, academics, and medical professionals when it comes to advising them on health-related matters.
When presented with Canada’s official low-risk alcohol drinking guidelines, which suggest maxing consumption at 2 (female) or 3 (male) standard drinks per day, 10 or 15 standard drinks per week, and 3 or 4 standard drinks on special occasions, most find what the government recommends credible (68%).
Advice Discrepancies Cause Confusion, Mistrust, Loss of Trust
However, when asked to compare Canada’s official low-risk drinking guidelines with recommendations that reach very different conclusions, Canadians’ trust devolves.
After reviewing recommendations that advise against consuming more than two drinks per week (issued in August 2022 by the Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse and Addiction), as well as a University of Victoria study (published April 2023 in JAMA Open) that concluded increased risk only above two drinks per day, 6 in 10 Canadians become some or some combination of:
Unsure about the quality of scientific evidence on alcohol & health;
Mistrustful of government, the CCSA, or public health guidelines generally; or,
Confused on what to do going forward.
Having read through all three recommendations, 6 in 10 Canadians explicitly agree that this contradictory information makes them less trustful of government and the scientific process.
The majority of the Canadian public believes that government’s focus should be on reducing the harm of excess alcohol consumption. Most think that trying to limit the amount of alcohol consumed by light to moderate drinkers will do nothing to convince heavy drinkers or reduce the harms of excess alcohol consumption.
The Upshot
Canadians are responsible drinkers. The 2 in 3 Canadians who do drink alcohol take a moderate approach. Very few have extreme views like believing alcohol should be cut out completely or enjoyed in excess. Their assumptions about what is healthy are well below what even Health Canada recommends in its low-risk guidance. In an era of declining trust in experts and institutions, having competing information in the marketplace of ideas can have negative consequences for regulators trying to put out the best advice possible.
Canadians get the risks of consuming alcohol above official guidelines, understand and perhaps even overestimate thresholds for what is unsafe, and their behaviors are in line with their assumptions, even if their personal consumption estimates were inflated by 2x. Most want governments to work on preventing cases of extreme abuse, rather than trying to get moderate or occasional drinkers to consume less beverage alcohol.
Methodology
The survey, commissioned by Spirits Canada, was conducted online with 2,000 Canadians aged 18 and over from April 24 to 28, 2023.
A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically 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 +/- 1.8%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Alberta’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.
We were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in 2019.
From June 6 to 11, 2023, Abacus Data conducted a national survey of 2,000 adults exploring several topics related to Canadian politics and current events as part of our regular national omnibus surveys. In this survey, we oversample Ontario to a total of 1,000.
In this survey, we asked a new question to gauge both the desire for change and the perception that there’s an alternative those wanting change are comfortable with.
I’m going to start there.
Overall, 81% of Canadians believe it is time for a change in government. 20% believe Justin Trudeau and the Liberals deserve to be re-elected. But among the 81% who want change, 31% say there isn’t a good alternative to the Liberals they are comfortable with.
Those who want change but say they are not comfortable with any of the alternatives to the Liberals are:
Slightly more likely to be women than men (55% to 45%)
45% voted Liberal in 2021. 21% voted NDP and 13% voted Conservative.
50% self-identify as being centrist, 36% are on the left side of the spectrum and 14% are on the right.
28% have a positive impression of Justin Trudeau while 41% have a negative one. 29% have a neutral impression of the Liberal leader
27% are currently undecided when asked how they would vote today, significantly higher than the other two groups (those who want change and think there’s an alternative and those who think the Liberals deserve to be re-elected)
More interesting is how these three groups say they would vote if an election was today.
Among those who want change and think there’s a good alternative, 56% would vote Conservative, 25% NDP and 6% would vote Liberal.
Among those who think the Liberals deserve to be re-elected, 77% would vote Liberal, 11% NDP, and 6% BQ. Only 2% would vote Conservative.
Among the 31% who want change but don’t think there’s a good alternative they are comfortable with, 33% would vote Liberal, 22% NDP, 19% Conservative, and 14% BQ.
