With a large lead overall, the Conservative Party has held the largest vote share by age, gender, region and income for some time now. But what about the relationship between federal vote and self-described class? Two weeks ago, I shared some data on perceptions around class in Canada. Today, I dig a bit deeper.
The findings below are from an online survey of n=1,500 gen pop adults in Canada from April 11th to 16th. This survey was paid for by Abacus Data.
Before we get into the data, a quick reminder of the federal polling numbers at the time of this survey (undecideds removed).
CPC: 43%
LPC: 23%
NDP: 18%
BQ: 7%
Green: 5%
And the majority of Canadians consider themselves middle class (41%). Very few say they are upper middle/upper class.
The main takeaway is that Conservatives lead among all classes. 39% of the lower class would vote Conservative, 47% of the working class, 41% of the middle class and 48% among the upper middle/upper class. Perhaps unsurprising, the NDP does best with those who self-describe as lower class. While the Liberals may do best with the middle class, they don’t fare so well among those working hard to join it.
The Bloc are most popular among the middle class- but far more individuals consider themselves middle class in Quebec, compared to other regions of the country.
Digging deeper, the findings get more interesting. When we look at childhood classes, we see much clearer leads for certain political parties. The Conservatives pick up a notable lead among individuals who say they grew up in the working class (49%), but they are far less popular among those who say they grew up in the lower class (32%).
Those who grew up lower class are much more likely to be voting NDP (33%), than other classes (13% among upper middle/upper).
When it comes to class mobility- the Conservatives lead across the board again. There is also a near perfect relationship between class mobility and Liberal vs NDP voting behaviour. Individuals who’ve experienced negative mobility (moving to a lower class) are more likely to vote NDP, while those who have ascended the class hierarchy become Liberal voters. The Conservatives still lead in both segments by a sizable margin.
The higher the class, the more positive the impression of Justin Trudeau. Impressions for Justin Trudeau are highest among the upper classes, and lowest among the working and lower classes. Trudeau has a net negative impression among all classes.
Among the middle class, the target of the federal budget, impressions are net negative (note: this survey was fielded ahead of the official federal budget release but in the midst of several budget announcements).
When it comes to impressions of leaders, Pierre Poilievre performs best across the board. For Poilievre, impressions are highest among the working class and upper classes.
The only class where Poilievre does not lead on impressions is the lower class. The lower class feels most positive about Jagmeet Singh. And it is one of the only classes where Singh has a positive impression. For Singh, impressions are most positive among the lower and middle classes, and lowest among the working and upper classes.
THE UPSHOT
While self-described class is about income, wealth, and financial stability it is also about identity. Looking at vote and leader impressions it appears as though Pierre Poilievre and the Conservative Party have done best at representing the values and ideals for a number of classes. The Liberal Party has done best with upper classes and the NDP with lower classes.
In 2015, Trudeau and the Liberals successfully spoke to Canadians in the middle class and those aspiring to join it. Today they are only able to capture a quarter of those votes, and they struggle with those who feel they are falling behind. The Conservatives and Pierre Poilievre are now the party of the middle class and class mobility.
Winning the next election will mean connecting with the two biggest classes- the working class and the middle class. We have already seen many signals from all parties looking to show they identify or at least represent these groups, and we will continue to watch to see which party can do it best as we get closer to an election.
METHODOLOGY
The survey was conducted with 1,500 Canadian adults from April 11 to 16, 2024. 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 +/- 2.53%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
We are 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.
Abacus Data conducted a nationwide survey earlier this year (1,500 Canadian adults from February 29 to March 6, 2024) to explore health perceptions among Canadians.
The findings from this study underscore the impact of cultural trends and advances in scientific knowledge, often reflected in national guidelines. But they also show diverse perceptions and views across some items and large generational differences.
Canadians were asked which of two behaviours is healthier. Overall, there’s widespread consensus on the healthiness of getting a solid 8 to 9 hours of sleep at night (rather than taking short naps throughout the day), the benefits of a balanced mix of plant and animal proteins for a healthy diet (rather than plant-based only), and favour cooking with olive oil (rather than vegetable oil), eating whole eggs (rather than just egg whites), and using butter (rather than margarine). Eating a lot of small meals throughout the day (69%) is also seen as healthier than eating larger meals in a shorter time period, while eating an hour before bed (58%) is typically regarded as unhealthy.
When asked more specifically, while most find it unhealthy to skip breakfast (65%), there is less consensus on whether having a muffin and orange juice constitute a healthy breakfast. While 45% agrees this a healthy breakfast, 30% find it neither healthy nor unhealthy, and 23% unhealthy.
Similarly, most think taking daily multivitamins is a healthy behaviour (70%) while more think it’s healthier to get nutrients from a healthy diet only rather than from using supplements. But one in three Canadians think it’s healthier to use supplements, and not just rely on a healthy diet for getting nutrients.
Differences in health perceptions: Cultural and social contexts
The perception of what constitutes a healthy lifestyle is often shaped by the campaigns, especially national guidelines, and the health information individuals were exposed to during their formative years. In the 1980s, for instance, government advice centred around low-carb, low-fat diets, advising against the consumption of cholesterol.
Newer research, which has challenged the negative consequences of carbs and fat, particularly cholesterol, has shifted the emphasis in national guidelines. Today, scientific and government advise centres on the negative consequences of ultra-processed food and emphasizes the importance of labelling.
