Abacus Data Poll: Budget Lands Softly as Political Deadlock Continues

Between November 5 and 6, 2025, Abacus Data surveyed 1,916 Canadian adults about the federal political landscape. The poll was conducted in the days following two major political developments: the release of the federal budget on November 4 and the defection of a Conservative MP to the Liberal caucus. These events had the potential to reshape the political narrative. Instead, they seem to have landed with a thud, leaving the broader dynamics of public opinion largely intact.

The federal race remains tight. Approval of the Carney-led government continues to erode. And Canadians remain laser-focused on pocketbook issues, particularly the cost of living, which has risen again as the top issue.

Public Mood: Restless but Unchanged

One in three Canadians (33%) feel the country is heading in the right direction. Half (49%) believe it is off on the wrong track. These numbers have been consistent for weeks and reflect a deep-rooted sense of frustration without much volatility. The budget hasn’t lifted optimism across the country.

Views about the state of the world (14% right direction) and the United States (13%) remain overwhelmingly pessimistic, underscoring a broad international anxiety that frames domestic political expectations.

Top Issues: Cost of Living Dominates Again

The cost of living continues to be the most pressing issue. Sixty-six percent of Canadians cite it as one of their top three concerns, up four points from the previous wave. The economy (39%) and healthcare (35%) follow, while concern about Donald Trump and his administration has dropped slightly to 34%.

This is the highest level of concern about the cost of living recorded in 2025 and reinforces the salience of affordability issues in the federal political debate.

Government Approval: Downward Slide Resumes

Approval of the Carney government is now at 44%, down from 52% since June. Disapproval has risen to match it at 34%. This is the lowest approval rating for the Carney government since the April federal election.

This latest data suggests the budget has not arrested the longer trend of softening support for the Liberals. Instead, it appears to have passed without significantly changing perceptions of the government’s performance.

Leader Impressions: Carney Treads Water, Poilievre Slides

Mark Carney’s favourability remains positive overall, with 46% viewing him positively and 34% negatively, yielding a net favourability of +12. This is unchanged from the previous wave.

Pierre Poilievre, however, has seen his net impression score fall to -7, the lowest it has been in over a year. Just 37% of Canadians view him positively, while 44% have a negative impression. This shift follows a week that included the unexpected defection of a Conservative MP to the Liberals. While the full impact of that event is still unfolding, it appears to have bruised Poilievre’s personal brand.

Vote Intention: A Neck-and-Neck Race

If an election were held today, the Conservatives would earn 41% of the vote, while the Liberals would capture 40%. Support for the NDP is steady at 8%, the Bloc at 7%, and the Greens at 2%.

Among those most likely to vote, the Conservative lead widens slightly to 43% compared to 40% for the Liberals.

Accessible Voter Pools: Still Evenly Matched

Despite significant shifts in approval and leader impressions, the accessible voter universes for the Liberal and Conservative parties remain exactly tied at 53% each. This symmetry reinforces the competitive nature of the current landscape and shows that no party is pulling away decisively on voter openness.

Regional and Demographic Trends: Familiar Patterns Hold

Ontario continues to reflect the national picture, with the Conservatives at 43% and Liberals at 44%. Alberta remains deep blue, with the Conservatives holding 61%. In Quebec, the Liberals lead with 39%, ahead of the Bloc at 30% and the Conservatives at 24%.

Older Canadians (60+) continue to lean Liberal, with 50% support, while middle-aged voters (45–59) prefer the Conservatives by a margin of 47% to 33%. Younger voters remain more fragmented, with the Liberals slightly ahead among 18 to 29-year-olds at 41% compared to 37% for the Conservatives while the Conservatives lead by 9 among Millennials (aged 30 to 44).

The Upshot

According to Abacus Data CEO David Coletto:
“We are seeing more confirmation than change in this wave of polling. The federal budget has not disrupted the longer trend of softening government approval. While the floor-crossing gave the Liberals a brief boost in media coverage, it may have done more to dent Poilievre’s image than elevate Carney’s.

What is striking is the continued dominance of cost of living concerns. As that number rises, expectations for government solutions do too. The fact that the budget failed to move the needle on approval or leader impressions suggests that Canadians are in a wait-and-see mode, not yet convinced of the budget’s efficacy to tackle the issues they care most about.

This remains a deeply competitive political environment. Both the Liberals and Conservatives have equal-sized accessible voter pools, but each is struggling to break through beyond the group that voted for them in the spring. The coming weeks will reveal whether the budget leaves any lasting impressions, but for now, the deadlock holds.”

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 1,916 Canadians from November 5 to 6, 2025. 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, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here: https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

The survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc. Inc.

About Abacus Data

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

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.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Canadian PoliticsPublic Policy

Canadians React to Budget 2025: Split Views, Muddled Message, and a Test of Trust in Carney’s Leadership

A new post-budget survey from Abacus Data, the first of its kind since the Carney government tabled its 2025 federal budget, finds the country divided on the plan, uncertain about the direction, and unclear on the story behind it. While many of the measures tested were well received on their own, the overall narrative remains fractured.

The results point to a muddled first impression. Awareness was solid, but understanding was limited. The response was emotionally mixed and thematically scattered. And while many Canadians support individual components, fewer are convinced that this budget offers a clear, credible path to a stronger economic future.

Awareness Was High, but Familiarity Lagged Behind

About 72% of Canadians were aware that the federal government had introduced a new budget, a reasonably high figure for a policy event. Awareness was higher among older respondents and those with a more positive view of the Prime Minister. Just over half of those under 45 were aware there was a budget tabled this week.

Familiarity with the content of the budget was more limited. Just 15% said they were very familiar with what was in it, while 48% said they were somewhat familiar. The remaining 37% had heard about the budget but could not speak to the specifics.

Notably, detailed familiarity did not appear to be necessary for support. Among those with a positive view of Mark Carney, just 16% were very familiar with the budget contents. Yet this group offered some of the most supportive responses across every measure tested.

That speaks to the power of the Carney brand. Many Canadians have delegated trust to the Prime Minister and believe he has the experience and judgment to manage the economy effectively. For those who trust him, the budget is seen not as a set of policies to be examined line by line but as a signal of competent leadership.

Two Competing Narratives: Investment or Indulgence?

Asked in their own words what the budget was about, Canadians gave answers that reflected two dominant narratives.

One is rooted in long-term investment. This group saw the budget as a generational effort focused on housing, infrastructure, defence, and economic renewal. Their language reflected optimism and intent.

The other group focused squarely on spending. These respondents described a government losing control of the books, citing the $78 billion deficit and warning about rising debt, inflation, and economic fragility.

Both stories exist in the public mind, but neither has emerged as dominant. About 10% said they did not know what the budget was about at all, and another 25% offered a wide array of mixed, non-specific responses. That lack of narrative clarity is one of the government’s biggest challenges going forward.

Emotional Reaction: A Split Between Hope and Hesitation

When Canadians were asked to pick from a list of words that describe the budget, the results showed a stark divide. Some of the most common words were “disappointing” (30%), “scary” (27%), and “out-of-touch” (25%). But just behind them were “hopeful” (26%), “responsible” (24%), and “ambitious” (23%).

In fact, 55% of Canadians chose at least one positive word to describe the budget, while 53% chose at least one negative word. About 28% selected both.

This suggests a country with mixed feelings. Canadians are looking for reassurance but are wary of overspending. Many see the budget as attempting something worthwhile but question whether it will work.

Support for Individual Measures Was Often Strong

When it came to specific components of the budget, many were met with broad support. The most popular measures included:

  • A “Buy Canadian” procurement rule (+62 net support)
  • Reducing temporary foreign workers and international students to ease housing and job pressure (+54)
  • New funds for Canadian businesses to reach global markets (+48)
  • New housing and infrastructure programs (+45 to +48)

Cuts to the federal public service also found more support than opposition overall (+24). However, that figure conceals important variation. Younger Canadians were significantly less supportive of these cuts than older ones. Among those under 45, net support was just +2, compared with +40 among those over 45.

