Globalization, Technology, Immigration And Politics In Canada

In recent years, much of the political upheaval that has been seen in democracies including the UK and the US appears to have to do with the impacts of globalization and technology on the economic confidence of people.  We decided to explore how Canadians perceive these topics.  Here’s what we found.

THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY

The large majority believe that technological change has been good for the world (89%) and almost as many (76%) think it has been good for their own economic well-being.  Most people (62%) also believe continued technological change is inevitable, “whether we like it or not”.

The broad consensus that technological change has been good for the world crosses party lines, generations, and self-defined class status.  Where some differences are apparent is when it comes to the personal benefits of technological change: baby boomers, NDP voters, and self-described working/lower class Canadians are less sure of the upside, but majorities in every case are of the view that the impact has been positive for them personally. 

THE ROLE OF GLOBALIZATION

A two-thirds majority (68%) of Canadians believe that globalization has “helped raise the standard of living for many poor people around the world”. At the same time, almost half (43%) feel “globalization has been harmful to the economic well-being of a fair number of people in affluent countries”. On a personal level, one in three (32%) believe that “globalization has been bad for my own economic well-being.”

Majorities among all generations, supporters of all parties and all classes believe globalization has helped the poor around the world, but New Democrats, baby boomers and those who consider themselves working/lower class are less convinced that this has happened.

These differences are more muted when it comes to the number of people who say they have been hurt by the impact of globalization. 

THE FUTURE OF THE ECONOMY

We asked whether people thought a variety of factors were likely to be more helpful or harmful to Canada’s future economic prospects.  We found:

• There is close to anonymity that technological advances and the Internet, in particular, are positive forces for the future of Canada’s economy.

• Three out of four people (73%) think “globalization including trade agreements” will have a positive influence on Canada’s future.

• Opinion is more uncertain and almost evenly split on the impact of immigration and “artificial intelligence and automation.”

There are some important differences by class and partisanship. On artificial intelligence/ automation, the majority of those in the upper/upper middle class say this will be a positive force, while the majority of those who self-describe as working or lower class take the opposite view.  A small majority (55%) of Liberals see it as a positive, while a small majority (55%) of New Democrats see it as a negative.

On immigration, Conservatives see it as a negative, Liberals as a positive, and New Democrats are evenly split.  Class based and age differences are also evident.

On globalization, differences are much more muted. Lots of supporters of all major parties see a positive effect, as do all generations and different self-described classes.

A complex relationship exists between these various points of confidence or apprehension.   We’ll explore these relationships in more detail in an upcoming release about globalism and nationalism, however, some of the highlights that we see are as follows:

• People who are pessimistic about Canada’s economic future are twice as likely to see immigration as a threat, compared to those who are optimistic.

• An 18% segment of the adult population are fearful about the impact of technological advances, artificial intelligence, the Internet, globalization, and immigration.

• A separate 28% segment are worried about artificial intelligence/automation and immigration but don’t show the same level of apprehension about other technological advances, or globalization. 

UPSHOT

According to Bruce Anderson: “Canadian attitudes are different from those which have given rise to nationalist economic politics in the US and elsewhere.  While opinion is somewhat divided on the upside of immigration, Canadians are fairly united when it comes to seeing the value of globalization and trade arrangements with other countries.

The question of technology is becoming more complex or nuanced.  On the whole, Canadians see big upsides to the technological revolution that has transformed world economies. However, there is already a fair bit of anxiety about the dislocation that may occur as a result of artificial intelligence and automation.

The numbers signal some potential for these issues to become class-based and partisan in nature, but so far, the differences are more modest than they appear to be in other countries, where the debate about globalism and nationalism is front and centre, and already highly charged.  Based on these patterns, it’s reasonable to expect that in Canada the policy pressures from the left will be about cushioning impacts of dislocation and creating new employment opportunities, while from the right they will include pressure on immigration.”

According to David Coletto: “Although we find a broad consensus among Canadians for the value of technological advancement and globalization to Canada’s economic future, it doesn’t mean these attitudes are static. It wasn’t that long ago that Republicans in the United States were more likely to favour trade and international engagement. Today, their views have shifted markedly as political leaders such as Donald Trump and other Republicans have railed against globalism and trade.

In Canada, the audience for these arguments is smaller but not politically insignificant. A growing opinion gap between those in different classes or educational groups suggests Canada is not immune to the forces of nationalism and anti-globalism. Managing these attitudes requires both political leadership that refuses to play upon these fears and economic and social policies that produce what some term “inclusive growth”.

In a future release, we will explore in more depth the prevalence of globalist and nationalist attitudes in Canada and profile the size and make up of these two points of view that are shaping the economic and political life of countries across the developed world.”

METHODOLOGY

Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from April 21 to 24, 2017. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of over 500,000 Canadians.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys.   The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of 1,500 is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

ABACUS DATA INC.

We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value-added insight.  Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, Ph.D.

MediaTechnology

A Tepid Economic Temperature: Is Class Conflict Coming to Canada?

Over the years, we’ve explored how people feel about the economy in a number of different ways. In our latest survey, we were interested to see what we would find if we used the same questions Gallup has used to measure the sentiments of Americans and to see how similar the reactions of Canadians would be. We also assess the potential for a populist reaction as we’ve seen in the United State, Britain, and France.

Here’s what we found:

CURRENT FINANCIAL SITUATION?

Half (48%) describe their personal financial situation as excellent or good in Canada, another 36% would say it is fair, and 16% say “poor’.

While partisan choices can sometimes have a lot to do with financial well-being, it doesn’t right now: 54% of Liberals say their situation is excellent or good, while 47% of Conservatives and New Democrats do as well.