Younger adults are also more likely to be exposed to health information through the internet and social media, shared by influencers and health gurus, which have created new ‘diet cultures.’
In our survey, older individuals (62%) are more likely to find it healthier to follow a low-carb diet, while younger people are more likely to perceive a low-ultra processed food diet as healthier. This likely reflects younger individuals’ exposure to recent campaigns prioritizing local and organic products, over ultra-processed food.
Comparably, older individuals see cutting out fats as healthier, likely a reflection of their exposure to the ‘war on fat’ messaging. Those aged 60+ are significantly more likely (74%) to view cutting as much fat from your diet as possible as healthy, whereas only 50% of those under the age of 60 feel this way.
Older individuals (79%) also perceive the consumption of dairy as healthier compared to younger adults (56%), likely a reflection of the extensive promotional campaigns for milk and dairy and its messaging surrounding bone strength and other benefits.
Generational differences also extend to exercise preferences: younger individuals (41%) perceive weight training as healthier, compared to older adults (15%). Conversely, older adults (85%) are more likely to find cardio workouts healthier, than younger age groups (59%).
Gender differences in health perceptions also reveal distinct preferences. Women (76%) see the consumption of daily multivitamins as healthier than men (66%), and are more likely to emphasize the health benefits of fermented foods (36%) than men (26%).
In contrast, men are somewhat more likely to view drinking a glass of wine (36%) or consuming sugar-free beverages such as pop (23%) as healthy, than women (28% and 17% respectively).
As with generational differences, gender preferences also extend to perceptions on exercise. While both men and women find low-intensity training workouts healthier than high-intensity training workouts, women (71%) are more likely to view low-intensity training as healthier than men (63%). Conversely, men (37%) are more likely to perceive high-intensity training workouts than women (29%).
Finally, health perceptions not only reveal current trends but also highlight gaps in public awareness. When asked if drinking a glass of wine, a day is healthy, the majority of individuals (39%) find it neither healthy nor unhealthy, while 5% are uncertain. Guidelines on consumption of alcohol have changed over the last couple of year, which may contribute to a lack of consensus.
People are also most uncertain about the health impacts of newer trends such as eating fermented foods regularly (16% don’t know) and fasting for 14 to 16 hours a day (8%).
In particular, the likelihood of perceiving fermented foods as healthy increases with education and income. Individuals with university completed are most likely to find fermented foods healthy (38%) and least likely to be unaware of the benefits (12%), while those with high school or less are least likely to find it healthy (24%) and most likely to likely to be unaware (19%).
The difference is similar when it comes to income. Individuals making over $150,000 are most likely to find fermented foods healthy (36%) and least likely to be unaware of the benefits (10%), while those making less than $150,000 are least likely to find it healthy (29%) and most likely to likely to be unaware (18%).
The Upshot
The answer to the question of ‘what is healthy’ is dynamic and evolving over time, as scientific understanding, societal norms, and cultural influences change. In particular, there is a clear generation divide on health perceptions, reflecting the profound impact of historical context on individuals’ beliefs about health and wellness. While older adults are more likely to emphasize the importance of low-carb and low-fat diets, younger adults find low-ultra processed foods more beneficial.
This divide on our understanding of nutrition is further reflected on other preferences such as exercise, the consumption of certain foods (like dairy or butter), and the focus on certain benefits, such as cutting fats.
As social and cultural contexts impact health perceptions, gender, education and income also play a role. Familiarity with emerging nutritional research, such as the use of fermented foods, illustrate the different exposure among certain demographics to ‘what is healthy.’
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.
Between April 25 and 29 2024, Abacus Data conducted a nationwide survey involving 1,500 Canadians (18+) to assess their perceptions of the housing situation in Canada. The survey explored the perceptions of homeownership, key factors affecting housing affordability, barriers to accelerating construction, and the role and impact of government actions.
The housing landscape in Canada is facing significant challenges, and the current research shows that many Canadians continue to express deep concerns about the attainability and affordability of homeownership. These findings underscore the need for coordinated actions and solutions to instill confidence in the housing market and ensure that homeownership becomes an achievable aspiration for all Canadians.
Perceptions of Homeownership in Canada Today
The current research reveals a negative outlook on Canadians’ perceptions of homeownership today. Specifically, 64% believe homeownership in Canada represents risk and financial strain, especially among non-homeowners (70%). Additionally, 89% of Canadians view housing as unaffordable for most, highlighting the widespread feeling of being priced out of the market. This suggests that many Canadians have lost confidence in the attainability of homeownership.
Furthermore, 81% believe the dream of homeownership is dead and unattainable for most, particularly among renters (85%). These findings underscore the urgent need for action to revive the dream of homeownership and make it attainable for all Canadians, as the dream of homeownership in Canada is currently at risk.
Factors to Consider Regarding Housing Affordability and Perceived Barriers to Speeding Up Construction
With many Canadians losing confidence in the attainability of homeownership, it is important to understand the factors people think are important when considering housing affordability. Among the most important factors to consider with respect to housing affordability, 39% of Canadians cite builders and developers prioritizing profit, while 38% point to increased immigration. Beyond these primary concerns, Canadians also recognize other critical factor that have an impact on construction costs. These include the availability and cost of land (37%), a shortage of skilled trade workers (28%), borrowing costs for builders (27%), provincial regulations (23%), and municipal bylaws (21%). Thus, while many Canadians believe builder and developer profit motives are a significant issue, they also acknowledge the various other factors affect housing costs and the ability to offer affordable housing.