Support also fractured around defence spending. While the overall net rating for increased defence investment was +35, this measure was notably less popular in Quebec and among younger Canadians.

One of the least popular moves was the decision to eliminate the luxury tax on private planes and yachts. It received a net rating of -11, making it the second most unpopular policy tested after the deficit. Older Canadians, Liberal and NDP voters, and even many Conservative supporters were not impressed. Among Liberal supporters, views were split, with no clear support advantage.

The Budget’s Political Impact: Some Gains, Some Risk

At a macro level, 52% of Canadians who were aware of the budget said it was a step in the right direction. The other 48% said it was a step in the wrong direction.

Among those with a favourable view of Carney, 84% said the budget was moving in the right direction, and only 18% said it fell short of their expectations. Among those with a negative view of Carney, just 9% said it was heading the right way.

But cracks are emerging even within the Liberal base. Among those who voted Liberal earlier this year, 19% say the budget fell short of their expectations and another 31% are unsure. About 19% of Liberal voters also said the budget would make them worse off personally, and the same proportion said it made them less confident that the government has a clear economic plan.

That group may not be abandoning the party yet, but their hesitation reveals a vulnerability.

Confidence in the Government’s Economic Plan Remains Shallow

When asked whether the budget made them more or less confident that the government has a clear plan to grow the economy, make life more affordable, and protect Canadians from global uncertainty, only 16% said it made them more confident. A much larger group — 39% — said it made them less confident.

This is one of the most important numbers in the dataset. Despite a slate of ambitious programs, big-ticket investments, and strategic messaging, most Canadians do not feel more reassured about the government’s economic leadership.

That gap between intent and impact is where the next political contest will unfold.

Expectations: A Budget That Left Many Wanting More

Asked whether Budget 2025 exceeded, met, or fell short of expectations, most Canadians came away underwhelmed.

Only 5% said the budget exceeded their expectations. Another 28% said it met them. But the largest group — 39% — said it fell short. An additional 28% were unsure or had no clear expectations going in.

Disappointment was especially high among Conservative voters (61%) and Canadians in Alberta (55%) and Saskatchewan-Manitoba (42%). But the reaction was not limited to opposition supporters. Among Liberal voters, 19% said the budget fell short, and another 31% were unsure, signs of soft support even within the party’s own ranks.

There was also a clear link between familiarity and disappointment. Among those who were very familiar with the budget, 42% said it fell short. For those somewhat familiar, 41% said the same. Those who had only heard about it were more likely to say they didn’t know, suggesting limited exposure softened criticism but did not generate enthusiasm.

The Prime Minister’s brand provided some insulation. Just 18% of those with a positive view of Carney said the budget failed to meet expectations. By contrast, 70% of those with a negative view said it fell short.

Overall, the expectations test offers an important signal. While a core group of government supporters are aligned with the direction, the budget has not delivered the kind of surprise or clarity that might energize broader public support. Many Canadians either expected more or were unsure what to expect at all.

Framing the Budget: A Nation Divided on the Story It Tells

To test how Canadians are interpreting the competing political narratives, the survey presented two sharply different characterizations of the budget.

One, aligned with the government’s messaging, described the plan as a bold, generational effort to make Canada stronger and more self-sufficient by investing in housing, infrastructure, and jobs. The other, reflecting opposition framing, portrayed it as a fiscally reckless move that nearly doubled the deficit and raised taxes, making life less affordable without delivering transformational change.

Overall, 46% chose the government’s framing while 54% sided with the Conservative narrative.

While this result reflects a modest tilt toward the opposition view, the story is more nuanced when broken down:

Among those very familiar with the budget, the split was 45% for the government’s frame and 55% for the opposition’s.

Those who had only heard about the budget were similarly split (46% government, 54% opposition).

Among those with a positive view of Carney, 73% chose the government’s framing, a strong endorsement.

By contrast, 85% of those with a negative view of Carney adopted the opposition’s version.

Politically, 71% of Liberal supporters adopted the government’s framing, while 78% of Conservative supporters leaned toward the opposition narrative. Among NDP voters, views were more evenly divided.

Regionally, Alberta (69%) and Saskatchewan-Manitoba (60%) leaned toward the Conservative message, while Ontario and Quebec were split evenly.

The fact that even those most familiar with the budget split almost identically to the national average suggests that understanding the details does not dramatically shift interpretation. Partisan identity and leader perception remain the dominant forces shaping how the budget is being framed in the public mind.

Parliamentary Support: A Divided Mandate

When asked whether their MP should vote to support or oppose the budget, 42% of Canadians said their MP should vote in favour, while 33% preferred a vote against. A sizeable 25% were unsure, a signal that many Canadians are still forming their views.

Support was strongest among Liberal voters (70%) and those with a positive view of Prime Minister Carney (71%). Among Conservative voters, only 22% supported the budget, while 57% said their MP should vote against it. NDP supporters were more mixed, with 35% favouring support and 29% opposed. A full 36% of NDP voters said they were unsure.

Familiarity with the budget played a role. Among those very familiar with the budget, support rose to 54%, while opposition climbed to 38%. Those less familiar were more uncertain, with nearly one in three in the “don’t know” category.

Support was higher among men (48%) than women (36%), and older Canadians were more supportive (45%) than younger ones (38%). Regionally, Alberta and Saskatchewan-Manitoba were most opposed, while Ontario, Quebec, and Atlantic Canada leaned more supportive or were closely divided.

The Upshot

If Budget 2025 was designed to launch a new economic vision and rebuild confidence in the Liberal government’s leadership, the evidence suggests it has so far, fallen short of that goal.

Most Canadians are aware of the budget but few are familiar with the details (yet). The impressions that have landed are contradictory. Some see promise and investment. Others see risk and overspending. Many are unsure what to believe.

The Carney brand remains a powerful asset. Among those who trust him, support for the budget is strong even without detailed knowledge of its contents. But that trust is not universal. It does not extend across the electorate, and even some past Liberal voters are unsure if this is the right approach.

Support for individual measures was often strong, especially when tied to Canadian industry, housing, and economic resilience. But other decisions, such as the luxury tax repeal and public service cuts, risk cutting across the values and expectations of key voter groups.

The most telling data point may be this: just 16% of Canadians say the budget made them more confident in the government’s plan to grow the economy and make life more affordable.

That is not the response one expects to a transformative blueprint. It is the reaction one gets when the message is unclear, the trade-offs are poorly explained, and the public is looking for reassurance and not yet finding it.

The government has its work cut out. The raw material for a compelling story may be there. But that story has not yet been heard.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 1,916 Canadians from November 5 to 6, 2025. 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 +/- 2.23%, 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, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements: https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

The survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.

About Abacus Data

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

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.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Canadian PoliticsPublic Policy

What Happens to the Conservative Party Without Pierre Poilievre? Canadians Weigh In on Potential Leadership Alternatives

Leadership hypotheticals are always speculative, but they’re not pointless. Political leadership is about more than brand management or media presence, it’s the centre of the coalition, the public face of a movement, and often the determining factor in voting behaviour.

That’s why we conducted a survey of 2,922 Canadian adults between October 24 and 29, 2025, for the Toronto Star, exploring what might happen if Pierre Poilievre were no longer leading the federal Conservative Party. Would voters be more or less inclined to support the party? Are there other Conservative figures who might perform better in an election? And what does all this say about the shape and limits of the Conservative coalition today?

It’s important to note that this poll was conducted prior to the events of budget week, during which one Conservative MP crossed the floor to the Liberals and another announced his resignation from Parliament. These developments may alter the dynamics we capture here, but they also make this snapshot even more relevant. At a time when party cohesion is under scrutiny and political leadership is under pressure, understanding the relative strength of Pierre Poilievre and his possible successors is timely.

This exercise is not a prediction. Poilievre has given no indication that he plans to step aside. But it does offer a useful benchmark: it tells us what Canadians think of key Conservative names, and what happens to the party’s support when someone else is placed at the helm.