There also isn’t much difference between younger people and older people: 46% of those under 30 and 47% of those 60 or older say their situation is excellent or good.

The biggest difference, not surprisingly, has to do with income: those with household incomes below $50,000 are twice as likely to describe their financial situation as fair or poor (74% vs. 36%) compared to those with higher incomes.

THINGS IMPROVING OR GETTING WORSE?

Just over half (56%) say their situation is getting better, compared to 44% who say it is getting worse. Again, there are partisan differences, but perhaps less dramatic than might be expected, if one believed in the thesis that political choice is all “about the economy”.

A majority of Liberals (65%) say their situation is getting better, as do about half (48%) of Conservative and NDP voters.

Millenials are among the most likely (68%) to say their situation is getting better.

Among those with incomes below $50,000, 44% say their situation is getting better compared with 63% and 69% in higher income brackets.

ENOUGH MONEY TO LIVE COMFORTABLY?

A small majority (56%) say they have enough money to live comfortably; 44% say they do not. Remarkably, these numbers vary by only 4 points from a low of 53% in BC to 57% in Quebec.

By partisanship, Conservatives (61%) and Liberals (62%) are within a point of each other, and 55% of NDP supporters say they have enough to live comfortably.

Again, challenging the thesis of a distressed Millennial cohort: 61% of those under 30 say they have enough, as do 60% of those 60 and older.

By income, $50,000 is something a dividing line: below it, less than half have enough, above it, most say they do.

ARE YOU A SAVER OR A SPENDER?

We asked people if they “more enjoy spending money, or more enjoy saving money.” A clear majority (62%) of self-identify as savers, with only modest variations across region, and age, and no difference by gender. NDP voters were the most likely to say they were savers (69%) while Conservatives (61%) and Liberals (62%) were not far behind, and identical.

WHAT IS YOUR SOCIAL CLASS?

When asked to choose which class they were in from a list of options provided, 1% said they were “upper class”. None of those people lived west of Ontario, and no New Democrats self-defined that way. Just over one in ten (12%) said they were “upper middle class.”

The plurality across the country (45%), and in every region, age, income group, and gender, self-defined as “middle class”. Another 29% said they were working class, and 13% chose “lower class”.

Asked what they thought their answer to this question would be five years from now, the number of people who said they would be upper class rose by 2 points, “upper middle” rose by 5 points, the number who said they would be working class dropped by 9 points.

Only 10% of “middle class” identifiers thought they would move down the scale (6% to working class, 4% to lower class), while 31% of those who self-identified as “working class” said in five years they would be in the “middle class”.

OPTIMISTIC ABOUT CANADA’S ECONOMY?

When asked about the future of the Canadian economy, 53% say they are optimistic, compared to 47% who are pessimistic. Younger people are more optimistic than older people. Albertans are as optimistic as Ontario residents.

The biggest differences revolve around partisanship: Conservative voters are far more pessimistic about the economy than average (65%). We also see a difference depending on one’s self-identified class.

IS A CLASS WAR ON THE HORIZON?

Some have argued that Canada is on the brink of intense class-based conflict. Our data would draw attention to one in five (19%) who self-identify as working or lower class, say their economic situation as fair or poor, say it is getting worse, and don’t have enough money to live comfortably.These Canadians show some of the signs associated with populist voting

These Canadians show some of the signs associated with populist voting behaviour elsewhere. Compared to other Canadians they are 18 points more likely to believe immigration is more harmful than helpful to Canada’s economy, and 17 points more convinced that technology has been bad for their economic well-being.

However, only 20% think Canada should be more like the United States, which is right on the national average. And, in the last federal election, most of them voted for a progressive option (39% Liberal, 23% NDP, 29% Conservative.

COMPARING CANADIANS WITH AMERICANS

Comparing our survey with those of recent Gallup survey findings reveals remarkably small differences in how people on either side of the 49th parallel feel:

• 52% of Americans say their financial situation is excellent or good, 48% in Canada
• 54% in America say their situation is getting better; 56% in Canada.
• 61% of Americans say they are savers; in Canada, 62%.
• 43% of Americans define themselves as middle class, compared to 45% in Canada Canadians. 30% of Americans say they are working class, compared to 29% in Canada.

In Canada, slightly fewer identify as upper or upper-middle (18% in the US 13% in Canada), and slightly more say they are lower class (8% in the US, 13% in Canada)

UPSHOT

According to Bruce Anderson: “These data paint a picture of a Canada that is neither broadly enthusiastic nor deeply dissatisfied with current financial conditions.

Those who imagine a deep generational divide will find little in these numbers to buttress that thesis. Younger people are not all that different from older people in terms of their sense of economic well-being, and indeed are more optimistic.

Economic conditions are often discussed as the axis point around which almost all political choice falls (recall “it’s the economy, stupid” from the Clinton-Bush election), however, our numbers suggest that these are playing muted role in political preference in Canada today.

There are important differences based on household income, but these don’t appear to be, at this point anyway, coalescing into something that looks like an incipient class war. It’s notable that of the 19% who show the greatest economic stress, almost equal numbers voted NDP and Conservative in 2015, while more voted for the centre-progressive Liberals.

The US economy is similar in some ways to Canada’s, but also has major differences too. Despite that, the number of people who feel good or bad about their circumstance, and who identify as middle or working class is remarkably similar – suggesting that while these views have something to do with actual financial conditions, they may, in fact, have more to do with expectations, optimism, pessimism, and psychology more generally.”