This group – those who want change but aren’t completely comfortable with the alternatives – will decide the next election. And right now, enough of them are staying with the Liberals giving them a shot at re-election. If any of the opposition parties can make themselves more appealing, that becomes a dangerous place for the Liberals.
Despite the desire for change, 46% of adults say they would consider voting Liberal, an accessible voter pool that hasn’t changed much over the past two and half years. This means while there is a desire for change, many haven’t completely closed the door to voting Liberal.
Current Vote Intention
If an election was held today, the Conservatives would get 35% (up 2 since mid-May), the Liberals at 28% (down 2), the NDP at 21% (up 3) with the BQ at 7% nationally. Numerically, this is the lowest we’ve had the Liberals over the past year.
Regionally, the Conservatives are ahead in the Prairies, are statistically tied with the NDP in BC, statistically tied with the Liberals in Ontario, and are at 30% in Atlantic Canada. The Liberals are statistically tied with the BQ in Quebec and ahead in Atlantic Canada.
By age, the NDP is numerically ahead among those under 30 but its support shrinks among older age groups. The Liberals get about 25 to 30% across all age groups while the Conservatives lead among those 45 and over.
Party Leader Impressions
Impressions of Justin Trudeau are largely unchanged from last month. 30% have a positive impression while 49% have a negative impression for an overall score of -19. Trudeau’s scores across the country are -22 in BC, -42 in Alberta, – 49 in SK and MB, -16 in Ontario, -6 in Quebec, and -4 in Atlantic Canada.
Both positive and negative impressions of Pierre Poilievre have increased over the past month. Today 32% have a positive impression while 40% have a negative impression for an overall score of -8. Over the past 6 weeks, Mr. Poilievre’s negatives have risen by 5 points from 35% in early May to 40% today. Poilievre’s scores across the country are -4 in BC, +15 in Alberta, +5 in SK and MB, -5 in Ontario, -31 in Quebec, and -10 in Atlantic Canada.
Jagmeet Singh remains the most popular leader in the country with 38% having a positive impression (up 4 in 6 weeks) and 32% having a negative view for a score of +6. Singh’s scores across the country are +16 in BC, -13 in Alberta, -7 in SK and MB, +7 in Ontario, +5 in Quebec, and +28 in Atlantic Canada.
UPSHOT
According to David Coletto: “The opinion environment for the Liberal government is quite challenging. 80% of Canadians say they want change and only 20% think the government deserves to be re-elected.
Despite this, the Liberals are still competitive because about 1 in 3 Canadians who want change, don’t feel there’s an acceptable or comfortable alternative to the Liberals. Most of them are voting for an opposition party, if an election was held today, but not all of them. A third is sticking with the Liberals, despite wanting change.
This dynamic indicates a complex and nuanced political environment in Canada, reflecting a broad dissatisfaction with the current Liberal government, yet also a degree of apprehension about alternatives.
While it might seem like a grim outlook with 80% of the populace desiring change, the Liberals can find some solace in the fact that a notable fraction of those yearning for change still doesn’t see a viable alternative. This can be seen as a testament to the government’s relative stability or the perception of the Liberals as the lesser of multiple evils. However, this shouldn’t invite complacency, but rather it should serve as a wake-up call to address public discontent. The Liberals need to reexamine and realign their policies with public sentiment to re-establish trust and strengthen their electability.
For opposition parties, these results are both an opportunity and a challenge. The desire for change signifies widespread discontent, creating a political vacuum that they can fill. However, the inability of a substantial fraction of voters to identify a comfortable alternative underscores a failure on the opposition’s part to present a compelling, viable vision for leadership. To capitalize on this scenario, opposition parties need to effectively communicate their policies, presenting clear, tangible alternatives to the current government’s approach. The closer we get to an election, the more the acceptability of the opposition parties will be under scrutiny.