Canadians Are Split on Poilievre, But He Anchors His Party’s Base

Pierre Poilievre’s public image is defined by polarity. Among all Canadians at the time of this survey, 43% hold a positive view of him while 46% view him negatively, leaving him with a net favourable rating of –3. But that average masks deep variation across partisan, regional, and demographic lines.

Among Conservative voters in 2025, Poilievre’s net score is a towering +70, a sign that he isn’t just tolerated by his party’s base but embraced. Among Canadians who are open to voting Conservative, his net rating is +59. Even among those not yet committed to the party, he is seen more favourably than not, though with some hesitation built in.

Regionally, his support is strongest in Alberta (+19) and Saskatchewan/Manitoba (+11), but weakest in Quebec (–25). Older voters are especially wary: among those 60 and over, Poilievre’s net score is –23. By contrast, voters under 60 tend to view him more favourably or are at least divided.

These numbers confirm a simple truth: Poilievre defines the current Conservative brand, for better or worse.

What If He Stepped Aside?

When asked how they would feel about the Conservative Party if someone else were leader, 29% of Canadians said they would be more likely to vote Conservative, compared with 12% who said less likely. Nearly half — 46% — said it would make no difference.

That 17-point “more likely” margin is striking. It suggests a theoretical opportunity for the party to expand its support under a different leader. But it’s also a cautionary note: Poilievre may repel some voters, but he mobilizes many others. That dynamic is hard to replicate.

Among 2025 Conservative voters, 58% say they’d be just as likely to vote for the party without him. But about 10% say they’d be less likely to do so, suggesting a portion of the party’s vote is more Poilievre than Conservative.

Among the broader accessible pool of Conservative supporters, 29% say they would be more likely to vote Conservative if Poilievre were not leader. That’s the number that might tempt some strategists to wonder about change. But a generic response to a hypothetical question is one thing. Real electoral scenarios are another.

When Real Names Replace the Hypothetical

To move beyond theory, we tested a range of potential Conservative leaders. These included some with strong national profiles — like Stephen Harper and Doug Ford — and others who are newer or lesser known, such as Melissa Lantsman and Jamil Javani. Each was placed in a hypothetical ballot test alongside the Liberals under Mark Carney, the NDP under a future leader, and the Bloc Québécois under Yves-François Blanchet.

Here’s what we found:

Pierre Poilievre remains the strongest option. With him as leader, the Conservatives secure 38% of the vote, narrowly ahead of the Carney-led Liberals at 36%.

Stephen Harper polls at 34% — a four-point drop from Poilievre — despite being the most well-known and best-liked name tested (net favourability +11). His appeal skews older and is strongest in Alberta but doesn’t translate into a stronger national showing.

Doug Ford, Ontario’s premier, draws 31% of the national vote. Although his net favourability is positive (+6), 31% of past Conservative voters say they’d be undecided or support another party under his leadership. In Ontario, Ford would trail Carney’s Liberals by four points.

Jason Kenney, former Alberta premier and Conservative cabinet minister, earns 30%. His overall impressions are mildly negative (–3), and his hypothetical performance is eight points below Poilievre. Support among former Conservative voters also softens.

Caroline Mulroney performs similarly to Kenney, attracting 29%. She holds a mildly positive favourability rating (+6) but lacks intensity or name recognition outside of Ontario or Quebec. About 17% of past Conservative supporters say they would be undecided under her leadership.

Michelle Rempel Garner scores 28% nationally, with a net favourability of +4. Half of Canadians say they don’t know enough about her to have an opinion. Even among past Conservative voters, her support base is more hesitant than with Poilievre or Harper.

Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston (27%) and business person Mark Mulroney (27%) perform at nearly identical levels. Both have relatively low national profiles. Houston has a slightly higher favourability score (+8), but that’s largely concentrated in Atlantic Canada.

Jamil Jivani, a first-term MP, garners 24%. He’s viewed neutrally and remains largely undefined in the eyes of voters. Among young men, however, his numbers are comparatively stronger, suggesting early-stage potential but limited reach today.

Melissa Lantsman brings in just 23% of the vote. Despite a growing media profile and a positive favourability rating (+6), 45% of past Conservative voters say they would either vote elsewhere or are unsure if she led the party. Just 2% of past Liberal voters would switch under her leadership.

A Pattern Emerges: Recognition Drives Results

Across all these scenarios, one theme stands out. Leaders who are well known perform better but not necessarily better than Poilievre. And those who are lesser known suffer from steep drops in support, even when their personal images are relatively positive.

In Poilievre’s case, definition is everything. His image may divide voters, but it also crystallizes the Conservative identity. It gives potential supporters a clear idea of what they’re buying. By contrast, candidates like Houston, Mulroney, Lantsman, and Jivani see undecided rates spike dramatically, often reaching 15 to 20%, compared with just 10% under Poilievre.

The issue isn’t necessarily that Canadians dislike the alternatives. In many cases, they just don’t know them. And when voters don’t know a leader, they default to caution, not curiosity.

The Liberal Factor: Carney’s Consistent Strength

In every hypothetical match-up, the Liberals under Mark Carney perform consistently in the mid to high 30s, whether the Conservatives are led by Poilievre, Harper, or Javani. In fact, in nine of the ten match-ups, the Liberals would finish ahead – except in the match up with Poilievre.

That stability underscores Carney’s own appeal, but it also highlights a deeper dynamic. The current Liberal base isn’t especially reactive to changes in Conservative leadership. Replacing Poilievre doesn’t cause Liberal support to collapse. If anything, it often strengthens it.

In part, that may reflect Poilievre’s success in energizing his own base while drawing intense opposition. His removal may soften that pushback, but it also dulls the contrast that defines the political choice for many voters.

The Upshot

This survey doesn’t suggest that Pierre Poilievre is irreplaceable. But it does show that no other current Conservative figure performs better today and most would do worse.

Poilievre’s brand carries both upside and risk. He is not universally liked, but he is vividly defined. And in the absence of a national figure who combines charisma, clarity, and cross-partisan appeal, the party’s best-performing option remains its current leader.

It’s possible that some of the lesser-known figures in our survey will grow into leadership contenders with broader appeal. But for now, their potential is speculative, while Poilievre’s performance is proven.

The Conservatives face a familiar political trade-off: stick with a polarizing figure who drives turnout and energizes the base, or gamble on a fresh face who may not be ready for prime time or cause a portion of the exist base to exit the Conservative tent or just not vote at all. For now, the data suggest that the party’s ceiling and floor are both tied closely to Poilievre. Without him, the base may mostly stay intact, but the reach would not automatically expand.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 2,922 Canadian adults from October 24 to 29, 2025. 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 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 Canada’s population according to age, gender, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

About Abacus Data

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

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.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Canadian PoliticsPublic Policy

Canadians See Economic Clouds Gathering But Still Hold Out Hope for Progress

As Mark Carney’s government prepares to release its first budget today, Canadians remain far more likely to believe the economy will get worse before it gets better. Yet despite this macro pessimism, many hold steady expectations for their own finances, revealing a cautious but resilient public mood.

This survey was done in partnership with The Logic.

Canadians Expect the Economy to Worsen, But Feel a Bit Better About Themselves

Nearly half (46%) of Canadians expect the national economy to get worse over the next 12 months, compared to only 19% who think it will improve.

That pessimism cuts across every region and demographic, but the intensity varies. Younger Canadians (18–29) are the least gloomy, with one-third (30%) expecting improvement, while pessimism peaks among those 60+, where 52% expect things to deteriorate.

Regionally, Alberta (50%) and Saskatchewan/Manitoba (53%) lead the negativity pack, while Quebec and Atlantic Canada are marginally less downbeat. Political affiliation also colours perception: 61% of Conservative voters think the economy will worsen, compared to only 29% of Liberals.

When it comes to their personal finances, Canadians are less fatalistic. 21% expect their situation to improve and 41% think it will stay about the same, while 34% anticipate decline.

