Monday, June 23, 2008

Turns Out Canadians Give a Shift

Harris Decima has released the first post Green Shift poll. Hey Stephie they like it. They really like it...Even in Quebec. C'est bon, non?

But once the policy was explained to respondents, the Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey found, close to half - 47 per cent - liked the idea, while 39 per cent said they were opposed.

The key finding, said pollster Bruce Anderson, is that Canadians who did not describe themselves as Conservatives were favourably disposed to the idea of a revenue-neutral carbon tax.

Two-thirds of Liberals, 59 per cent of New Democrats, 62 per cent Parti Quebecois supporters and 48 per cent of Green Party supporters said they were in favour of the policy - all, except for the Green Party, by wide margins.

The Liberal green plan is also finding double-digit support among women (48 per cent in favour, 34 per cent opposed), voters under 35 years of age (61 versus 26), and in voters east of the Ontario-Manitoba border (49 versus 37), all segments the Conservatives need in order to win a majority.


televox said...

This just goes to show that left leaning voters will get behind any half-baked plan no matter how much it will hurt the economy or how little it will actually do for the environment. Companies will simply pass the expense on to the consumer in higher prices, be it for fuel, food, cars (even the energy efficient kind), and so on.
I'd like to see this poll done in the west.
I'd also like to see Dion fight an election on this platform, because he will be completely DECIMATED. I know no one who supports this 'crazy' tax-and-spend scheme...

James Curran said...

The sky is falling. The sky is falling....good copy of the Conservative talking points though.

Hey this guy will listen to you though.

jaybird said...

James: I don't see anything that suggests that progressive voters prefer Carbon Tax to Cap and Trade. Favourably disposed does not suggest to me that it will drive PQ and NDP supporters to the Libs over the plans presented by their own parties. In terms of swing voters...again you don't report they prefer Carbon Tax over Cap and Trade.

Clearly progressive voters believe that carbon needs to be priced so if the question is Carbon Tax over doing surprise the express their support.

I am not surprised to see that GPC supporters aren't too keen on LPoC plan. I think that as they watch a central plank from their policy book being poorly pitched that support number will fall even more.

Jason Hickman said...

From the article you cited ...

But once the policy was explained to respondents...

Much would depend on exactly how the policy was "explained", no?

From the same article:

The survey results showing strong initial support among non-Conservatives came after respondents were read a description of the policy that, while it used fairly neutral language, nevertheless presented the policy as the Liberals would wish. [emphasis added]

I'm *not* accusing H-Decima of being deceptive. But presumably, not all commentary on the Green Shift (assuming the Libs get to keep the name!) will "present the policy as the Liberals would wish".

wilson said...

All fine and dandy James, to explain the implimentation of the Green Shift,
not the consequences.
How would those same people have voted (only half liked the positive side) if they were told:

''....For example, last year, Ontario's five generating stations that run on fossil fuels produced just over 28 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.

As a result, Dion's scheme would slap a whopping tax of $1.1 billion just on those five power stations, increasing the cost of operating them by a staggering 80% or more.

As the spokesman for Ontario Power says, someone would have to pay....'

Yah, let's have that debate.

James Curran said...

Maybe the head of Ontario Power could start with giving back $1million in salary per annum.

James Curran said...

As for your question Jason. It clearly states how the plan was explained. You did read that, right?

Jason Hickman said...

Of course. As I noted, it was arguably explained "as the Liberals would wish", which helps explain the positive score.

Look, this should hardly be a controversial point, but I'll say it again: how a policy is explained, or even described, matters when you're doing surveys. I can still remember the '88 campaign, when polls that called the original FTA "the Mulroney-Reagan free trade deal" showed an appreciably lower level of support than ones that called it "the Canada-US free trade treaty".

The language in this case, according to the CTV website, explained the GS policy just about exactly as the LPC thinks it will work. Not surprisingly, it resulted in a more positive result than a negative description would have.