From a broader perspective, this situation illustrates a common dilemma in many democracies: the desire for change coupled with the fear of the unknown. While change is often seen as a positive, progressive force, it can also introduce uncertainty. When voters are unsure of the alternatives, they may opt for the status quo, even if they’re dissatisfied with it. This dynamic can stagnate political landscapes and force a more polarizing, negative type of politics.”
METHODOLOGY
The survey was conducted with 2,000 Canadian adults from June 6 to 11, 2023. A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically 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.
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 one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in 2019.
The PCs lead the Ontario Liberals by 9 province-wide. Since March, the PC vote share among committed respondents is down 5 while the NDP share is up 3.
The PCs are well ahead among those aged 45 and over while the NDP and Liberals do better among those under 45.
74% feel it’s time for a change and 26% believe Doug Ford and the PCs deserve to be re-elected. But among those who want change, 29% say there isn’t a good alternative to Ford and the PCs.
Ford’s net impression is -16, Stiles is 0 while John Fraser is -8.
We also tested impressions of the candidates running or may run for the Ontario Liberal leadership. Mississauga Mayor Bonnie Crombie is the best known of the candidates and has a net favourable rating of +12.
METHODOLOGY
The survey was conducted with 1,000 Ontario adults from June 6 to 11, 2023. A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically 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 +/- 3.1%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Ontario’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
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 one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in 2019.
On behalf of the Paramedic Association of Canada, Abacus Data conducted an extensive online nationwide survey of Canadians’ views of healthcare and the role of paramedics. The sample size was 3,150 adult Canadians and the survey was conducted from April 24 to 28, 2023.
The full report can also be accessed in French HERE.
Many More Canadians Think Emergency Room Wait Times, Access to a Family Doctor, and Paramedic Response Times are a Major Problem in Canada.
Since 2021, concerns about several aspects of Canada’s healthcare system have increased. Today, half or more Canadians believe that emergency room wait times and capacity (66%), surgery wait times (63%), hospital overcrowding (59%), access to a family doctor (56%), and access to mental health services (50%) are a major problem in Canada. Those who believe emergency room wait times are a major problem increased by 13 points since 2021 while those who think access to a family doctor is a major problem is up by 16 points.
When it comes to response times of paramedics, 36% believe it is a major problem, a 15-point increase since 2021 and a 23-point increase since 2012. Back in 2012, only 13% of Canadians considered paramedic response times are a major problem.
Regionally, views about paramedic response times are fairly consistent although those in BC (46%) and Alberta (39%) are more likely to consider it a major problem than those in other provinces.
The survey also found that older Canadians are more likely to think the health care issues identified were serious problems in Canada. In particular, 66% of those aged 60 and over believed that surgery wait times were a major problem, 25 points higher than those aged 18 to 29.
Paramedics are Deeply Respected and Most Believe they are Central to the Healthcare System.
89% of Canadians say they have a lot of respect or considerable respect for paramedics. This view is held across the country and demographic groups.
When asked to classify whether several professions played a central role, an important role, or a supporting role in the healthcare system, 57% think paramedics play a central role while another 32% say an important role. This is unchanged from last year.
Overall, 74% of Canadians believed that doctors play a central role followed by registered nurses (64%) and paramedics (57%).
The views about paramedics are consistent across the country although older Canadians and those who have been treated by a paramedic were more likely to consider paramedics central to the healthcare system.
Paramedics are as trusted as doctors or nurses to make on-the-spot medical decisions.
When asked to what extent they trust doctors, nurses, and paramedics to make on-the-spot medical decisions about their personal health, eight in ten (82%) Canadians said they had high trust in paramedics compared with 81% for nurses and 85% for doctors.
Trust in paramedics was consistent right across the country and across demographics. 87% of those who have personally been treated or transported to a hospital by a paramedic say they have high trust in their ability to make on-the-spot medical decisions.
83% of Canadians support the idea of Community Paramedicine.