METHODOLOGY

Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from April 21 to 24, 2017. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of over 500,000 Canadians.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys. The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of 1,500 is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

ABACUS DATA INC.

We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value-added insight. Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, Ph.D.

MediaPolls

Disruption in the Canadian News Business

Yesterday we looked at news bias and fake news. In our latest survey, we examined a range of questions about how Canadians access news content with a focus on TV news and newspapers. This is our second release on this topic.

Here’s what we found:

• About one in three (36%) watch a national news broadcast every night, another 24% say they watch once or twice a week. About one in five (18%) never watch a national news broadcast, including 25% of Millennials. The age differential on this question was striking. Among Baby Boomers (aged 55 to 71) 50% watch every night; among Millennials (aged 18 to 37), the number drops to 15%.

• Just 16% read a physical copy of a newspaper every day – more people (28%) say they never do. Even among Baby Boomers (55 to 71), only 23% say they read a physical paper every day, and 24% say they never do.

• For podcasts, a content format that didn’t exist only a few years ago, 20% listen at least once a week, including 5% who say they listen to a podcast every day. Half (50%) overall have at least sampled podcasts, led by Millennials (67%) — 10% of whom listen daily.

• Given the series of financial disappointments for Postmedia, we asked people how the potential demise of that company would affect them. The majority (56%) say it “won’t really affect me”, and another 39% say “I’ll be disappointed but I’ll use other ways to be informed.” One in twenty (5%) said “it will be a big problem for me in terms of being able to stay in touch with the news I need.

• Differences across generations and across regions were rather modest. There was no significant difference between those living in urban or rural areas.

• The most disappointed are those who currently read a physical newspaper every day. 14% felt it would be a big problem for them while another 52% said they would be disappointed, but they will use other ways to be informed.

UPSHOT

According to Bruce Anderson: “Massive change in media habits has been evident all over the world and Canadians are experiencing this as well. The long term dominant role of nightly news and physical newspapers is clearly being displaced by a variety of other means of news consumption, a process led by younger generations who want their news not by appointment, but on demand. They also want it to follow them wherever they are, not require them to arrange a delivery or watch on a TV screen.

Given the extensive disruption, it is perhaps not that surprising that so many people seem to shrug off the implications of the potential demise of the country’s leading chain of newspapers. But while policy makers and journalists may be worried about this scenario, few in the public see it as a game changer.

While our release yesterday showed no sense of deep grievance about the state of journalism in Canada, these numbers show rather weak attachment to or knowledge of the fundamentals required to gather and get them news that people need every day. People may be more sanguine than the situation warrants.”

According to David Coletto: “These results offer further evidence of substantial disruption affecting the news media business happening all over the world. Driven by technological changes and accelerated by generational change, how Canadians consume media is changing rapidly.

Only 15% of Canadian Millennials read a physical newspaper every day, 35-points less likely than their Baby Boomer parents. As Millennials show their parents how to access the content they want on-demand and wherever they are, I expect these numbers to change quickly over the next few years. The “generational contagion” we see in news media consumption is mirrored in other sectors as well.”

METHODOLOGY

Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from April 21 to 24, 2017. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of over 500,000 Canadians.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys. The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of 1,500 is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

ABACUS DATA INC.

We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value-added insight. Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, Ph.D.

MediaPollsTechnology

Canadian News Media And “Fake News” Under A Microscope

In our latest survey, we examined a range of questions about how Canadians see the media today and their exposure to “fake news”.  Over the next few days we will release three reports on what we learned.

Here’s what we found:

•  People are twice as likely to say the quality of journalism is declining (26%) as improving (13%). However, this is significantly affected by the views of Conservative voters, who are far more likely to say journalism is deteriorating (42%)

•  85% say they have been exposed to “fake news stories” including 47% who say “quite a few” stories. Most (57%) of those who’ve been exposed to fake news said they read the stories.  Among those who read fake news stories half said their views were affected and they were misled.

•   We estimate that about 24.5 million Canadian adults have been exposed to “fake news” and 14.1 million have read content. About 7.5 million have said their opinion had been improperly informed because of the “fake news” they read.

•   On the question of media bias, 58% think “the news media generally favour one political party over another, with Conservative voters 15 points more likely to feel this way than Liberal voters (69% versus 54%). Millennials were also far more likely than average to perceive a bias, as are residents of Alberta.

•   We asked about perceived biases of different media outlets, and in most cases, roughly half saw no bias. The tendency was to see a Liberal bias at CBC, a Conservative bias at the National Post and Sun Newspapers, a slight tendency to see a Liberal bias at the CTV and Global, and mixed opinions about the Globe and Mail.

•   We did find differences of opinion depending on the party respondents said they voted for in the 2015 Federal Election.

•   Conservative voters were more likely to perceive a bias in the news media overall, particularly at the CBC. But at least a third of Conservative voters felt that CTV, Global, and the Globe and Mail favoured the Liberal Party and one in five felt the National Post and the Sun newspapers favoured the Liberal Party.

•   Liberal and NDP voters held varied views but not substantially different from Conservatives. Both were more likely to feel that the CBC tended to favour the Liberals while the Sun and National Post favoured the Conservatives.  Interestingly, Liberal voters were more likely to feel the Globe favours the Tories as opposed to the Liberals.  The opposite view held by Conservative voters.

UPSHOT

According to Bruce Anderson: Canadian views of the media reveal a degree of concern with the way things have been going, but something short of profound dismay.  While more people see a decline in quality than seeing an improvement, the majority opinion is that things aren’t changing that much.

However, there is broad awareness of and exposure to “fake news”, and many people say that this phenomenon has hampered their ability to form proper opinions.