Younger respondents are again more upbeat, 38% of those 18–29 foresee gains, while pessimism is concentrated among older and Conservative voters (43% of Conservatives expect their situation to worsen).

In short: most Canadians expect national turbulence, but many still believe they can weather it personally.

2. Carney’s ‘Getting Things Built’ Agenda: Hopeful but Not Yet Convinced

Asked how likely it is that Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government will succeed in getting major projects built, half the country (49%) say it’s likely, yet only 12% are very likely to believe so.

That slim confidence margin tells a nuanced story: Canadians are open to optimism but remain unconvinced by government delivery.

Liberal supporters are predictably confident (71% likely), while just 31% of Conservatives share that view. Still, the partisan divide isn’t absolute: almost half of NDP voters (45%) and Bloc voters (48%) also fall into the “somewhat likely” camp, signalling mild optimism without firm conviction.

Regionally, belief in Carney’s ability to deliver projects runs highest in Altantic Canada (57%), Ontario (50%) and Quebec (48%) and lowest in Alberta (43%) and Saskatchewan/Manitoba (43%). The pattern reinforces a familiar divide — central Canada’s cautious confidence versus Western Canada’s enduring skepticism about Ottawa.

3. What Should Be Built: Housing Tops the List, But Energy and Infrastructure Follow Close Behind

When asked which major projects Canada needs most urgently, the top three reflect both current anxieties and long-term priorities: Housing and urban infrastructure (58%), renewable energy projects (43%), and new oil and gas pipelines (42%).

All other categories including highways, ports, LNG terminals, and nuclear reactors trail in the 20–30% range, suggesting broad but shallow support for a variety of initiatives.

Regional divides are sharp: two-thirds of Albertans (63%) want new pipelines, compared to only 28% in Quebec. The reverse is true for renewable energy, where half of Quebecers prioritize it, compared to just 30% in Alberta.

Meanwhile, Ontarians (28%) are most likely to say new nuclear reactors should be a priority, a reflection of that province’s energy mix and pragmatic climate policy debate.

4. Trading Independence: Carney’s Push for New Partners Finds Broad Support

On trade, the consensus is unusually strong. 63% of Canadians want Carney to prioritize finding new trading relationships, while just 27% prefer to focus on preserving ties with the U.S..

Support is especially high among older Canadians (76% of those 60+), a reminder of how much Baby Boomers lead the “elbows up” constituency.

Partisan gaps exist but are not extreme: 73% of Liberals and 55% of Conservatives back diversification.

This suggests a shared appetite for economic resilience amid U.S. political uncertainty, even if the meaning of “independence” varies across the spectrum.

Confidence in Carney’s ability to deliver on this front is mixed: 64% believe his efforts to find new trade partners can succeed, though only 20% are confident enough to say definitely.

That optimism climbs to 87% among Liberals but drops to 45% among Conservatives.

5. A Willingness to Trade Growth for Independence

Finally, a striking 70% of Canadians agree that they are willing to accept slower economic growth if it means greater economic independence from the U.S..

Agreement cuts across age, region, and party: even 55% of Conservative voters say they’re prepared to take that trade-off.

This rare consensus reveals something deeper about the national mood. There is a desire for control and self-determination, even at the expense of short-term prosperity.

The Upshot

The mood of late-2025 Canada on the even of the federal budget is defined by guarded realism. Canadians expect economic turbulence and are skeptical that government can deliver on its promises, yet they still crave tangible progress and national resilience.

They want growth that feels earned and secure, not fragile or dependent.

If Carney can combine credibility with delivery, he may find Canadians willing to give him time. But the patience of a cautious public has limits.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 2,922 Canadians from October 24 to 29, 2025. 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 Canada’s population according to age, gender, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here: https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

The survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.

About Abacus Data

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

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.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Canadian PoliticsConsumer BehaviourPublic Policy

Canadians’ Views on Immigration Remain Largely Unchanged from Last Year and Overly Negative

From October 24 to 29, 2025, Abacus Data conducted a national survey of 2,922 Canadian adults to explore public attitudes toward immigration and its perceived impacts.

The results show that opinions on immigration have stabilized after last year’s sharp rise in skepticism. While most Canadians continue to believe current immigration levels are too high and are contributing to pressure on housing and healthcare, the tone of concern has not deepened. If anything, the data suggest a pause in the trend toward growing negativity, as Canadians adjust to the new reality and as the federal government signals a more cautious approach.

As Ottawa prepares to unveil a new immigration plan in the upcoming budget, the findings underscore that the public remains cautious but not hardening. The political pressure is still on restraint, not expansion.

Perceptions of Immigration in Canada

Today, 49% of Canadians view immigration negatively, almost identical to the 50% recorded in November 2024. Only 26% hold positive views, while one in four (26%) are neutral. These numbers indicate that the national mood on immigration has stabilized after a year of growing concern.

Age and political affiliation continue to shape perceptions. Younger Canadians (18-29) are far more likely to view immigration positively (36%) than those aged 45 and over (22%). Among political groups, Liberal supporters (39%) and New Democrats (26%) remain more positive, while 68% of Conservative supporters and 61% of Bloc Québécois voters view immigration negatively.

Gender gaps are modest but consistent: men (22%) are slightly more likely than women (29%) to express positive views. Regionally, concern remains highest in Prairie provinces (SK/MB 53%, AB 56%) and Quebec (49%), while Atlantic Canadians remain relatively more open.

Concerns About Domestic Migration

Beyond international immigration, Canadians are also uneasy about domestic migration—the movement of people within the country. Fifty-five percent say they are concerned about its impact on their communities, consistent with 56% last year.

Concern is highest in Alberta (62%) and Quebec (57%). Younger Canadians (18-29) are nearly as concerned as older cohorts, indicating that housing stress and affordability issues transcend generations.

Immigration Targets: Lower Ambition, Persistent Concern

When asked about the federal government’s plan to welcome 380,000 new immigrants in 2026, a reduction from the 500,000 level tested last year, 67% still believe the number is too high, down modestly from 72% in November 2024.

This decline suggests that lower targets have slightly softened opposition, but the majority still favour restraint. Nearly 44% say the target is “way too high,” and another 23% “too high.” Only 22% believe it’s about right.

Perceptions that the intake is excessive are strongest among Conservative supporters (79%), BQ voters (81%), and Canadians aged 45-59 (74%) and 60+ (68%). Liberal and NDP supporters are more evenly divided, though even within those groups, around half express concern.

The Perceived Impact of Immigration

Majorities continue to believe immigration is worsening access to key resources:

69% say it negatively impacts the cost and availability of housing (down 4);
60% say the same about healthcare (unchanged);
58% about social services (up 1); and
60% link it to traffic and congestion (up 1).

These figures are largely unchanged from 2024. The dominant narrative remains that Canada’s capacity to absorb newcomers is strained, not that Canadians oppose immigration in principle.

Interestingly, the share who say immigration is making Canada “worse off overall” has declined slightly, from 53% to 51%, while 22% believe it makes the country better off.

What’s Driving Concern?

When asked why the system isn’t working effectively, Canadians overwhelmingly point to structural capacity issues rather than cultural or ideological ones.

  • 51% cite insufficient housing and infrastructure;
  • 47% cite a strain on public services;
  • 38% believe there is simply an overwhelming influx of newcomers.

These factors have remained the top drivers for two years, reflecting what we’ve called a scarcity and precarity mindset, a belief that the system is running out of space, not that people are running out of compassion.

Recognized Benefits Remain Steady

Despite widespread concern, many still acknowledge immigration’s benefits:

  • 35% say it helps fill gaps in the labour market,
  • 26% say it contributes to economic growth, and
  • 24% believe it supports an aging population.

Optimism is most evident among younger Canadians and Liberal supporters, who are more likely to view immigration as an economic and social asset. By contrast, about 30% of Canadians say they see no benefits at all, including nearly half of Conservative voters.

This divide highlights how immigration has become a political identity issue, with optimism and skepticism increasingly aligning with partisan and generational lines.