Respondents were shown the following description of community paramedicine and asked whether they support or oppose the idea of community paramedicine:
Traditionally, paramedics are trained to respond to emergency 911 calls, treat patients who are ill and/or injured, and transport patients to emergency departments. However, not all patients require transportation to an emergency department. Many simply need a basic health assessment, minor treatment, and referral to an appropriate community, or other health care service.
Community Paramedicine is about engaging paramedics in non-traditional roles to assist in delivering health care to urgent and non-urgent, but not life threatening situations. By expanding the role of paramedics, and working collaboratively with other health care professionals and community agencies, paramedics can manage patients who do not require immediate treatment and transportation to an emergency department.
Under a Community Paramedicine model, paramedics will continue to respond to medical emergencies and provide non-urgent medical care within the community and at patients’ homes.
Overall, 83% of Canadians we surveyed either strongly support (44%) or somewhat support (39%) the idea of community paramedicine as presented in the survey. Only 2% are opposed to it and the remaining 15% said they neither support nor oppose it.
Support for the idea is consistent across the country and is particularly popular among women – 47% of whom strongly support the idea of community paramedicine.
There is also cross partisan support for the idea – Liberal, Conservative, and NDP supporters overwhelmingly support it.
Why is there such high support for community paramedics?
Almost all Canadians are comfortable with the idea of paramedics playing a greater role in the delivery of healthcare services in their community. 93% say they are either completely or mostly comfortable with the idea including massive majorities across age, gender, and regional subgroups.
At a time when Canadians are deeply concerned about the capacity of the healthcare system and whether they can get access to care when they need it, Canadians believe paramedics can be utilized more.
In fact, when we ask whether people consider paramedics to be either emergency responders, healthcare professionals, or both, 70% consider them to be either healthcare providers alone or both healthcare providers and emergency responders equally. The perception of the profession has changed as the nature of healthcare and Canada’s healthcare system has changed.
In fact, when we present respondents with a scenario in which a paramedic responds to a medical emergency and give Canadians a choice between that paramedic always taking them to a hospital, no matter what the medical problem is or allowing the paramedic to decide whether there is a more effective option for treatment, 2 in 3 give the paramedic discretion to make the right choice. Only 22% want the paramedic to take them to the hospital.
The Upshot
Health care remains a top concern for many Canadians, especially as it relates to capacity and access issues in emergency rooms, hospitals, and access to a family doctor. More recently, concerns about the emergency response times of paramedics have also grown sharply. Given these concerns, Canadians recognize and value the role that paramedics can play in improving access and outcomes for Canadian patients.
Paramedics in Canada are well regarded, trusted, and seen as central to the health care system. There is almost no resistance to the concept of community paramedicine and large numbers of Canadians enthusiastically support it, especially women who value the peace of mind knowing that their loved ones will be cared for if a medical emergency or situation arises.
Given the reputation of the process and the role Canadians see paramedics playing, it should be no surprise that the public thinks they should be part of the national discussion about the future of healthcare and play a greater role in delivering healthcare services.
Methodology
The survey, commissioned by the Paramedic Association of Canada, was conducted online with 3,150 Canadians aged 18 and over from April 24 to 28, 2023.
A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically 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 +/- 1.8%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Alberta’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
Paramedic Association of Canada
The Paramedic Association of Canada is a voluntary professional organization of paramedicine practitioners in Canada. Its mission is to provide quality care for the public through leadership in the advancement of the profession of paramedicine. For more information, contact Pierre Poirier at pierre.poirier@paramedic.ca, or visit their website at http://www.paramedic.ca/
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 one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in 2019.
Just as we anticipated in our final pre-poll survey, Danielle Smith and the United Conservatives ended up on top when all the votes were tallied. That same survey also dug into how Alberta’s wildfires may have influenced voter sentiment.
Based on responses from 1,200 eligible Albertan voters from May 26 to May 28, 2023, we examined the Albertan experience with the wildfires, how they felt the issue was addressed during the campaigns, and who they saw as the most capable leader in dealing with it.