Most Canadians believe major media outlets harbour political biases, although the tendency to believe this is quite a bit stronger among Conservative voters than others. Also interesting is that when it comes to translating that feeling of systemic bias into view of individual news outlets, Canadians seem a bit more tentative.

The extent to which Conservative voters see a bias that works against their interest is the most notable finding here: it is likely both the fuel for and the product of the anti-“mainstream news” themes employed by conservative partisans in recent years.

METHODOLOGY 

Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from April 21 to 24, 2017. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of over 500,000 Canadians.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys.   The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of 1,500 is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

ABACUS DATA INC.

We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value-added insight.  Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, Ph.D.

MediaPollsTechnology

Was Kevin O’Leary the Conservative Party’s best hope to beat Trudeau? Data suggests he wasn’t.

Yesterday, Kevin O’Leary shocked many, including myself, by dropping out of the Conservative Party leadership race.

In announcing his decision, O’Leary claimed that while he thought he could win the leadership, he feared he would be unable to win a general election because of an inability to win enough support in Quebec.

Data we collected over the past weekend confirms Mr. O’Leary’s assessment that he did not have a clear path to beating Prime Minister Trudeau. However, Quebec wasn’t his only liability.

In our survey, we asked respondents samples they would be more likely to vote for Mr. Trudeau or one of the candidates for the Conservative Party leadership if that person was elected leader. Respondents were shown a random set of 3 hypothetical scenarios as a way to test the pulling power of the main leadership candidates.

The results show that Mr. O’Leary, despite a wide advantage in name recognition and a high profile leadership campaign, has not been any more successful in growing the Conservative Party tent with the general public or the group of voters accessible to the Conservative Party. Our survey in February found his negatives had almost doubled among the general public.

In fact, a deeper analysis suggests Mr. O’Leary, along with Kellie Leitch, could have the opposite effect and stymie growth opportunities for the Conservative Party.

I computed a push and pull score for each candidate we tested. The push score is the percentage of 2015 Conservative voters who say they would be more likely to vote for Mr. Trudeau. The pull score is computed as the aggregate percent of the electorate who voted for a party other than the Conservative Party in 2015 but say they would be attracted to the party if it was lead by the candidate mentioned. Recognizing this is a crude measure, it does give us some insight into the potential impact of each of the leading Conservative candidates.



The data shows that Mr. O’Leary and Ms. Leitch both have a net negative impact on potential party support while all the other candidates either have the potential to grow party support marginally or at least have a mostly neutral effect on it. Since so few Canadians know who these other candidates, they are more likely blank slates and their push/pull scores are more a factor of partisanship and views on Mr. Trudeau than a preference for the candidate.

Moreover, the net impact of the Conservative Party’s leadership race seems to have done little to grow the party’s appeal beyond those who voted for it in 2015.

So when Kevin O’Leary said he didn’t see a clear path to victory in a general election, our data supports that assertion. And as the one candidate with substantial profile across the country, his inability to grow support for his party is evidence he may have had a difficult time when trying to appeal to the general public.

METHODOLOGY

Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from April 21 to 24, 2017. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of over 500,000 Canadians.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys.   The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of 1,500 is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Media

Tensions Rising: Canadian Views on Foreign Conflict, China, & Trudeau in an International Crisis

For generations, Canada’s interests, foreign policy and view of the world has been aligned with that of the United States.  This alignment has not always been perfect and disputes have arisen on occasions, but today there are reasons to wonder if the future will be different from the past when it comes to how closely Canadians feel to our neighbors to the south.

Currently, only 20% feel “Canada should try to be more like the United States” while 80% disagree with that idea.

There is a broad feeling among Canadians (79%) that tensions around the world are rising, while only 3% say that tensions are easing. Given that US President Trump has adopted a more aggressive approach with a number of countries around the world, we wanted to know how Canadians would react to the possibility of armed conflict. Here’s what we found.

SYRIA

20% would want Canada to join a military effort to remove President Assad of Syria.  Another 32% would want Canada to express support but not provide military aid. 30% would favour neutrality and 18% say they would want Canada to oppose a conflict and urge diplomatic solutions. 

NORTH KOREA

20% say that Canada should join the US if it enters a military conflict with North Korea. Another 26% say we should express support for the US but no military participation. 30% say we should take a neutral position, and 24% say we should oppose conflict and urge diplomatic solutions.

RUSSIA

Only 14% would want Canada to join the US militarily in a conflict with Russia, and another 18% would favour moral support.  33% would prefer neutrality and 35% would want Canada to oppose such a conflict.

CHINA

Only 10% say Canada should join the US militarily if it entered into a conflict with China, and only 17% would want Canada to express support (but no military participation.  34% would favour neutrality and 39% say Canada should express opposition to a conflict.

In short, no more than 20% would want Canada to join the US in any of these hypothetical armed conflicts, while about half or more in each case would prefer to see Canada take a neutral position or oppose conflict and urge diplomacy.

These results vary somewhat, but not all that much, by party affiliation. Conservative voters are more likely to support the idea of joining the US militarily, but still, only 30% of CPC voters would want our troops involved in a Syrian invasion, 32% in a conflict with North Korea, just 21% with Russia and only 16% with China.

CONFIDENCE IN PM TRUDEAU

We asked respondents to let us know how much confidence they had in Prime Minister Trudeau if he were “faced with an international crisis”.

  • 70% have a great deal or a good amount of confidence Mr. Trudeau would “manage our relationship with our allies well”, including 38% of CPC voters and 69% of NDP voters.
  • 63% have confidence he would “weigh all the options carefully before making a decision”, including 33% of CPC voters and 58% of NDP voters.
  • 62% have confidence he would “make the right decision for Canada”, including 29% of CPC voters and 57% of NDP voters.