Political Leadership on Immigration

When asked which party is best equipped to manage immigration, 38% chose the Conservative Party, up four points since 2024. The Liberals rose sharply to 29% (+13), while support for the NDP fell to 7%.

Among those with a negative view of immigration, the Conservatives dominate; among those with a positive or neutral view, the Liberals are well ahead. This polarization underscores how immigration has become a proxy issue for broader economic and competence debates.

The Upshot

After years of intense discussion about housing, affordability, and healthcare, public opinion on immigration appears to have levelled off. Canadians remain skeptical but not increasingly so. The intensity of opposition has eased slightly, even as most continue to call for lower intake levels and better management.

The results suggest the public conversation is stabilizing, not escalating. Immigration remains framed less by ideology and more by perceptions of capacity, fairness, and government performance.

For policymakers, the message is clear: the public wants a system that works, not necessarily one that shrinks. But the political reality is that immigration is now closely tied to cost-of-living anxiety, and governments that appear indifferent to those pressures risk losing trust.

As the federal government prepares to set new targets in the upcoming budget, the data serve as both a warning and an opportunity. The warning: Canadians are not ready for a return to high growth without proof that housing and healthcare can keep up. The opportunity: if government can demonstrate that it is managing immigration responsibly like linking newcomers to solutions, not strain, it could begin to rebuild confidence in the system.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 2,922 Canadians from October 24 to 29, 2025. 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 Canada’s population according to age, gender, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here: https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

The survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.

About Abacus Data

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

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.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Canadian PoliticsPublic Policy

Abacus Data Poll: Tight Race Continues as Trump’s Trade Talk Cancellation Adds Tension Ahead of Budget

Between October 24 and 29, 2025, Abacus Data surveyed 2,922 Canadian adults about the current political climate. The findings suggest a political environment that remains remarkably stable despite several flashpoints, including Donald Trump’s abrupt withdrawal from trade talks with Canada and Pierre Poilievre’s controversial remarks about the RCMP’s handling of Liberal-linked investigations.

With the federal budget set to be tabled on November 4, and the U.S.–Canada relationship under deeper strain, Canadians appear attentive, divided, and bracing for uncertainty, but not yet shifting decisively in any political direction.

Public Mood: Static and Stalled

A third of Canadians (33%) believe the country is headed in the right direction — essentially unchanged from two weeks ago. Meanwhile, 51% say Canada is off on the wrong track, reinforcing a broader narrative of unease without upheaval.

Confidence in global leadership remains deeply pessimistic: only 13% feel the world is headed in the right direction, and the same proportion (13%) say that about the U.S. under Trump’s administration.

Trump, Ontario Ads, and the Fallout in Public Opinion

This wave captured public reaction in the immediate aftermath of U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to suspend bilateral trade discussions. The move followed a U.S.-targeted advertising campaign launched by the Ontario government.

Trump’s visibility as a political concern has increased slightly: 37% of Canadians now cite Donald Trump and his administration as a top national issue, up two points from earlier this month. This makes Trump the second most frequently mentioned issue in the country — behind only the cost of living (62%, unchanged) and tied with the economy (37%).

The increase is modest, but notable, reinforcing a trend: Trump’s presence in the news cycle correlates with shifts in public concern — especially among older, more risk-averse Canadians.

Still, Canadians remain overwhelmingly negative in their view of Trump: only 13% have a positive impression of him, while 74% view him negatively, for a net favourability of -61.

Government Approval: Softening Slightly, But Holding

Approval of the federal government led by Mark Carney sits at 47% — down one point since the last wave. Disapproval ticked up two points to 34%. That 13-point gap in net approval remains healthy, especially in such a competitive political environment, but the slight uptick in negativity reflects a delicate balancing act as the Liberals prepare to table their budget in a fraught economic and diplomatic moment.

Leader Impressions: Carney Holds, Poilievre Stagnates

Mark Carney continues to lead in favourability: 46% of Canadians have a positive view of him, while 32% view him negatively resulting in a net favourability score of +14, unchanged since the previous wave.

Pierre Poilievre remains less well-regarded overall: his favourables sit at 39%, while 42% view him negatively, for a net score of -3.

Poilievre’s recent interview, where he criticized the RCMP’s integrity in their handling of past Trudeau-related scandals, generated criticism from multiple corners. While the full electoral impact is unclear, his overall impression numbers have not changed, suggesting no obvious impact except reinforcing previously held impressions.

Vote Intention: Stability Reigns as Budget Looms

If an election were held today, the Conservatives would capture 42% of the vote (up one point), while the Liberals hold at 40%. The NDP sits at 8%, with the Bloc Québécois at 6% and the Greens at 3%. The People’s Party and other alternatives remain static at 1% each.

Regional Dynamics: Tight in Ontario, Dominant in Alberta

Ontario remains the focal point of the national contest: Conservatives and Liberals are locked in a statistical tie at 44% each. This mirrors the national picture and suggests a deadlock in the province where federal elections are often won or lost.

In Alberta, the Conservatives dominate with 62% to the Liberals’ 25%. In Quebec, the Liberals (40%) hold a notable lead over the Bloc (27%) and the Conservatives (25%). In British Columbia, the race is close: Conservatives at 41%, Liberals at 40%.

Generational Trends: Boomers Remain a Liberal Firewall

Among Canadians aged 60 and over, the Liberals lead by a significant margin: 49% compared to 37% for the Conservatives. This older cohort remains disproportionately concerned about Trump and disproportionately supportive of Carney’s steady leadership style. Every time Trump reinserts himself into Canadian public life, the Liberal lead among this cohort increases.

By contrast, the Conservatives lead among 30–59 year-olds, while younger Canadians (18–29) remain more divided, with neither party breaking away clearly in the data.

The Upshot

According to Abacus Data CEO David Coletto: “We continue to see remarkable stability in a highly competitive political environment. Despite headline moments — Trump’s trade walkout, Poilievre’s RCMP remarks, and the countdown to a major budget — Canadians appear to be observing more than reacting.

What stands out is how little advantage either party has gained from recent events. The Liberals retain their edge on international leadership and competence. The Conservatives continue to lead on cost-of-living, but haven’t expanded their appeal among swing segments, particularly older voters.
The big unknown is the budget. If it delivers reassurance without raising alarms, it could reinforce the Liberals’ case for steady management. But if it falters, the window opens wider for the Conservatives to present a contrast.

For now, the deadlock continues and a highly competitive political environment remains the norm.”

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 2,922 Canadians from October 24 to 29, 2025. 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 Canada’s population according to age, gender, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here: https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

The survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.

ABOUT ABACUS DATA

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

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.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Canadian PoliticsPolitics

Canadians Want Prudence, Not Pain, Ahead of Budget 2025

With the 2025 federal budget set for November 4, new polling from Abacus Data for the Toronto Star finds Canadians approaching the budget in a pragmatic, almost weary frame of mind. Few see the deficit as an urgent crisis, and most want the government to steer a steady course, reducing the deficit gradually, without drastic cuts or new taxes that would hit their wallets.

The Deficit: A Manageable Concern, Not a Crisis

Asked how they view the federal deficit, only 23% said it is “a serious problem that must be addressed immediately, even if it requires major cuts or tax increases.”

The largest group, 43%, believes the deficit “is a problem, but can be reduced gradually over time,” while another 21% are largely unconcerned, seeing it as acceptable if it funds key priorities or necessary investments.

That pattern reveals a public with limited appetite for austerity. Even among Conservative supporters, only about one-third see the deficit as an emergency, compared with 15 % of Liberal and 13% of NDP voters. There is no significant difference by age.

Preferred Approach: Gradual Adjustment Over Shock Therapy

When asked what approach the federal government should take, 37% favour reducing the deficit gradually with modest cuts and limited new investments — the clear plurality view.
Only 17% want the government to balance the budget as quickly as possible even if it means major cuts.

By contrast, 28% would rather maintain or expand spending:

15% want higher taxes on corporations or wealthy Canadians to fund investments without growing the deficit.