For our analysis, we lumped folks who had either voted or were likely to into three camps: Smith’s UCP, Notley’s NDP, and the undecided.
Wildfire Impact on Voters
First off, we wanted to gauge how the wildfires had affected voters. Three in four (75%) confirmed that they experienced some impact. When broken down by region, those from Calgary were less likely to report being affected than those in Edmonton and other communities within Alberta. Interestingly, undecided voters showed a more contrasting response compared to the overall sample.
We followed up with a question about any hardships they had experienced due to wildfires in the past three years. Over half, 54%, mentioned they’d had to stay indoors, 39% suffered health problems, and 14% had to change their travel plans. When compared to the overall respondents, UCP voters were less likely to experience issues, while NDP voters were more likely to.
Campaign and Government Response to Wildfires
Opinions were fairly split on whether the electoral campaign adequately addressed the current wildfires. NDP voters were more likely to disagree with this statement than UCP voters. A significant 65% of undecided voters confessed that they weren’t familiar enough with the electoral campaigns to make a judgment call. People from Calgary and Edmonton showed a bit more agreement than the total respondent pool.
As for the Alberta government’s efforts in wildfire prevention, 34% believe it’s on the right path, while 29% think it’s going the wrong way. Not surprisingly, there’s a clear divide between UCP and NDP voters. Over half of UCP voters (51%) feel things are moving in the right direction compared to just 21% of NDP voters. Conversely, 16% of UCP voters and nearly half of NDP voters (48%) believe it’s on the wrong path. Among the undecided, 67% aren’t sure about the current direction – a significant jump from the 37% total for Alberta. Voters from Calgary and Edmonton were less pleased with the current direction, whereas other communities were more supportive.
Best Leaders for Wildfire-Related Issues
Our final questions asked people which party and leader would best handle wildfire-related issues.
Danielle Smith and the UCP edged out the NDP in:
Developing a long-term wildfire mitigation strategy (36% UCP vs. 32% NDP)
Boosting funding for firefighting and wildfire responses (38% UCP vs. 36% NDP)
Meanwhile, Rachel Notley and the NDP came out on top in:
Addressing challenges related to Alberta’s climate change (29% UCP vs. 41% NDP)
Shifting Alberta’s economy away from oil (22% UCP vs. 44% NDP)
Collaborating with the federal government on wildfire responses (36% UCP vs. 39% NDP)
The Upshot
The survey data suggests that the wildfires in Alberta did indeed have some impact on voter sentiment in the election. A substantial 75% of the respondents reported experiencing some form of impact from the wildfires. This indicates that wildfires were a personal issue for many voters, likely influencing their perception of the candidates and their platforms.
The responses also indicate some partisan differences in perception and experiences. NDP voters reported more adverse consequences from the wildfires compared to UCP voters. This difference may have shaped their views on the government’s response to the wildfires and their choices in the election.
Importantly, the data suggests that voters had mixed feelings about how well the issue of wildfires was addressed during the campaigns. Some felt the issue was sufficiently handled, while others disagreed. Particularly, a large portion of undecided voters felt they did not know enough about the electoral campaigns’ take on the wildfire issue, indicating a potential gap in information or communication.
Moreover, the voters were somewhat divided on the government’s performance in terms of wildfire prevention, with a sizeable number of voters uncertain about the direction the government was taking although more felt the government has handing the issue well. Suggesting that in the end, the wildfires and the Smith government’s handling of the emergency likely did better than harm to her re-election prospects.
Whether the NDP would have done better had it made climate change and the fires a bigger part of their campaign remains to be seen. On the one hand it may have further activated its base and connected the fires with the UCP’s less aggressive policy stand on climate change. On the other hand, as the NDP was seeking to convert past UCP voters, climate change wasn’t a top issue despite the wildfires.
METHODOLOGY
The survey was conducted with 1,200 Alberta adults eligible to vote from May 26 to 28, 2023.