COMPARING CHINA AND THE UNITED STATES

Given the emergence of China as a high-profile participant in global discussions in recent years as well as one of the most important economies in the world, we decided to ask Canadians to compare the US and China on a number of dimensions.

The results paint a remarkable picture where China is seen as playing a more positive role in some respects even that Canada’s closest traditional ally.

Majorities say China is:

• Doing more than the US to try to maintain peace and avoid conflict (61%)

• Doing more than the US to try to maintain peace and avoid conflict (61%)

• Showing a better example of what world leadership should look like (57%)

• Doing more to grow the economy around the world (56%)

• More stable and predictable (54%)

• More respectful of other people around the world (53%)

Majorities say the US is:

• More committed to freedom of speech (84%)

• Doing more for the poor in their country (61%)

• Doing more to address climate change and environmental issues (57%)

Conservative and Liberal voters react differently on some of these items, with CPC voters giving more credit to the US and showing more skepticism about China. However, these differences are in some cases more modest than might have been anticipated.

UPSHOT

The role of China in the world has been changing and so has that of the United States.  Canadians have been watching these events unfold and opinions are clearly evolving.  For many people, China looks like a more stable and predictable power, one that evinces more respect for others and is doing more to raise economic prospects around the world.  None of these observations would have been as common only a few years ago.

Inevitably, these impressions are a function not only of what China has been doing but also the way in which Canadians are seeing the US with Donald Trump as it’s leader.

Broad reluctance to join a military conflict that Mr. Trump might consider is just one illustration – many seem also to feel that America under Trump seems to lack respect for people in other parts of the world.

That so few believe Canada should be more like America is an illustration that for many Canadians, Trump’s America is not, for the moment anyway, a “shining city on a hill.

METHODOLOGY

Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from April 21 to 24, 2017. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of over 500,000 Canadians.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys.   The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of 1,500 is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

ABACUS DATA INC.

We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value-added insight.  Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, Ph.D.

Media

Trade, Trump & Milk: How Canadians React To Tough Talk

The large majority of Canadians (92%) are happy with the range and quality of dairy products available in Canada, and two thirds are satisfied with prices.  This view that the market is working reasonably well today creates an important context in which the recent statements by President Trump will be received by Canadian voters.

When informed that the US/President Trump has been critical of Canada for not allowing easier access to US dairy products and would like to see Canadian markets open to more imports, Canadians were mostly are unmoved.

By a broad margin (77%) Canadians were inclined to feel that “like the US and other countries, Canada has policies that are designed to support a healthy Canadian dairy farm sector and they work well enough to meet the needs of consumers too”.  Only 23% chose the alternative argument that “Canada should change our rules and allow more foreign dairy products to compete in our market because it would mean more products would be available and possibly lower prices for consumers.”

Note – We asked half our sample mentioning President Trump specifically and the other half without attributing the criticism to him specifically. The results were only marginally different – those told that the criticism was leveled by Mr. Trump were four points more likely to say Canada’s policies were fine the way they are.

We then asked people what they felt Canada should do if the US Administration presses Canada on this issue.  Almost no one (7%) felt that Canada should simply agree to the changes the US was asking for.   Opinion is somewhat divided between those who feel Canada should “stand firm and refuse to make any changes” (43%) and those who say Canada should “negotiate a solution that gets Canada something we would like in exchange for giving the Americans some of what they want in the dairy sector.” (50%)

Respondents who had been informed that it was President Trump who was making the case for opening up our markets were 8 points more likely that other respondents to say that Canada should “stand firm” and 9 points less likely to say we should give something to get something.

In considering the political context for this issue in Canada, it’s important to look at how responses differ by region, political leaning and whether people live in rural or more urban/suburban settings.

•  In every region of the country, and across rural and urban and all major party lines, a majority is satisfied with the range, quality and price of Canadian dairy products.

•  More than 70% in every region, among both genders, all age groups, among all major party supporters and across rural and urban Canada believe Canada’s policies are working well enough. Only 23% of Conservative voters believe Canada should open up markets; 24% among Liberal supporters, and 9% among NDP voters.

•  On the question of what Canada should do if the US presses the matter, no subgroup shows more than 11% interest in simply going along with the US demands. Conservative voters were a bit more inclined to prefer to see a negotiated solution over standing firm (52% to 39%) while Liberals were more drawn to the stand firm (55%) versus a negotiated settlement (38%). NDP voters were evenly split.  In Quebec, 55% prefer a “stand firm” position, compared to 37% who favoured negotiation. 

THE UPSHOT

According to Abacus Chairman Bruce Anderson:

“The Trudeau government is not alone in facing important challenges in our trading relationship with the US.  These results show that most Canadians want Ottawa to show a combination of firmness and pragmatism in dealing with trade irritants, an instinct that probably would extend to other trade challenges beyond dairy as well.

For Canada’s dairy producers the results show that Canadian opinion is more instinctively aligned with them than not – but in a qualified manner.  Canadians will consider the overall shape of the relationship with the US and expect their government to mount a strategic defense of Canada’s interests.

That means defending dairy policy if necessary, but not necessarily protecting dairy rules if other strategic interests outweigh that consideration.”

Listen to an audio briefing from David Coletto:

METHODOLOGY

Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from April 21 to 24, 2017. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of over 500,000 Canadians.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys.   The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of 1,500 is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding. 

ABACUS DATA INC.

We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value-added insight.  Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, Ph.D.