13% say the government should spend more on priorities like health care and housing, even if the deficit grows.

We don’t find much regional difference while politically, Conservative voters are more likely to prefer a more rapid reduction in the deficit than other party voters but even among Conservatives, the preference is for gradualism.

Appetite for Cuts and Taxes: Limited and Conditional

Most Canadians are open to modest measures but reject extremes.

A majority (55%) say across-the-board spending cuts would be acceptable, but similar numbers also support raising taxes on higher-income Canadians (59%) to fund new spending.

By contrast, only 30% find it acceptable to run a “much larger deficit”, and just 23% would accept a GST increase. Raising the retirement age to 67 is even less popular (24 % acceptable, 63 % unacceptable). The data underline Canadians’ fiscal pragmatism: they will accept “fair-share” taxes on the wealthy, modest restraint on spending, but draw the line at anything that feels punitive or regressive.

Spending Priorities: Protect the Essentials

When asked which areas should be protected from cuts even if taxes rise, health care (51%), affordable housing (46%), and seniors’ benefits (44%) topped the list. That hierarchy says much about the current mood: health care and housing remain two of the four pillars of anxiety in 2025 (with the cost of living and Trump the other two).

Younger Canadians emphasize housing and education; older respondents prioritize health, pensions, defence, and climate and the environment.

Partisan differences are more subtle and less directional.

Only 5% said they were fine with cutting everything — a clear sign that few Canadians are clamouring for a return to 1990s-style austerity.

Carney vs Poilievre: A Contest of Trust and Risk

Perhaps the most telling result comes from a question about who Canadians trust to balance the budget in a way that would hurt people like them the least.

Mark Carney and the Liberal Party lead with 45%, compared with 38% for Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives, while 17% remain unsure

This measure, what we call “fiscal empathy”, cuts across the partisan divide.

Carney’s edge is widest among women (+11) and in Ontario (+10) and Quebec (+22). Poilievre leads in Alberta and Saskatchewan-Manitoba but trails badly in Atlantic Canada.

Among 2025 vote-intention groups, the results are predictable but revealing: 84% of Liberal voters trust Carney, while only 8% of Conservatives do.

The Upshot

Heading into the 2025 federal budget, Canadians are pragmatic, not panicked. Most see the deficit as manageable — 43% say it can be reduced gradually, while only 23% view it as an urgent crisis demanding cuts or tax hikes. The appetite for austerity is low; the public prefers steady, predictable management over disruption.

Canadians are open to “fair-share” measures — modest spending restraint and higher taxes on the wealthy — but reject anything that feels punitive, such as GST hikes or raising the retirement age. Health care, housing, and seniors’ benefits remain untouchable priorities.

At the heart of this mood is fiscal empathy: trust in who can balance the books without hurting ordinary people. On that front, Mark Carney holds a narrow advantage — 45% trust him and the Liberals to manage the budget fairly, compared with 38% for Pierre Poilievre.

Expectations and public preference are also pulling in opposite directions. Almost seven in ten Canadians (69%) want the deficit reduced—whether gradually or rapidly—while expectations point to it increasing. The plurality (37%) favour slow, steady deficit reduction, another 17% want it balanced quickly, and only a minority support holding or expanding spending. That tension creates a political vulnerability for the Carney government: even if Canadians reject austerity, they still expect visible discipline. A budget that appears to loosen control, without a convincing path toward gradual balance, could erode the fiscal empathy advantage the Liberals currently hold.

The message to Ottawa is clear: steer a steady course. Canadians want competence, not crusades; reassurance, not revolution. With global uncertainty rising and Trump re-entering the political frame, the 2025 budget is less about bold new ideas than about proving that calm, careful leadership still has value in anxious times.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 2,922 Canadians from October 24 to 29, 2025. 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 Canada’s population according to age, gender, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here: https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

The survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.

About Abacus Data

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

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.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Canadian PoliticsPublic Policy

Cannabis is Mainstream, Public Support is Strong, and Canadians Want the Sector to Grow

Findings from a national survey conducted by Abacus Data for Organigram Global Inc.

Seven years after cannabis was legalized in Canada, a new survey from Abacus Data conducted for Organigram Global reveals that cannabis has firmly taken root in Canadian society. Cannabis use is widespread across age groups, and the sector is broadly seen as a valuable contributor to the national economy. Most Canadians support the idea of modernizing regulations to help the industry grow—and critically, very few see any political downside to doing so.

At a time when economic headwinds are blowing north from Washington—driven by U.S. protectionism and a trade war sparked by the Trump administration—many Canadians appear ready to double down on homegrown economic sectors that can offer stable jobs and export potential. Legal cannabis is increasingly viewed not only as a normalized consumer product but as a sector worth investing in, supporting, and growing. The data reveals a clear political opening for federal leaders: cannabis is not a liability; it’s an opportunity.

Legal Cannabis Is a Part of Everyday Life

Cannabis use in Canada is not niche—it’s mainstream. More than one in three Canadian adults (35%) report using cannabis in the past six months, and 32% say they’ve used it in just the last two weeks. Usage is even higher among younger Canadians: half (50%) of those under 45 have used cannabis recently, and more than a third have used it in the past two weeks.

Legal cannabis is not just consumed frequently—it’s used in diverse forms. In the past six months, 25% of Canadians consumed edibles, 16% used dried flower, and others reported using vaping devices, oils, and beverages. In some product categories, consumption is on par with, or even preferred to, alcohol. Among cannabis users, 30% say they prefer it over alcohol, and another 29% view the two equally.

Cannabis is no longer a subculture: it’s a consumer choice as normal as ordering a craft beer or a glass of wine.

Canadians See the Economic Value of Legal Cannabis

A strong majority—59%—say the legal cannabis sector is an “important contributor to Canada’s economy.” That view cuts across region, gender, and political affiliation. The highest levels of agreement are found in Ontario (65%) and Atlantic Canada (66%), as well as among Canadians aged 18 to 44 (65%).

There is also little political difference. 69% of recent Liberal voters and 58% of recent Conservative voters agree that legal cannabis industry is an important contributor to Canada’s economy.

In today’s global context, this support takes on greater significance. With Canada facing threats of economic disruption from U.S. trade policy, support for industries that provide resilient, domestic jobs matters more than ever. Legal cannabis is increasingly seen as part of Canada’s economic diversification strategy and Canadians are on board with that vision.

Political Opportunity, Not Political Risk

When presented with two options for federal cannabis policy, nearly six in ten Canadians (59%) chose “updating the rules” to support economic growth and consumer needs, rather than maintaining strict limits.

The same proportion (58%) say they would be excited or okay with the government making it easier for the sector to grow and create jobs. Just 28% would object.

Notably, Liberal voters are especially supportive. Two-thirds (67%) of Carney Liberal voters back making it easier for the industry to grow, and 68% are open to federal investment in expanding new product categories. Support also spans other parties, including NDP (69%), Green (64%), and even a slim majority of Conservative voters (54%).

Canadians Want Policy Change with an Economic Lens

Asked what the federal government should prioritize to support the legal cannabis sector, Canadians point squarely to economic development:

  • 47% want economic departments like Industry or Agriculture involved in cannabis policy decisions alongside Health Canada.
  • 43% want tougher enforcement against the illegal market.
  • 33% want lower business taxes for producers.
  • 31% want the government to support new product categories like edibles, beverages, and wellness items.

Importantly, support for economic-focused cannabis policy is consistent across the country and especially strong among cannabis users and younger Canadians. The data shows Canadians want a smarter regulatory environment that enables innovation and competitiveness, especially as other countries begin to explore legalization themselves.

New Product Categories Have Strong Public Support

One of the clearest takeaways from this study is the untapped potential in emerging cannabis categories. A majority (57%) of Canadians say they’re open to the federal government investing in the growth of cannabis beverages, edibles, and wellness products. Only 28% would object.