A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically 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 +/- 2.9%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Alberta’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
David Coletto is Chair, CEO and a founding partner of Abacus Data a full-service market research and strategy firm based in Ottawa and Toronto. With over a decade and a half of experience in the industry, David and his partners founded Abacus 12 years ago and since then David has become one of Canada’s most respected social researchers regularly commenting on politics, the labour market, and consumer behaviour.
He earned a PhD in Political Science from the University of Calgary in 2010 and is an adjunct professor at Carleton University. He is the host and producer of inFocus with David Coletto a podcast that explores the intersection of public opinion, politics, public policy, and consumer behaviour.
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 one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in 2019.
I’m going to approach this report slightly differently than others we have done throughout the campaign.
I’m going to offer up the reasons why I think the UCP are the favourites to win tomorrow and help explain how we got here and the underlying reasons why the NDP is likely to fall short of winning the election yet still achieve a remarkable feat – winning close to a majority of the vote in Alberta.
As I did in our previous analysis, I’ll focus on those who have already voted or are likely to vote.
Our Final Forecast: Despite a very close province-wide vote (UCP 49%, NDP 48%), the UCP should win tomorrow.
Based on our survey of 1,200 eligible voters in Alberta, conducted from Friday, May 26 to Sunday, May 28, 2023, I believe the UCP and Danielle Smith are well-positioned to win tomorrow although it is close enough that I could be wrong.
Province-wide, I expect the UCP to get close to 49% of the vote. The NDP will get around 48% with other parties collecting about 3%. This estimate is based on the responses of Albertans who have already voted and are likely to vote tomorrow.
Here is a bit more detail about how the vote breaks down:
According to our survey, 27% of eligible voters in Alberta said they had already voted in advance polls. 50% said they voted UCP while 47% voted NDP. 1% voted for the Alberta Party and 3% voted for other parties.
Among all eligible voters, the UCP leads by 4 over the NDP. Since mid-May, the UCP vote is up 9 points while the NDP vote is down 3. 12% of all eligible voters remain undecided, a drop of 7-points since our survey last week.
The UCP leads by 21 among those 45 and over while the NDP leads 61% to 36% among those under 45.
The UCP leads by 19 among men while the NDP leads by 15 among women.
The NDP is ahead by 30 in Edmonton proper (60% to 30%) while the UCP is well ahead outside of the two largest cities (UCP 57% vs. NDP 40%). In Calgary proper, we have the UCP ahead by 9 (54% to 45%). Given the sample sizes in each region, there’s almost a 100% chance that each party’s lead in each region is statistically significant. The margin however could vary. In Calgary for example, the NDP could be ahead by 1 point while the UCP could be ahead by 19. But the likelihood of such a large lead for the UCP or a slight lead for the NDP is rather small.
The UCP and NDP are tied among those with high school or less, the UCP is ahead among those with a college degree or some university, while the NDP is well ahead among those with a university degree.
The UCP leads by 11 among non-racialized Albertans while the NDP leads by 31 among racialized Albertans.
1 in 4 of those who voted for the federal Conservatives say they will vote or have voted for the NDP. Almost all of those who voted NDP or Liberal federally support the NDP.
Overall, these results point to some very sharp divides in vote by demographic and regional variables. But it’s the UCP lead in Calgary (even if it ends up smaller than our estimate suggests) and among older voters that leads to my conclusion that they are the favourites to win the election outright tomorrow.
What explains this likely outcome?
35% of voters or likely voters feel the province is headed in the right direction. 47% feel it is off on the wrong track. For comparison, 31% of Canadians feel the country is headed in the right direction according to the most recent Abacus Data national survey.
Danielle Smith and Rachel Notley have almost identical personal images. 39% have a positive impression of Danielle Smith compared with 41% who feel the same way about Rachel Notley. Those with a negative view of the leaders are the same at 43%.
In Calgary proper, Smith’s net favourable rating is -3 while it’s -7 for Notley.