MediaPolls

Finding Parity: Canadian Opinions About Women in Politics

In partnership with Equal Voice and in recognition of International Women’s Day and Equal Voice’s Daughters of the Vote initiative, we conducted a national survey of over 2,100 Canadian adults and asked them a range of questions about their views and perceptions about women in politics.

Here are the top 5 findings from the study:

1. We still have some work to do raising the issue of underrepresentation of women in Parliament. 58% of Canadians think there are too many or the right number of women in Canadian politics, even though, on average, Canadians estimate that women occupy 31% of the seats in the House of Commons.

2. Most don’t believe gender parity will be achieved any time soon. Almost a majority of Canadians believe that it will take 18 years or longer for there to be gender parity in the House of Commons.  Troubling, 25% think it will never happen.  Equal Voice estimates that at the current rate, it will take 90 years before we achieve gender parity in the House of Commons.

3. Canadians have mixed views on what the biggest obstacle to electing more women to public office is. 30% think it’s fewer women run for office because of the negative, conflictual nature of politics; 28% say it’s because political parties don’t recruit enough women, while 26% point to the family obligations of women. However, we found some fascinating differences across gender and generations.

4. Few would recommend a woman they know well to run for public office and 22% would definitely not recommend a career in elected politics.

5. Women and men would focus on different issues if they ran for Parliament. When asked to identify 3 priorities their campaign would focus on if they ran for office, we found substantial differences between men and women.  Women were more likely to say they would campaign on making housing more affordable, improving public healthcare, and taking action to address climate change.  Men were more likely to focus on reducing public debt, cutting taxes for corporations, and spending more on public infrastructure.

THE POLITICAL GENDER GAP IN CANADA 

Most Canadians do not perceive a problem when it comes to the number of women elected to public office in Canada. Overall, 54% say the right number are elected, compared with 42% who feel there are too few. 4% feel there are too many women elected to public office.

However, we found sharp differences of opinion between men and women. 51% of Canadian women feel there are too few women in politics compared with 33% of men. In particular, young women (those aged 18 to 36) believe there is a problem, as 59% feel there are not enough women elected to public office.

For the most part, Canadians have a good sense of female representation in the House of Commons, but most Canadians overestimated the percentage of female representation there. Only 13% of respondents correctly identified the percentage within 3-percentage points of the actual number (26%), while 26% underestimated the number, and 60% overestimated female representation in the house.  In fact, 11% of respondents thought 50% or more of the seats in the House of Commons were represented by female MPs. Overall, the average estimate was 31% and we found no gender, age, or regional difference in the estimates.

However, when we compare estimates about the percentage of women in the House of Commons with views on whether there are too many or too few women in politics, we find a strong relationship.  Those who underestimate or correctly estimate the number of women in the House are more likely to feel there are too few women in politics than those who overestimate the number of women in the House.  This demonstrates the importance of raising awareness of the gender gap in Canadian politics.

Canadians also have mixed views about when or if Canada will achieve gender parity in its elected national legislature.  While 20% feel gender parity will be achieved by the 2023 federal election (6 years from now), almost a majority (46%) believe it will take at least 14 years to achieve parity, while 25% think it will never happen.

Equal Voice estimates that if current trends hold, it will take about 90 years before gender parity is reached in the House of Commons.  Only 32% of Canadians recognize the challenge at hand and feel that gender parity in the House will take longer than 22 years or may never happen at all.

Interestingly, women are more likely to think it will take longer to achieve parity. In fact, Millennial men (those aged 18 to 36) are the most “optimistic” thinking it parity will be achieved much sooner than any other age/gender group.

WHAT PREVENTS MORE WOMEN FROM BEING ELECTED? 

There is no consensus about why women aren’t being elected to public office in Canada.  When we asked what the biggest obstacle facing women entering politics was, 30% felt it was the negative nature of politics making it undesirable for women to run.  28% felt it was due to political parties failing to recruit women to run in winnable districts, while 26% felt it was because family obligations prevent women from considering a run for office.  Only 12% said that voters themselves don’t support female candidates, while 5% said it was a fundraising disadvantage.

When we compare responses by women and men, women are more likely to say political parties are to blame (32%) and were less likely to mention family obligations getting in the way.  Moreover, 17% of women felt that Canadians don’t want to vote for female candidates, 11-points more than male respondents.

Men, on the other hand, were more likely to say that the nature of politics and family obligations are the most significant obstacles, and were less likely to blame political parties.

There was also a substantial difference amongst women of different generations.  Millennial women were much less likely to cite family obligations as an obstacle, and more likely to reference political parties not recruiting women in winnable ridings and the nature of politics.

The same was true of men across generations.  Millennial men were less likely to say that family obligations represented a hurdle for women otherwise eager to enter politics. 

Despite the fact that many Canadians recognize that there aren’t enough women in politics, few would likely recommend a woman they know well to run for public office.  Only 18% say they are very likely to recommend running for office, while another 22% say they are likely to recommend it.  We find no real difference of opinion between men and women and among younger women.

 

We also find a relationship between what people perceive to be the biggest obstacle preventing women from running for office, and their likelihood to recommend running for public office to a woman they know well.

Those who say the biggest obstacles are Canadians not wanting to vote for women candidates, fundraising challenges, or political parties not recruiting enough women in winnable districts are more likely to recommend running for public office than those who think family obligations or the negativity of politics are the biggest barriers.  This suggests that perceptions about the obstacles to women being elected are related to willingness to encourage women to enter politics.  If you think that politics is nasty and full of conflict, you are much less likely to recommend a woman you know run for public office versus if you think the lack of parity is caused by Canadians not voting for women, women facing fundraising challenges, or political parties not doing their part to recruit women in winnable districts.