To expedite the construction of new homes and alleviate the housing crisis, it is crucial to understand the perceived barriers. Nearly two-thirds of Canadians (63%) believe high construction costs are the biggest obstacle. Additionally, 46% cite lengthy approval processes and red tape, 41% point to a shortage of skilled labor in the construction industry, and 32% highlight zoning restrictions. These barriers impede the speed of construction and must be addressed to effectively tackle the housing crisis and make affordable housing a reality.
Role and Impact of Government
Degree to which government is doing enough to address housing affordability
Only 1 in 4 Canadians believe the federal government is doing enough to address housing affordability, marking a 10-point improvement since September 2023. Those planning to vote Liberal in the next election are significantly more likely to believe the government is addressing housing affordability (49%) compared to those intending to vote Conservative (11%). Additionally, 26% of Canadians believe their provincial government is doing enough (+12 points since September 2023), and 20% feel their municipal government is taking adequate action (+6 points since September 2023). Despite these improvements, over half of Canadians still believe that all levels of government are not doing enough to address housing issues.
Level of Importance Placed on Making Housing More Affordable
Most Canadians do not believe government, at all levels, are prioritizing housing adequately. Specifically, 63% feel the federal government, 65% their provincial government, and 69% their municipal governments are not giving sufficient importance to housing affordability today. At the federal level, those planning to vote Conservative in the next election are significantly more likely to perceive the government as neglecting housing affordability (71%) compared to Liberal voters (36%). These perceptions highlight a widespread sentiment that housing affordability is not receiving the necessary attention, underscoring the urgent need for more effective government action across all levels.
Degree to Which Governments are Working Together
Amidst the prevailing sentiment that all levels of government are falling short in addressing housing affordability and prioritizing its importance, 3 in 5 Canadians (60%) express skepticism about the effective collaboration between provincial and federal governments to tackle the housing crisis, with merely 15% perceiving effective collaboration. Among those doubting this collaboration, 71% intend to vote for the Conservative party in the upcoming election, compared to 44% who plan to vote for the Liberal party. These findings underscore a significant lack of confidence in government cooperation, adding complexity to efforts aimed at addressing the housing crisis and restoring belief in the feasibility of affordable homeownership for Canadians.
The Upshot
Over the past year, Canada’s housing crisis has reached critical levels, prompting widespread attention from politicians nationwide. Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government has taken significant strides towards addressing housing accessibility and affordability, notably through measures outlined in the 2024 Federal Budget. However, despite these efforts and some signs of a shift in sentiment, there remains a prevailing sense of dissatisfaction among Canadians regarding the government’s response. Many believe that the federal government is failing to adequately address housing affordability, prioritize it effectively, and collaborate efficiently with provincial counterparts on this issue. Consequently, pessimism persists among Canadians regarding the future of housing accessibility and affordability in the country, with a strong belief that the dream of homeownership in Canada is dead and unattainable.
This pessimistic sentiment surrounding the state of housing in Canada adds an intriguing dimension to the current political landscape. While Justin Trudeau and the Liberal government strive to demonstrate their commitment to addressing housing concerns, Pierre Poilievre has actively championed housing affordability as a central focus of his political agenda, consistently emphasizing this message. As the discourse on housing continues, navigating these differing approaches will be crucial in addressing the pressing needs of Canadians and shaping the future trajectory of the housing market.
Methodology
The survey was conducted with 1,500 Canadian adults from April 25 and 29 2024. 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 +/- 2.53%, 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.
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.
The 2024 federal budget focused on generational fairness, and helping young Canadians get ahead. But a sense of fairness and getting ahead is hard to come by these days. In part, because more Canadians than ever are finding it difficult to save, and fewer feel they are on their way to future financial success either.
The findings below are from an online survey of n=1,500 gen pop adults in Canada from April 11th to 16th. This survey was paid for by Abacus Data.
To lay some groundwork for the conversation, more Canadians consider themselves middle-class (41%). Very few Canadians consider themselves any higher. Those living in Quebec are more likely to say they are living in the middle-class than others. Those in Atlantic Canada are more likely to say they are lower class.
Household income does align with reported class- but middle-class has the widest range of household income. Half of those making $50-75K, $76-100K, and $100-150K consider themselves to be middle class.
One in three Canadians feel they have made it into a better class than the one they grew up in. A quarter say they are living in a lower class than they grew up in. Interestingly, those who have had more time to build generational wealth and break into a new class are no more likely to say they’ve made it. The distribution of lower to upper class looks the same among 18 to 29 year olds as it does for those 60+.
Instead, owning a house is a much stronger predictor of class. 72% of those in an upper class own a home, compared to 45% of those working class or below.
About half of those in the working and middle class say they’ve had little to no class mobility over their lifetime. Those on either end have seen more movement but not always positive- 73% of those in the lower class say it’s lower than the class they grew up in, and 75% of those in an upper class say it’s a higher class than they grew up in.
Self-prescribed class can be interchangeable with feeling like you are able to get by financially day to day or put aside funds for saving or discretionary spend. We see some alignment between class and getting ahead, but there are still a sizeable number of individuals in each class who feel they are financially limited. And even more important, a large number of those below the middle class who say they aren’t even able to make ends meet.