Openness is even higher among key demographics:

  • 64% of Canadians under 45 support investment in new product categories.
  • Among Liberal voters, that number climbs to 68%.
  • Even in more traditionally cautious regions like Quebec and Atlantic Canada, public openness still outpaces resistance.

Canadians Envision a Cannabis-Driven Economic Future

When asked to imagine what could happen if governments updated cannabis rules, Canadians were overwhelmingly positive. More than 70% say it would be a good or okay thing if Canada created tens of thousands of new jobs in farming, retail, and manufacturing, or became a global leader in wellness-focused cannabis products.

Three-quarters would welcome breakthroughs in cannabis-based pain and anxiety treatments. The same number support a future in which legal cannabis generates $5 billion in tax revenue to help fund social services and reduce the cost of living.

Even more culturally transformative ideas—like people drinking cannabis beverages instead of alcohol, or those products being available at spas, bars, and restaurants—receive more support than resistance. The desire for change isn’t just about economics. It’s about culture, health, and quality of life.

The Upshot

Cannabis is no longer a question mark for Canadian society, it’s a known quantity. One-third of adults use it regularly, half of younger Canadians do, and most are perfectly comfortable with the idea that it will become a bigger part of our economic and cultural life.

The data paints a clear picture: the legal cannabis industry has broad social license, visible economic value, and political upside for federal decision-makers. Updating cannabis policy is not a risk. It’s a low-resistance opportunity to create good jobs, expand a homegrown sector, and chart a more resilient economic path in an increasingly volatile global economy. And it’s cross-partisan.

In the face of trade pressure and economic threats from abroad, Canadians are ready for the federal government to back sectors that make sense at home.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 2,000 Canadian adults (aged 18+) between June 25 and July 2, 2025. 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 +/- 2.19%, 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, and region.

This survey was commissioned by Organigram Global.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here:
https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standardsnadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

ABOUT ABACUS DATA

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

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.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Canadian PoliticsConsumer BehaviourPolls

Housing the Goal: How Canadians Are Resizing Expectations and Redefining What Homeownership Means

Abacus Data, in partnership with the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA), conducted a national survey examining how Canadians are navigating today’s housing crisis. This second release in the series explores the state of homeownership as both a personal goal and a social marker, the growing sense of compromise Canadians feel in pursuit of it, and the kinds of housing solutions they believe are needed to restore balance.

Findings show that while Canadians continue to value homeownership, many have adjusted their expectations – rethinking what, where, and how they can buy in today’s market. At the same time, there is broad agreement that the current mix of housing options doesn’t match people’s needs. Canadians point to the “missing middle” – the shortage of attainable, mid-density homes like townhouses, duplexes, and family-sized rentals – as a key barrier to ownership and affordability.

This release examines how Canadians are adapting their behavior and expectations in the face of these challenges and highlights the opportunity for policymakers and industry leaders to meet them where they are – by building the kinds of homes that make ownership attainable again and for the lives Canadians want to live.

Homeownership as a Goal and a Symbol

Despite today’s affordability challenges, homeownership remains a defining goal for many Canadians. Among non-homeowners, two-thirds (65%) say they would like to own a residential property someday. This desire is especially strong among younger Canadians – 86% of those aged 18–29 and 75% of those aged 30–44 – as well as families with young children (84% of those with children under 12).

More than half of Canadians (54%) say owning a home is important to them, rising to 59% among families with young kids. Only 11% say it is not important at all, underscoring that homeownership continues to serve as a key life milestone and source of stability.

While the goal remains, its meaning is evolving. Among younger Canadians, only 49% now describe ownership as essential, while 47% see it as somewhat or moderately important. This shift reflects a redefinition of success – one that prioritizes stability and belonging, even if those qualities come in smaller or less traditional forms.

Resetting Expectations and Resizing Dreams

Adjusting to a New Reality

Canadians are already reshaping what homeownership looks like. Among first-time buyers, 60% have adjusted their expectations – planning for a smaller home (28%), a different type of property (18%), or a less desirable community (14%).

Younger Canadians are leading this adjustment: 68% of those aged 18–29 say they’ve changed their expectations, with one-third (32%) now planning to buy smaller homes and one in five (22%) considering different types of properties altogether. Among parents with children under 12, three-quarters (75%) have made similar trade-offs, often downsizing plans or rethinking where to buy.

Compromise as the New Normal

Nearly half of Canadians (49%) are prepared to buy smaller homes than they once envisioned, and one in three (32%) would consider co-buying with family or friends. Another 31% are open to purchasing an older home that needs work, while one in four (24%) would take on a longer commute – particularly those aged 18–44.

While many view these compromises as disappointing (35%) or unfair (26%), nearly one in three (31%) say they’re acceptable because ownership itself is what matters most. Among young Canadians (36%) and families with children (39%), compromise is increasingly seen as part of the process, not a setback.

Making Sacrifices to Make It Work

Many aspiring homeowners are already making tangible sacrifices to reach their goal. Four in ten (39%) have cut back on other spending, more than a quarter (27%) have settled for smaller or less ideal homes, and one in five (19%) have delayed major life milestones. These trade-offs have become normalized – part of a new reality in which flexibility and persistence define the path to ownership.

Supply and Mix: Building the Right Homes, Not Just More Homes

A Crisis of Fit, Not Just Quantity

Canadians widely agree that affordability and availability have reached a crisis point. Three-quarters (76%) believe not enough affordable homes are being built, and two-thirds (69%) say shortages are changing who can afford to live in their community. More than six in ten (61%) also believe that the homes being built today don’t meet the needs of Canadian households – particularly when it comes to size, layout, and family suitability.

Canadians point to several key drivers: high construction costs (32%), population growth outpacing supply (29%), and a lack of affordable builds (35%). Importantly, one in five (19%) believe too little attention is being paid to the types of homes Canadians actually need – suggesting the issue is not just quantity, but suitability.

A Shared Understanding, With Divided Views on Causes

Within this broad agreement, political perspectives influence how Canadians interpret the problem. Liberal supporters are more likely to say that not enough affordable homes are being built (38%) and that high construction costs (36%) are key contributors. Conservative supporters, on the other hand, are more likely to emphasize population growth outpacing housing supply (33%) and the influx of new Canadians (39%) as primary causes.

Despite these differing views, Canadians broadly agree on the path forward: solving the housing crisis isn’t just about building more homes – it’s about building the right homes in the right places, with a better balance of affordability, accessibility, and design to meet the needs of today’s households.

The Missing Middle: Canada’s Overlooked Opportunity

Bridging the Gap Between Condos and Detached Homes

Many Canadians believe the housing crisis is not only about a shortage of homes but also about the lack of housing that fits their lives. More than half (51%) say municipal zoning rules are holding back the development of the “missing middle” – townhomes, duplexes, and mid-sized rentals that bridge the gap between condos and large detached homes.

Canadians also see a need for greater balance and incentive in how homes are built. Over half (54%) believe private developers should receive stronger incentives to build two- and three-bedroom rentals that families can afford. At the same time, 55% say expanding non-market housing should not come at the expense of market housing supply, showing that Canadians see both as essential to a healthy housing ecosystem.

When asked what types of homes would make the biggest difference, Canadians most often point to small detached and semi-detached homes (29%), townhomes (24%), and family-sized rentals, alongside supportive and seniors-oriented housing. These are the very options that have become increasingly scarce – yet they are where affordability and livability intersect. Without this missing middle, families are squeezed out of both the rental and ownership markets.

Priorities for Change

Canadians are clear about what needs to happen next. Nearly half (49%) say building more smaller, attainable homes that people can afford should be a top national priority. They also emphasize the importance of policies that make homeownership realistic (42%), ensure affordability for all (42%), and increase overall housing supply (41%). One in three (34%) see promise in prefabricated and modular homes as a way to boost supply and reduce construction costs.

Together, these findings point to a clear message: Canadians are ready for a housing strategy that focuses not just on building more homes, but on building the right mix – homes that reflect how people actually live today.