WHO ARE ROLE MODELS FOR YOUNG WOMEN TODAY?

Respondents were asked to name a female role model in politics for young women to aspire to unprompted.  The word clouds below report the most commonly mentioned individuals.  Those mentioned most often were Conservative Party Leader Rona Ambrose, Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, former UK PM Margaret Thatcher, former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former First Lady Michelle Obama, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and Premiers Christy Clark and Rachel Notley.

ALL RESPONDENTS

 

Among female respondents, Michelle Obama, Elizabeth May, Hillary Clinton, Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland, and Rona Ambrose were mentioned more frequently.

FEMALE RESPONDENTS

 

WOULD ELECTING MORE WOMEN IN PARLIAMENT CHANGE ANYTHING?

Academic research has shown that having more women in a legislature does change the focus and priorities of the legislative agenda.  In our survey, we tried to assess that ourselves by asking all respondents to cho0se which three issues they would make central to their campaign if they ran for Parliament.

Overall, the top three issues selected by all respondents were improving Canada’s public healthcare system (42%), cutting taxes for middle-class Canadians (36%), and reducing public debt and the budget deficit (29%).  Other highly ranked issues including increasing the number of reasonably paying jobs (22%), finding ways to make housing more affordable (22%), and reducing income inequality in Canada (21%).

But we did find substantive differences between the issues women and men selected.   Women were 9-points more likely to say they would campaign on making housing more affordable, 8-points more likely on improving the quality of healthcare, 6-points more likely on taking action to address climate change, and 5-points more likely on making childcare more affordable for parents.

In contrast, men were more likely to say their campaign would focus on reducing public debt and the budget deficit reducing public debt and the budget deficit (+9) and cutting taxes for corporations (+7).

There was no real gender difference on fighting crime, making education the best in the world, or creating new job opportunities for young people.

METHODOLOGY

Our survey was conducted online with 2,125 Canadians aged 18 and over from February 10 to 16, 2017. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of over 500,000 Canadians.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys.   The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of 2,150 is +/- 2.2%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

EQUAL VOICE

Equal Voice is a national, bilingual, multi-partisan organization dedicated to electing more women to all levels of political office in Canada.

Equal Voice regards the equal representation of women in Canada’s Parliament, in our provincial/territorial legislatures, and on municipal and band councils, as a fundamental question of fairness for women in terms of their access to Canada’s democratic institutions.

Founded in 2001, Equal Voice brings women and men together from across the political spectrum in its nine chapters across the country.  They include chapters in: British Columbia, Alberta (south and north), Ontario (Toronto and Ottawa), Saskatchewan, three of the four Atlantic provinces (Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, and New Brunswick), as well as a dynamic national youth chapter.

For more information, visit its website at https://www.equalvoice.ca/

ABACUS DATA INC.

We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value-added insight.  Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, Ph.D.

For more information, visit our website at http://www.abacusdata.ca/

MediaPolls

Is Prime Minister Trudeau losing the Millennials?

Recently, a CBC opinion journalist asserted that Millennials had “finally fallen out of love” with Justin Trudeau because of his decision not to pursue electoral reform. The argument was that electoral reform was so important to Millennials that this breach of faith was a final straw in the relationship.

Millennials are those born between 1980 and 2000. They are the largest generation in Canada and will make up the largest portion of the electorate in 2019 which will mark the end of Baby Boomer dominance in deciding elections. Millennial views matter more than ever. And the CBC column was correct in making the point that Millenials were drawn to the idea of electoral reform but in a recent CP article, I question whether it was a primary reason for their strong support for the Liberals in 2015.

However, there’s a problem with the CBC “fallen out of love” assertion. It doesn’t square with the evidence.

We conducted a large survey of over 4,000 Canadian adults in mid-February including 783 voting age Millennials (18 to 36). We compared this data with our post-election data from October 2015. (Note, this is a different survey than the data we released yesterday. I’m using this data because of the much larger sample size, even though it’s a week older).

A quick look at the data finds:

• The Liberals would do about as well today with Millennials (42%) as they did in October 2015 (44%).

• Compared with our post-election survey in October 2015, the Liberals are down 2, the Tories are up 3, and the NDP is down 5. The Greens are up 5.

• The Liberals hold a wide lead among Millennial men and women and across all age groups.

• The Liberals have a substantial lead among Millennials in BC (15 points), in Ontario (24), and in Quebec (28). The Liberals trail the Conservatives in Prairies, which is true among older age groups as well.

• In mid-February, 53% of Millennials say they approve of the job the federal government and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is doing while 29% disapprove. Millennials are 9-points more likely to approve than older generations.

The Liberals may or may not keep Millennials in their corner when the next election rolls around. But the evidence simply does not support the argument that Millennials have “fallen out of love” with the Liberals so far. While our surveys show that the Liberals are seeing a tighter competition with the Conservatives, this has more to do with narrowing among older voters. Millennials continue to be a core support group for the federal Liberal coalition at least for the time being.

Naturally, there’s a difference between news coverage and opinion pieces, but I still feel it’s reasonable to expect some evidence to back up an inaccurate observation that is presented as a fact, as was the case in the CBC piece.

Methodology

Our survey was conducted online with 4,173 Canadians aged 18 and over from February 10 to 16, 2017. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of over 500,000 Canadians.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys.   The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of 4,173 is +/- 1.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Abacus Data

We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value-added insight.  Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, Ph.D.

We also operate Canadian Millennials, one of the most comprehensive resource websites for all things Millennials in Canada.  Contact David today to learn more.