Results are also quite similar when it comes to the momentum of impressions. When asked whether their feelings about the two main leaders are getting better, worse, or not changing over the past few weeks, 32% say their impression of Smith is better while 34% say they are worse. For Notley, it is 30% better and 34% worse – almost exactly the same.
42% think Danielle Smith will be premier after the election double the number who feel Rachel Notley will be premier (21%). 37% are unsure who will be premier after the election.
Both party campaigns have tried to frame this election in terms of risk. When Albertans are asked which choice is the riskiest, 51% select the UCP while 49% pick the NDP – an almost even split. The results are almost the exact same when framed around which party is a safe choice. 51% think the UCP is a safer choice while 49% select the NDP.
The UCP has a big lead on who Albertans think is best to manage the economy (59% to 41%), while the NDP leads on who people feel is most likely to fix healthcare (55% to 45%).
When it comes to values, 52% believe the UCP is closest to their own values, 4 points more than the NDP at 48%.
To evaluate the influence of Danielle Smith and the public’s perception of her on the election, I posed a question to respondents: how would their vote change if Smith was not leading the UCP?
The results indicate that Smith has made this election far closer than it would otherwise be. 44% of all eligible voters say they would vote UCP, 16 points more than would vote NDP at 28%. 5% would vote for the Alberta Party while 22% say they would be undecided.
Among those who have voted or are likely to vote, the UCP gets 55% to 38% for the NDP. In essence, Smith has likely depressed UCP support by 6 points when we compare these results to the actual vote or vote intention of these same people.
Finally, throughout the pre-election period and into the election, I’ve highlighted a group of respondents who I termed “Reluctant UCPers”. These are people who say they voted for the UCP in 2019 (when Jason Kenney won a big majority) but were either voting for another party or were undecided.
Today, that group represents only 10% of the electorate, an eight-point drop from the start of the campaign.
This suggests that the UCP campaign has been effective in convincing many of its past supporters who were on the fence to come home to the UCP while the NDP was unable to convert those Reluctant to vote UCP this time to switch.
Today, 14% of those who voted UCP in 2019 and either voted already or are likely to vote are voting NDP while 79% are voting UCP. 4% remain undecided. If that 4% all turn out tomorrow and vote NDP, that could have an impact – but the sample size is too small to give me any indication of how they might vote if they decide to cast a ballot tomorrow.
The Upshot
The NDP had to do something very difficult in this election. It had to convince a lot of Albertans to vote NDP for the first time in their lives. They had to get them to go against their identities and norms in the province to vote for a party they probably never thought they would. They convinced many, but it looks like not enough to win the election.
Coming into this election, Danielle Smith was very much the focus of people’s attention. Her favourables were lower than Rachel Notley’s. Many past UCP voters were repelled by her, thought she was worse than Jason Kenney as Premier, and felt she was a risky prospect. It looked like she would have a hard time either consolidating UCP support or motivating enough to support her.
In the end, the structural advantages of a united conservative electorate t in Alberta meant the UCP was always the favourites to win the election. The NDP needed to center the election around healthcare, convince voters they had economic credibility, and persuade individuals that Notley represented the safer option available.
Ultimately, it appears the NDP was unable to convince enough Albertans that the UCP and Smith were too risky and that Notley and the NDP were a safe alternative. To defeat an incumbent, especially in a province like Alberta, requires both those conditions to be met.
Danielle Smith will likely continue as Premier after tomorrow’s election. How long she can stay in the role remains to be seen. But her campaign closed stronger than it started with a solid debate performance and a closing week without much controversy.
Does this mean Alberta is now solidly a two-party system? I think so. Will it always be naturally competitive? Maybe not. Depends on many variables.
But whether or not the result tomorrow night is as I expect (and we still could be surprised), there will be a lot of lessons for political managers to unpack in the days and weeks ahead.