Only 8% of those in the lower class say they are able to put money aside to cover expenses. 44% say they are unable to make ends meet. On the other ends of the scale, two thirds of those in the upper classes are saving, but a third are stretched too thin either just making their payments or falling behind.
The Upshot
The recent economic uncertainty in Canada has left many feeling financially challenged, both in the short and long-term. Canadians (particularly in the lower class, but also middle and upper) feel stretched financially day-to-day, which influences their ability to pay bills today, envision financial stability in the future, and more broadly, feel like Canada is on the right track and that there is enough to go around.
In the long-term, achieving financial success and even stability takes time, but time alone isn’t responsible for accumulating wealth. Assets, in particular home ownership, are one of the main drivers for class mobility and financial wealth. Helping more Canadians get ahead will be about addressing these perceptions (and reality) of both short-term and long-term financial success.
Methodology
The survey was conducted with 1,500 Canadian adults from April 11 to 16, 2024. 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 +/- 2.53%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
We are 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.
From May 16 to 21, 2024 Abacus Data conducted a national survey of 2,415 adults exploring several topics related to Canadian politics and current events as part of our regular national omnibus surveys.
In this edition of our Canadian politics tracking, we report on our usual metrics along with a deep dive to assess what Canadians think a Pierre Poilievre-led Conservative government should and would do if elected.
I was on Power & Politics last night talking about these results:
Vote Intention: Conservatives lead by 16 over the Liberals
If an election were held today, 41% of committed voters would vote Conservatives with the Liberals at 25%, the NDP at 18% and the Greens at 4%. The BQ is at 38% in Quebec.
Since our last survey, the Conservatives are down 2 while the Liberals and NDP are up 1. About a month ago, the gap between the Conservatives and Liberals was 21-points. Today it is 16.
Regionally, the Conservatives are well ahead in the Prairies, lead by 17 in BC and 15 in Ontario. In Atlantic Canada, the Conservatives are 20-points ahead of the Liberals while in Quebec, the BQ is ahead of the Liberals by 12-points with the Conservatives in third at 21%.
Learn about the game-changing tool from the Abacus Data team that makes it possible to estimate polling results to the riding level for improve advocacy and government relations.
Demographically, the Conservatives lead among Canadians aged 30 and over but among those aged 18 to 29, the gap between the Liberals and Conservatives have closed over the past month. In April, the Conservatives led by 23. Today, it’s 5-points. This is the second survey in a row that we have found Liberal support among younger Canadians to be higher than we have typically seen in the past five months.
Although there has been a small shift voting intentions, there’s been little change in the size of each party’s accessible voter pools. Today, 51% are open to voting Conservative (down 2), 41% are open to voting NDP (up 1) while 40% are open to voting Liberal (up 3 since April).
No major shifts in other metrics.
Beyond vote intention, there hasn’t been much change in overall impressions.
There has been no shift in perceptions about the direction of the country. 58% disapprove of the job performance of the federal government compared with 27% who approve.
54% of Canadians say they want to see a change in government and believe there is a good alternative while 17% believe that Justin Trudeau and the Liberals deserve to be re-elected. All of these measures are within a narrow band we have measured for the past few months.
Impressions of Justin Trudeau are static. 58% have a negative impression of the Prime Minister and 26% have a positive view for a net score of -32.
In contrast, impressions of Pierre Poilievre have deteriorated slightly in the past few weeks. Today 38% have a positive impression while 37% have a negative impression for a net score of +1.
Feelings about NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh have improved with 35% having a negative view and 32% having a positive view for a net score of -3.
Find out more about the The Three Threads and how the Abacus Data team looks at polling for public affairs and advocacy.
What Should and Would a Poilievre-led Conservative government do?
Back in December, I conducted a survey asking Canadians about their expectations and desires for a hypothetical Conservative government led by Pierre Poilievre. On this latest survey, I revisited these questions. I think these questions can help us understand whether the Conservatives have been successful at setting the agenda, whether its larger coalition today is fundamentally different than the smaller one last spring, and what the Liberals might need to do to make the Conservative seem unacceptable to more people.
First, few Canadians are certain that a Conservative government would do any of the things we tested but they are more certain than anything else they will eliminate the national carbon tax. This was the case in December, and remains the case today.
Compared with December, more Canadians now believe that the Conservatives will make housing more affordable (43%, +4), will eliminate the carbon tax (61%, +3), and will end the national dentalcare program (43%, +3). They are also much more likely to believe that the Conservatives, if elected, won’t welcome as many immigrants to Canada as the Liberals (64%, +6).
On the issue of abortion, there hasn’t been a big shift in perceptions about this. 41% of Canadians think a Poilievre-led Conservative government will definitely or probably make it harder for women to have an abortion while 35% think it wouldn’t. Those unsure about this are down 3 to 24%.
The implication, in my view, is that the Conservatives continued to be effective at agenda setting and their relentless focus on the carbon tax and housing continues to pay dividends. For the Liberals, this data shows that their focus on abortion has not yet changed public perceptions, but there is still room to do.
Especially when we consider the results below – what Canadians think a Poilievre government should do.
In this case, only 23% of Canadians think a Poilievre government should make it harder for women to have an abortion. This is why the Liberals are focused on this issue today. Most Canadians don’t want to see that happen.
Similiarily, most Canadians do not want the Conservatives to end either the national childcare or dental care programs or to welcome as many immigrants as the Liberals have. There is widespread support for making housing more affordable, for balancing the budget, and for cutting income taxes.