Canadian PoliticsMediaPolls

Federal Politics More Competitive; Reviews of Trudeau Trump Meeting Are Positive

The Canadian political dynamic is more competitive, largely because of shifting results in Ontario: where the Liberal brand has lost a bit of appeal and we see strengthening interest in the Conservatives.  In BC, the Liberals remain well ahead, but the NDP have picked up some ground in the last couple of months.

Nationally, 40% would vote Liberal today, the same number as supported the party in last October’s federal election.  32% would vote Conservative, also equal to the result they achieved last election. Just 16% would vote NDP, which is four points lower than the party’s 2015 election result.

The gap between the two largest parties has narrowed from 21 points in November to 8 points today. This gap remains wide in Atlantic Canada, Quebec, and fairly wide in BC, but is now virtually non-existent in Ontario.

Much of the loss in support for the Liberals has come from those who self-identify as left or centre-left on the political spectrum.  In December, 56% of those on the left supported the Liberal.  Today, it’s 47%, a decline of 9 points.  There has not been any change in support for the Liberals among those in the centre (unchanged from December) or on the right (down 1).

GOVERNMENT APPROVAL

Today, 49% approve of the performance of the government, while 33% disapprove.

Approval levels have dropped 8 points from their peak last August, and disapproval rose by 9 points.  During these months, the Trudeau government made several choices that likely disappointed some on the right, as well as some on the left, of the spectrum.  Major announcements included high profile policy choices to tax carbon, approve pipelines, and shelve plans to reform the electoral system.

Ottawa’s approval rating is highest in Atlantic Canada (60%), BC (58%), and Quebec (54%) while lowest in Alberta (30%). While our ballot preference question shows a dead heat in Ontario, the Trudeau government approval rating in the province actually improved slightly from December 2016.

(This finding suggests that the appearance of a tighter federal contest may have at least something to do with the downward pressure on the Liberal brand for the provincial Liberal Party.  The Ontario Liberal Party is trailing the Conservatives by 14 points in the average of recent provincial polls, and Premier Wynne is struggling with a 70% unfavourable rating.)

The toughest market for the Trudeau government remains Alberta where net approval has continued to decline.

80% of those who said they voted Liberal in 2015 say they approve of the job performance of the federal government.  Only 9% disapprove.  Almost half of NDP voters approve (46%) while fewer than one in five Conservative voters (17%) feel positive about the federal government’s performance.  Looking back to January 2016, the most notable movement has been a shift downward among NDP voters.

 

ASSESSING PM TRUDEAU’S VISIT TO WASHINGTON

Public reactions to the visit by Prime Minister Trudeau to Washington to meet President Trump have generally been quite positive reactions:

• Most (67%) said they thought the PM did a good job representing Canadian interests, another 35% said he did an acceptable job. Only 8% felt he did a bad job.  These views were unusually similar across partisan and ideological groups.

• Most Canadians (72%) think Mr. Trudeau will be able to have as good a relationship with the US president as is possible, while 28% believe another Canadian leader would do better. 92% of Liberal voters and 78% of NDP voters feel Trudeau will be able to have a good relationship with President Trump as possible, as do 41% of Conservative voters.

• When asked if Stephen Harper or Justin Trudeau would do better in managing Canada’s relationship with President Trump, 60% said Trudeau would. Liberal and NDP voters broadly preferred Mr. Trudeau while 84% of Conservatives preferred Mr. Harper.

• A substantial majority (68%) said that Mr. Trudeau struck the right balance in how he approached the US President, while 32% said they thought the Canadian PM should have been more forceful in making the point that many Canadians do not agree with some of Mr. Trump’s policies. Notably, partisan differences on this question were quite mild.

UPSHOT

According to Bruce Anderson:

“Having made a series of policy choices that were bound to disappoint or frustrate some voters in recent months, it’s not surprising that our polling is showing some softening and a more competitive dynamic.

At the same time, it’s important to distinguish the driving forces behind the shifting landscape.  Alberta Conservatives are more unhappy than they were.  In BC, the Liberals have seen some ground gained by the NDP, which likely has had to do with decisions on electoral reform and pipelines.  In Ontario, the prudent analysis is to disentangle whether voters are softening on the federal Liberals as opposed to expressing frustrations with their Liberal Premier.  We’ll return to that in our next survey.

Reactions to Mr. Trudeau’s visit with President Trump signal ongoing confidence in how Mr. Trudeau is representing Canada’s values and interests in his international affairs work. Many Canadians have discomfort with some of the approaches taken by the US President, but it’s clear that they see the Prime Minister as having a responsibility to build a constructive dialog, given the importance of the economic relationship, and the strong links that exist between our countries, separate and apart from politics.”

According to David Coletto:

“The political landscape in Canada is far more competitive today than only a few months ago.  The post-election boost in Liberal support has subsided and we have reverted to vote intentions that closely mirror the results of the last federal election.

Government approval is down below 50% for the first time since the election but apart from those in Alberta, Canadians in others regions of the country continue to show substantial support for the government’s performance.  35% or less disapprove of the Trudeau’s government’s performance in Atlantic Canada, Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia.

We suspect that the unpopularity of the Wynne government in Ontario is putting pressure on the Liberal brand in the province which may help explains the gap between approval ratings and vote intentions.”

DOWNLOAD THIS RELEASE

METHODOLOGY

Our survey was conducted online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from February 17 to 19, 2017. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of over 500,000 Canadians.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys.   The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of 1,500 is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

ABACUS DATA INC.

We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value-added insight.  Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, Ph.D.

MediaPolls