Alberta will come out of this election quite divided along regional, demographic, and cultural lines. This election exposed some big cleavages with old, traditional Alberta one on side and a newer, contemporary Alberta on the other. Younger and newer Albertans are strongly backing the NDP. Older and long-time residents of the province are backing the UCP. The UCP caucus will likely have few urban MLAs and will be dominated by elected members from smaller and rural communities. Governing in such an environment may prove both difficult and divisive.
Tomorrow we are likely to see Danielle Smith and the UCP re-elected but the results of the survey suggest we could be surprised. Some will think I’m hedging my bets but any conclusion otherwise would be foolish given how close things are and the variables that polling can’t capture. indicate that close enough that I may
Subscribe to my substack for more data and breakouts in the coming days from this poll.
METHODOLOGY
The survey was conducted with 1,200 Alberta adults eligible to vote from May 26 to 28, 2023.
A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically 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 +/- 2.9%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Alberta’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
David Coletto is Chair, CEO and a founding partner of Abacus Data a full-service market research and strategy firm based in Ottawa and Toronto. With over a decade and a half of experience in the industry, David and his partners founded Abacus 12 years ago and since then David has become one of Canada’s most respected social researchers regularly commenting on politics, the labour market, and consumer behaviour.
He earned a PhD in Political Science from the University of Calgary in 2010 and is an adjunct professor at Carleton University. He is the host and producer of inFocus with David Coletto a podcast that explores the intersection of public opinion, politics, public policy, and consumer behaviour.
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 one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in 2019.
The last year has shown that living costs can be high and unpredictable. The cost of food and other home goods has meant living a comfortable life day-to-day is more pricey for everyone. And the rapid rise in house prices, not yet matched by wage increases, have meant other living costs have put comfort out of reach for more folks. With this, we were curious. How much income do people believe they need to live comfortably? And how does it differ by age.
To begin, on average Canadians say they need to earn $79,280 (before taxes) annually to live a comfortable life. It is higher for those with a partner ($85,445) and lower for those without ($72,919). It is lowest in Quebec, and highest in Toronto. And those who have children, say they need to earn about $30,000 more than those without.
Those with a household income lower than $75,000 say they’d need to earn more than they do now to live a comfortable life- but a relatively modest increase. Those with a higher household income, $75,000 and up, say the are comfortable making what they do now, and some would even be comfortable with less.
One of the greatest variations however is by generation. Gen Z say they need to make over $100,000 a year to live a comfortable life, more than any other generation, including millennials. This is also considerably higher than the current average income for this cohort, which hovers around $45,000.
The generational breakdown is as follows: Gen Z say they need to make $100,953, Millennials say $87,386, Gen X say $84,700 and Boomers say they need to earn $63,753 before taxes to live a comfortable life.
One likely driver of this discrepancy is that a greater proportion of young people (Gen Z in particular) that are striving for a comfortable life, rather than living one. Younger generations need to check off some large boxes before they feel comfortable. For Gen Z this is looks like saving for a downpayment or starting to tackle student loans, and for Millennials this is likely a mortgage or other debt. For Boomers, who have bought and paid off the major purchases in their life, their earnings to live comfortably are much lower.
Another likely influence is where these generations live, or hope to live (Gen Z and young millennials prefer cities and urban cores).
THE UPSHOT
Perceptions of financial comfort varies based on a number of factors. It’s influenced by where you live, if you have a partner and if you have dependents to support. But above all else, it’s influenced by your age whether or not you’ve made it through many of the major life purchases that are considered life milestones.
As more Gen Z’s become more situated in the workforce, their perceptions of ideal income may shift, but the important take away is the discrepancy between the actual income of young people in Canada, and what they think they need to live comfortably. This gap signals financial concern for young people (something that’s been on the rise for everyone, but particularly these generational cohorts since the pandemic), and if it sticks around (or worse yet, increases) will have real consequences on everything from consumer behaviour to votes.
METHODOLOGY
The survey was conducted with 1,750 Canadian adults and 1,750 Ontario adults from April 28 to May 4, 2023
A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically 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 +/- 2.343%, 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.
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 one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in 2019.