Cutting funding to the English-language CBC is also not overly popular. 41% want the Conservatives to do this (up 3) while 59% don’t want them to and current Conservative supporters are split. 60% want them to while 40% don’t.
What about Climate Change?
In this wave of research, 80% of Canadians want the Conservatives to have a serious plan to deal with climate change, including 74% of those who would vote Conservative today. But only 31% think they definitely or probably will and 48% think they won’t up 3-points since December.
Here again is another example of a shield issue for the Conservatives and one that presents risk, especially if the wildfire season continues to be as bad as many predict it will be.
There is little appetite for ending the national childcare or dental care programs, for limiting access to abortion, or to cutting all public funding to the English-language CBC.
What does all this mean?
Overall, these results continue to signal that public perceptions of what a Conservative government would do if elected are not fully formed and the broader coalition of voters that the Conservatives have assembled – in large part because they want change and are rejecting Mr. Trudeau and the Liberals – don’t want them to do things that the core Conservative base may be excited about.
The Conservatives and Mr. Poilievre have been very successful at making it clear there will eliminate the carbon tax and there’s a sense that they will make housing more affordable and reduce immigration numbers. But there’s more confusion and uncertainty on other policy areas.
The Upshot
According to Abacus Data CEO David Coletto: “Last month we had the Liberals trailing the Conservatives by 21-points. Today, it’s 16. That’s not a huge swing but it’s movement, thanks in large part to a shift in vote intentions among younger Canadians. Despite this improvement, it’s still a very difficult environment for the Liberals.
The desire for change is still very high. The Prime Minister’s personal numbers are still near there all-time low, and Mr. Poilievre, while a little less popular than a few weeks ago, has way less people feeling negatively towards him than the Prime Minister.
Beyond the horserace and our usual trackers, the deep dive into perceptions about what a Conservative government will and should do is instructive. It shows both the areas of opportunity and risk for the Conservatives and explains why the Liberals are trying to focus attention on abortion, rather than on carbon pricing, housing, or taxes. We will reask these questions in a few months to see if anything changes.”
Methodology
The survey was conducted with 2,415 Canadian adults from May 16 to 21, 2024. 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 +/- 2.0%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
We are 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.
From April 30 to May 1, Abacus Data conducted a public opinion survey with a nationally representative sample of 1,500 Canadian adults. The survey was commissioned by the Canadian Medical Association to assess public reaction to the federal budget which was released on April 16.
We find that Canadians are concerned about the impacts of the capital gains tax change on access to healthcare, particularly family physicians. The objectives of the survey were to:
Measure public perceptions about access to healthcare and primary care in Canada.
Gauge familiarity with the budget and reaction to the capital gains tax change proposal.
Assess perceived impact of these changes on the healthcare system in Canada.
Executive Summary
Awareness and Opposition to Capital Gains Tax Changes: Approximately 58% of Canadians are aware of the proposed capital gains tax changes in the recent federal budget, with only 1 in 4 feeling the changes are a good idea. Opposition is at 35% which suggests many Canadians remain open to a conversation on the proposal.
Potential Healthcare System Strain: The survey indicates a widespread belief that the capital gains tax changes would negatively impact the healthcare system, including increasing wait times for family physicians and possibly leading to fewer family physicians in practice.
Interest in Revising Proposed Changes: After being shown information on the compensation of physicians, including family physicians across Canada and the potential impacts of these changes, we find support for reversing or revising the changes for healthcare providers who run community-based clinics rises to 6 in 10 Canadians.
Capital Gains Tax Changes
When respondents are shown information on the capital gains tax and the changes put forward, about six in ten Canadians (58%) say they are very or somewhat aware of the capital gains tax changes proposed as part of the budget announcement on April 16. Older Canadians and those more familiar with the budget in general are most aware.
Initial reaction to the proposal is mixed. 24% of Canadians think the proposal is a good idea, 24% think it is an ok idea, while 35% are opposed, and 18% are unsure.
When asked which of three possible outcomes people would like most, 29% want the federal government to reverse the proposal entirely, 20% want to see an exemption for healthcare providers who run community-based medical clinics, and 20% want the proposed changes passed. 7% say they do not care either way and 24% are not sure what the government should do.
Note, this reaction is based on pre-existing views as the survey had not yet mentioned the position of physicians and the CMA on the tax changes.
Potential Healthcare System Strain
Respondents were then informed about the CMA’s position and concern about the impacts to physicians and healthcare.
The survey finds widespread belief that the tax changes would have negative impacts on the healthcare system and access to primary care providers and specialists. 54% to 64% of Canadians believe outcomes like longer wait lists for family physicians, fewer physicians becoming family physicians, or family physicians stepping away from their practice would definitely or probably happen.
Canadians are most concerned about the impacts on wait times, which are already a top issue. 29% say these changes will definitely result in longer wait lists for family physicians.
Only about 1 in 5 Canadians felt these outcomes are unlikely.
Interest in Revising Proposed Changes
After being provided additional context on the compensation and retirement model for physicians in Canada we re-asked questions on support/opposition for the proposed changes.
When we re-ask what the federal government should do with the proposal on capital gains taxes (after sharing additional context and information) – 33% want the proposal reversed and stopped entirely (up 4 percentage points from the initial asking), 28% want healthcare providers who run community-based clinics exempted (up 8 percentage points), while 16% want the proposal passed by Parliament (down 4 percentage points).