The Upshot

Canadians are redefining what it means to own a home. The goal of homeownership remains deeply important, but its expression has evolved. It’s no longer about how big the home is or where it’s located – it’s simply about having a place to call their own. Canadians want stability and belonging, and they’re showing a remarkable willingness to adapt to get there: planning smaller, sharing ownership, buying older, and moving farther. They haven’t given up; they’re determined to make ownership possible in whatever form it takes.

That determination exposes a deeper problem – the housing market hasn’t adapted as quickly as Canadians have. People have already changed their expectations; the supply has not. At the center of this disconnect lies the “missing middle” – the absence of attainable, mid-density homes like townhouses, duplexes, and family-sized rentals that make ownership realistic for ordinary Canadians. Without it, families are squeezed between small condos that don’t suit their lives and detached homes they can’t afford. The missing middle is where affordability and livability meet – and Canadians know it’s key to restoring balance.

Many feel they’re being forced to compromise – settling for less space or less choice just to own – but it doesn’t have to be that way. By focusing on the right mix of housing and embracing innovations like modular and offsite construction, Canada can scale supply without turning the housing crisis into a zero-sum game of supportive vs. rental vs. ownership. With the right policies, compromise can give way to opportunity.

Politically, the message is clear. Canadians want leadership that recognizes how their housing needs have changed and acts with urgency to meet them. Those who focus on unlocking the missing middle, reforming zoning, and incentivizing attainable, family-suitable housing won’t just respond to a crisis – they’ll help rebuild the foundation of homeownership for a new generation.

In the end, the path forward is not about recreating the past but building for the realities of today – homes that are attainable, adaptable, and reflective of how Canadians actually live. The willingness to change is already there among the public; what’s needed now is the same determination from those shaping the country’s housing future.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 3,900 Canadian adults from September 5 to 16, 2025. 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 +/- 1.57%, 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.

This survey was paid for by the Canadian Real Estate Association.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here: https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

ABOUT ABACUS DATA

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

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.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Canadian PoliticsHousing

PCs Hold Commanding Lead, But 1 in 4 PC Supporters Point to a Lack of Alternative for their Support of Doug Ford.

Doug Ford and the Progressive Conservatives remain the dominant political force in Ontario, commanding a solid lead over their rivals despite signs that a meaningful segment of their support is more circumstantial than enthusiastic.

Our latest survey of 1,000 eligible voters, conducted during a relatively quiet week in Ontario politics, finds the PCs holding at 51%, the Liberals ticking up slightly to 25%, and the NDP climbing to 15%, their highest share in months.

Beneath those steady toplines, however, the poll reveals important undercurrents about voter attitudes, particularly among Ford’s own base. One in four PC voters say they are supporting the PC Party not because of its record, but because they don’t see a better option. This quiet vulnerability comes as the Ontario Liberals search for a new leader and the NDP continues to struggle with visibility and relevance.

Vote Intention: PCs Maintain Strong Majority Support

If an election were held today, 51% of committed voters would support Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives, a one-point dip since mid-September. The Liberals inch up by one point to 25%, while the NDP climbs by three to reach 15%, marking their first upward movement since the spring. The Greens fall back slightly to 5%.

Ford’s 26-point lead over the Liberals mirrors last month’s results and signals the enduring stability of his coalition. But while top-line numbers appear rock-solid, the motivations behind that support merit closer examination.

PCs Continue Regional and Demographic Dominance

Regionally, the PCs lead in every part of the province. In Toronto, they command 58%—a figure once unthinkable for a centre-right party in the city—compared to 26% for the Liberals and just 12% for the NDP. In the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), the PCs lead 48% to the Liberals’ 32%, and they hold double-digit advantages in Southwestern and Eastern Ontario.

The demographic cuts reinforce this trend. Ford’s party leads among both men (54%) and women (49%), and across every age group, including younger voters aged 18 to 29, where the PCs still come out ahead at 40%, compared to 31% for the Liberals and 15% for the NDP.

Approval Ratings: Still Positive, But Softening

Approval of the Ford government stands at 42%, a five-point drop from September, while disapproval has climbed to 33%, up two points. Although still in net positive territory (+9), this is the lowest approval Ford has seen since the beginning of the year.

This decline, though modest, reflects growing ambivalence. Fully 22% of Ontarians now say they neither approve nor disapprove—suggesting a reservoir of soft support or opposition hat could shift under different circumstances.

Leadership Impressions: Ford Leads, Crombie Slides Further

Doug Ford remains the most positively viewed political leader in the province, with 43% holding a favourable view and 35% unfavourable, yielding a net impression of +8.

Bonnie Crombie, now in a caretaker role, continues to slide: only 25% of voters view her positively, while 35% view her negatively—a net -10. Marit Stiles and Mike Schreiner remain less defined to most voters, with net scores of -1 and -2, respectively.

Preferred Premier: Ford Still Leads, But Gaps Emerging

Doug Ford remains the preferred choice for Premier for 46% of Ontarians. Crombie trails at 18%, Stiles at 12%, and Schreiner at 4%.

Notably, Ford leads in every region and age group except among 18-to-29-year-olds, where his lead narrows significantly: 37% prefer Ford compared to 22% for Crombie and 15% for Stiles. Among women, Ford holds a ten-point lead (42% vs. 32% for all others combined), while among men, he leads by a commanding 30 points.

A Quarter of PC Voters Back Ford by Default

One of the most revealing findings this month is from a new question we asked this wave. Among those who say they would vote PC, 25% say their choice is driven by the lack of a better alternative, not by Ford’s performance or personal loyalty.

This segment—representing about 7% of the full electorate—is the soft underbelly of Ford’s support. They’re not necessarily happy with the government, but they see no credible opposition worth taking a risk on.

The implications are clear: if the Ontario Liberals can select a leader with credibility and appeal, or if the NDP can finally break through with a more resonant message and brand, there is room for movement. But that if has been the central challenge for both parties for several years.

Perceptions of Ford’s Impact: A Mixed Bag

New questions added to this wave also offer deeper insights into how Ontarians view the Ford government’s impact. While 43% believe the Premier has made Ontario “better” at standing up for the province, and 26% credit him with making the province more attractive for business, most issues show tepid or negative evaluations.

  • Only 19% say Ford has made positive impacts on reducing uncertainty for Ontario workers.
  • Just 14% think he’s improved health care.
  • Only 10% believe he’s improved affordability or the availability of housing.

In all cases, most either think he hasn’t made much impact or has made things worse.

Even among PC voters, enthusiasm is muted: 55% say the government has had no real impact on housing, and 51% say the same about affordability.

What stands out is how much of the government’s goodwill likely stems from its posture toward the Trump administration. The perception that Ford is “standing up for Ontario” appears to anchor support at a time when economic and public service outcomes are receiving lukewarm or negative reviews. Absent this dynamic, it’s likely that both the government’s and Ford’s personal approval ratings would be under far heavier pressure.

The Upshot

Doug Ford continues to dominate the political landscape in Ontario—buoyed by a fractured opposition and a broad but partially disengaged support base. The latest numbers offer both reassurance and warning signs for the Premier: his coalition remains large and cross-demographic, but much of it is conditional.

One in four PC supporters might vote differently if a more compelling option were on offer. And among the public overall, there’s growing uncertainty about whether the Ford government is meaningfully improving life in the province.

For the Ontario Liberals, this is both a challenge and an opportunity. A new leader will need to quickly establish credibility and communicate a clear alternative vision. For the NDP, the data underscores the urgency of relevance: with just 12% naming Marit Stiles as their preferred Premier, but some signs their prospects have improved this wave, the party risks becoming stuck with little traction with the public.

The path to dislodging Ford isn’t blocked, but it will require more than criticism. It will take a compelling, relevant and credible alternative.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 1,000 eligible voters in Ontario from October 9 to 15, 2025.

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 the sample matched Ontario’s population according to age, gender, education, and region. Totals may not add to 100 due to rounding.

This survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements. Learn more: https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards

ABOUT ABACUS DATA

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

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.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Provincial Politics