76% of Canadians with an opinion about the policy proposal said they would like to see government reverse the proposed tax change in some form, including exempt healthcare providers who run community-based clinics.
What This Means
Only a minority of Canadians would like to see the proposed capital gains tax changes move forward as is, as there are growing concerns about the impact on healthcare quality and access.
Our polling indicates a significant portion of the Canadian public is wary about the implications of this tax change on healthcare access and capacity. Healthcare remains one of the top issues in Canada, second to the cost of living and inflation, with access to care being one of the biggest challenges.
Many Canadians think fewer physicians, including family physicians, is a probable result of these changes and express concern about what this means for the healthcare system.
La population canadienne craint que la proposition de modification de l’impôt sur les gains en capital nuise à l’accès aux médecins
Les 30 avril et 1er mai, Abacus Data a sondé l’opinion publique en questionnant un échantillon représentatif de 1 500 adultes dans tout le Canada. C’est l’Association médicale canadienne qui a commandé le sondage pour prendre le pouls de la population après le dépôt du budget fédéral le 16 avril dernier.
Les résultats montrent que le pays s’inquiète des conséquences que pourrait avoir un changement d’imposition des gains en capital sur l’accès aux soins de santé et, plus précisément, à un médecin de famille. La visée du sondage était triple :
Mesurer la perception du public quant à l’accessibilité des soins de santé et des soins primaires au Canada.
Jauger le degré de familiarité de la population avec le budget ainsi que sa réaction à la mesure fiscale proposée.
Apprécier la perception générale de l’incidence de cette mesure sur le système de santé canadien.
En bref
Sensibilisation et opposition aux modifications de l’impôt sur les gains en capital : Environ 58 % de la population a connaissance des modifications proposées à l’impôt sur les gains en capital dans le dernier budget fédéral, et une personne sur quatre estime qu’il s’agit d’une bonne idée. En ce qui concerne l’opposition, on se situe à 35 %, ce qui porte à croire que la population reste ouverte à ce que la proposition soit rediscutée.
Constriction possible du système de santé : Selon les résultats, l’opinion largement répandue est que le système de santé sera mis à mal par ces modifications avec, entre autres, des temps d’attente plus longs pour avoir accès à un médecin de famille et, ultimement, une possible baisse du nombre de médecins de famille en activité.
Intérêt à l’égard d’une révision de la proposition : Une fois les personnes interrogées mieux renseignées sur la rémunération des médecins – y compris des médecins de famille partout au Canada – et sur les conséquences éventuelles de la proposition, nous avons constaté que l’idée d’une annulation ou d’une révision des modifications pour les prestataires de soins de santé à la tête d’une clinique communautaire trouvait alors appui chez six personnes sur dix.
Modification de l’impôt sur les gains en capital
Une fois mieux renseignées sur l’imposition des gains en capital et les modifications proposées, environ six personnes sur dix (58 %) ont déclaré être très bien ou quelque peu au fait de la mesure annoncée avec le budget le 16 avril. Les personnes âgées et les personnes généralement plus familières avec le budget sont les plus avisées.
La réaction initiale est partagée : 24 % des personnes interrogées pensent que la proposition est une bonne idée, et 24 %, une idée correcte, tandis que 35 % s’y opposent et que 18 % sont hésitantes.
Concernant l’issue souhaitée, nous avons proposé trois éventualités aux personnes interrogées : 29 % d’entre elles aimeraient que le gouvernement fédéral revienne entièrement sur sa proposition, 20 %, qu’une exemption s’applique pour les cliniques communautaires, et 20 %, que les modifications soient adoptées. Les personnes ayant déclaré être indifférentes à l’issue de la situation représentent 7 %, et celles incertaines de ce que devrait faire le gouvernement, 24 %.
À noter que cette réaction s’appuie sur les opinions préexistantes des personnes interrogées, puisque la position des médecins et celle de l’AMC ne leur avaient pas encore été communiquées.
Constriction possible du système de santé
Nous avons ensuite informé les personnes interrogées de la position et de la réserve de l’AMC concernant l’incidence des modifications sur les médecins et les soins de santé.
Selon les résultats, l’opinion largement répandue est que le système de santé et l’accès aux prestataires de soins primaires et aux spécialistes seront mis à mal par les modifications fiscales. De 54 % à 64 % de la population pense qu’il est certain ou probable que les modifications auront des conséquences : listes d’attente plus longues pour un médecin de famille, diminution du nombre de médecins qui opteront pour la médecine familiale et départ des médecins de famille qui exercent la médecine en cabinet.
Ce sont surtout les délais d’attente – un enjeu déjà majeur – qui préoccupent les gens, dont 29 % affirment que la mesure proposée se traduira assurément par une attente plus longue pour consulter un médecin de famille.
Seulement environ une personne sur cinq pense que ce scénario est improbable.
Intérêt à l’égard d’une révision de la proposition
Nous avons fourni aux personnes interrogées davantage de contexte sur le modèle de rémunération et de retraite des médecins au Canada, puis les avons à nouveau questionnées sur leur appui ou leur opposition aux modifications proposées.
Lorsque réinterrogées (et mieux informées), 33 % des personnes souhaitent que la proposition soit révisée ou entièrement supprimée (une hausse de quatre points de pourcentage), 28 %, que les cliniques communautaires en soient exemptées (une hausse de huit points), et 16 %, que le Parlement adopte la proposition (une baisse de quatre points).
Parmi les personnes ayant un avis sur la question, 76 % ont déclaré vouloir que le gouvernement revienne de quelque façon sur sa proposition, notamment en exemptant les prestataires de soins de santé des cliniques communautaires.
En conclusion
Seule une faible partie de la population canadienne souhaite voir la proposition de modification de l’impôt sur les gains en capital être adoptée dans sa forme actuelle, car les possibles conséquences sur la qualité et la disponibilité des soins de santé préoccupent de plus en plus la population.
D’après notre sondage, la majorité appréhende les implications d’une telle mesure sur l’accessibilité et la capacité du système de santé. Notons que, derrière le coût de la vie et l’inflation, la question des soins de santé, et surtout de l’accès aux soins, reste l’un des plus grands enjeux au Canada.
De nombreuses personnes penchent vers la probabilité qu’une diminution du nombre de médecins, dont les médecins de famille, résulte de ces modifications et se préoccupent des répercussions sur le système de santé.
The survey was conducted with a representative sample of n=1,500 adult Canadians. May 6 to 8, 2024. 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 +/- 2.5%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched BC’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
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.
Now, Premier David Eby and the NDP is one bad campaign away from going down to defeat as the B.C. Conservatives take advantage of the collapse of B.C. … Source: https://www.google.com/url?rct=j&sa=t&url=https://www.thewrit.ca/p/as-bc-united-collapses-ndp-now-has&ct=ga&cd=CAIyGjc1Y2Q2YWMwOGE3YWEyZTk6Y29tOmVuOlVT&usg=AOvVaw2O8EDxIl6a1Gk9as6jD4h6
But the Abacus monthly tracking survey for the Star, shows the number of undecided voters has shot up. Source: https://www.google.com/url?rct=j&sa=t&url=https://www.thestar.com/politics/provincial/fords-tories-dip-slightly-but-still-lead-liberals-and-ndp-survey-shows/article_214e29b0-1768-11ef-b102-1f4c325224e2.html&ct=ga&cd=CAIyGjc1Y2Q2YWMwOGE3YWEyZTk6Y29tOmVuOlVT&usg=AOvVaw31ltW3O5EYsAfkIZzK_3k0
From May 10 to 15, 2024, Abacus Data conducted a survey of 1,000 eligible voters in Ontario exploring several topics as part of our regular national omnibus surveys.
Every month, with our media partner the Toronto Star, we track how Ontarians are feeling about their political choices and add new topics based on current events and discussions. In this edition of the survey, we continue to explore impressions of party leaders and perceptions about Doug Ford’s government along with our usual trackers.
Doug Ford and the Ontario PCs continue to lead over Bonnie Crombie’s Ontario Liberals, by 13 percentage points (2 points down from our last survey).
If an election were held today, 39% of committed voters in Ontario would vote PC. The Ontario Liberals are at 26%, with the Ontario NDP closely behind at 22%, and the Greens at 9%.
These results are consistent with our survey last month and changes are within the margin of error of the survey. But we do see an increase in those who are undecided. 28% of respondents are undecided, up 7 points from last month.
Our data also reflect federal vote intentions in Ontario. For the Ontario PC and Liberals, support for the federal Conservatives and Liberals is slightly higher than their own. In contrast, the Ontario NDP and Greens poll slightly higher than their federal counterparts.
Regionally, the Ontario PCs are also ahead across the province. They lead by 12 points in Toronto, 20 in the GTHA, 13 in southwestern Ontario, and 14 in eastern Ontario.
Interestingly, the rise in support for PCs in eastern Ontario last month seems to have been short-lived. Support for the PCs in the region went down 10 points since last April, while the Ontario Liberals gained ground (rising by 8 points).
The Ontario PCs also lead in almost all demographic groups. They are well ahead among men (at 46%) and among those 30 to 44 and 60 and over. Among women, however, the PCs and Liberals are in a tight race, with Liberals leading over the PCs by 1 point. Last April, PCs were 7 points ahead the Liberals in this demographic.
The slight drop in support for the Ontario PCs is also reflected in party leader impressions. 31% have a positive view of Premier Ford, with a net score of -8. This represents a 1-point drop since last month.
In contrast, impressions of Ontario NDP leader Marit Stiles and Green Party leader Mike Schreiner have improved. NDP leader Marit Stiles has a net score of +6 (up 5 points from last month) and Green Party leader Mike Schreiner has a net score of +5 (up 8 points). Ontario Liberal Party leader, Bonnie Crombie, enjoys about equal positive and negative views.
When asked specifically about Ford’s government, approval of the government’s performance is largely unchanged, while 39% disapprove. Overall, this still represents a small improvement for the Ford government.
The Upshot
Since our last survey, little has changed across the province, as the Ontario PCs lead over the Liberals and the NDP, and Premier Ford remains relatively popular. In fact, disapproval for the Ford government went down 4 points since last month, to the lowest point since June 2023.
The small surge in support for the PCs in eastern Ontario, which may have reflected the announcement of a deal with the City of Ottawa, did not last. The PCs saw a 10-point drop, benefitting the Liberals, whose support improved by 8 points. Time will tell if the Liberals can hold on to this change, as well as among women, where the PCs also lost ground to the Liberals.
For Ontario NDP leader Marit Stiles and Ontario Green leader Mike Schreiner, while perceptions have improved, these did not have an effect on vote intentions.”
Methodology
The survey was conducted with 1,000 eligible voters living in British Columbia from May 6 to 8, 2024. A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 3.1%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched BC’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
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.
From May 6 to 9, 2024, Abacus Data conducted a survey of 1,000 eligible voters in British Columbia exploring their views on federal politics and government as part of a larger survey. A few days ago we released results on views towards provincial politics.
The federal Conservatives lead by a significant margin in British Columbia. The Conservative Party has the support of 44% of committed voters, 18 points ahead of the NDP, in second place, and 26 points ahead the Liberal Party, in third place. The Greens placed in fourth with 8% of committed voters. In comparison with the 2021 election results this represents an 11-point gain for the Conservatives, a 3-point gain for both the NDP and the Greens, and a 9-point drop for the Liberals.
Among those who identified as Liberal voters in the 2021 election and were asked about their current voting intentions, 62% expressed that they would vote for the Liberal party again if the election were held at the time of the survey. In contrast, 95% of those who identified as Conservative voters expressed their intent to vote for the Conservative Party again, while 78% of self-identified NDP supporters stated they would do the same.
The Conservatives also lead in both Metro Vancouver and Interior/Northern BC, with the support of 46% in both regions. In Vancouver Island, the NDP is slightly ahead of the Conservatives by 2 points, and well ahead of the Liberals by 25 points.
Demographically, the Conservatives are well ahead among men, with 50%. This lead, however, shrinks among women where the support for the Conservatives is only 8 points ahead of the NDP (compared to the 28-point difference among men), and where Liberals are only 7 points ahead of the Greens.
The Conservatives lead across all age groups in BC. They have a 12-point lead among those 18 to 29, a 16-point lead among 30 to 44 year olds, a 17-point lead among 45 to 59 year olds and a 28-point lead among those aged 60+.
Leader impressions: An unpopular Prime Minister
Support for the Conservatives likely reflects the unpopularity of Prime Minister and Liberal Party Leader, Justin Trudeau. When asked for party leader impressions, Prime Minister Trudeau is by far the most unpopular leader. Among British Columbians, 55% have a negative impression and, conversely, only 22% have a positive impression (the lowest percentage among party leaders), for a net score of -33. This mirrors the latest national average, where 58% have a negative impression of the Prime Minister (for a net score of -34).
In comparison, both the NDP leader Jagmeet Singh and the Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre have about equal numbers viewing them favourably and unfavourably. Among British Columbians, 37% have a positive impression of both party leaders, while 30% have a negative impression of NDP Jagmeet Singh and 32% have a negative impression of Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre. Notably, Green Party leader, Elizabeth May, enjoys mostly neutral impressions and about equal positive and negative views.
Overall, Jagmeet Singh is the most popular party leader with a net score of +7 while Pierre Poilievre’s is +5. Elizabeth May, who represents a B.C. district, is at +4.
Regionally, negative impressions of Prime Minister Trudeau worsen in Interior/Northern BC, where the Prime Minister is by far the least popular leader with a net score of -40 (60% hold negative views), 6 points below the national average. Similarly in Metro Vancouver and in Vancouver Island, Prime Minister Trudeau has a net score of -34 and -23, respectively.
For reference, both NDP leader Jagmeet Singh and Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre have a net score of +2 (31% hold negative views) in Interior/Northern BC. In Metro Vancouver, Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre is the most popular leader with a net score of +10, while NDP leader Jagmeet Singh is the most popular party leader in Vancouver Island, where he has a net score of +16.
The unpopularity of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is perhaps most noticeable in the accessible voter pool for the Liberals. When we ask people if they would consider voting for each of the main political parties, 53% say they are open to voting for the Conservatives, 39% for the Liberals, and 51% for the NDP. The Conservatives and the NDP have about equally sized accessible voter pools
For the Liberals the pool of accessible voters is not only smaller than for the Conservatives and the NDP, but 61% of people surveyed said they would not consider voting for the Liberals. This represents the smallest pool of accessible voters for the three major parties, and only 2 points larger than that of the Greens.
The Upshot
The federal Conservatives are in a strong position, leading in all groups in British Columbia, and mirroring the general popularity of the party across Canada. This is also positive news for the Conservatives in British Columbia, where the party lost 4 seats in the 2021 federal election.
For the NDP, our data show a mixed bag. Among most groups, with the exception of those on Vancouver Island, the NDP trails behind the Conservatives by considerable margins. Across the province support for the NDP is 18-points behind the Conservatives. Impressions of the NDP leader, however, are generally positive. Our latest survey in BC provincial politics found a similar mixed bag, as the NDP remains ahead – and Premier Eby has a net favourable impression – but in a tighter race with the BC Conservatives.
Finally, for the Liberals, who were able to capture the most seats in British Columbia in the 2021 federal election, the results of our latest survey show the party in a challenging position and may be heading to a result more similar to what the party got prior to the Paul Martin years. The Liberals trail behind the NDP among young British Columbians, a key demographic, and among residents of Metro Vancouver, where the Conservatives had previously struggled to find support. Impressions of the Prime Minister are also overly negative, as the Liberals’ accessible voter pool falls below 50%.
Methodology
The survey was conducted with 1,000 eligible voters living in British Columbia from May 6 to 8, 2024. A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 3.1%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched BC’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
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.
