Friday, November 12, 2010

NDP held massive lead on eve of Campbell departure

Taken shortly before Gordon Campbell's announcement that he would resign as BC Premier as soon as a replacement was found, an Angus-Reid poll placed the opposition BC New Democrats well ahead of Campbell's government.With 47%, the BC New Democrats had lost two points from Angus-Reid's last BC poll taken in mid-October, but still held a very comfortable lead. Campbell's BC Liberals were at 26%, a gain of two points but still well below the party's 2009 election result.

The Greens and BC Conservatives were tied at 10%, representing a three point loss for the Greens and a two point gain for the BC Conservatives.

The BC NDP led in all parts of the province, with 44% in Vancouver, 45% in the Interior, 51% on Vancouver Island, and 57% in the North.

Liberal support ranged between 20% and 31%, while the Greens did better in Vancouver (13%) but worse in the North (2%).

The BC Conservatives are running a strong third in the Interior, with 18%.

This poll would give the BC New Democrats a majority government with 70 seats. The party would sweep all 14 seats on Vancouver Island, and win 22 in the Interior, seven in the North, and 27 in and around Vancouver.

The Liberals would be reduced to 12 seats, all won in Vancouver.

Independents would win two seats, one in the North and one in Vancouver, while the Greens would win one seat in Vancouver.

UPDATE: I did not incorporate the "ballot box factor" in this projection. This is the difference between what pollsters report and what actually happens on voting day. I have added this factor to the projection model for British Columbia and will use it in the future. Had I used it for this projection, I would not have awarded a seat to the BC Greens. It would have gone to the BC Liberals instead.

If there is one bit of silver lining in this poll for the BC Liberals as they head into a leadership convention, it is that 28% of British Columbians prefer that the next electoral outcome be a BC Liberal government with someone other than Gordon Campbell as leader. But the NDP still holds the edge, with 32% preferring that they form the next government. Only 6% preferred a re-elected Campbell government.

31 comments:

  1. The interesting part of this poll is the "2013 government preference" question:

    1. NDP - 32%;
    2. Liberal - 34% (6% with Campbell/28% without Campbell);

    That just shows how soft and tepid current NDP support is - and that was BEFORE Campbell stepped down taking all his negatives with him.

    NDP leader Carole James has a paltry 25% approval rating, albeit much better than Campbell's 12%. At least 6 NDP constituency associations have also called for James to step down and for a leadership convention.

    It will also be interesting to see how the "party preference numbers" will shape up in the next round of polling now that Campbell is actually gone.

    And then Campbell's replacement. Another Ipsos poll released AFTER Campbell stepped down shows that Surrey mayor Dianne Watts is far out in front in terms of popularity with BC'ers, which would further change the political dynamic.

    Most pundits believe that Watts will not step into the ring and she has stated that her family and the leadership date are prime considerations in that decision.

    Watts will hold a news conference sometime next week to make her intentions known.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Keith Martin needs to take over the Liberals and gain back the support they have lost.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Keith Martin would be just the person to drive the BC Liberals even further into the ground what with his outspoken lobbying for the end of medicare etc...

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Keith Martin would be just the person to drive the BC Liberals even further into the ground what with his outspoken lobbying for the end of medicare etc..."

    It's called a two-tier system, it makes sense and BC already has private health clincs.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yeah BC has plenty of private clinics, nobody has a problem with it except people who vote NDP anyways.

    Keith Martin would be a good choice.

    Basically the Liberals need someone who is right wing to be leader.

    Otherwise the right will split away and the NDP will sweep.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am not sure why people feel that the Liberals HAVE TO gain power again. The NDP in BC follows a rather centrist agenda already. One only needs to think Michael Harcourt on the massive neoliberal agenda pursued in the 90s for evidences. Sure there were some spending programmes that became disaster and a couple of scandals but government of all stripes are guilty of this.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well, if the BC Liberals want to go into the next election on a platform of two-tiered health care and the destruction of Medicare as we know it - the chances of an NDP win in the subsequent election would promptly go from 95% certain to about 99% certain.

    Even a rightwing fanatic like Gordon Campbell wasn't willing to touch that third rail.

    ReplyDelete
  8. DL the fact is that Gordon Campbell has a record of expanding private care options in BC.

    And he won re-election. Twice.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Even a rightwing fanatic like Gordon Campbell wasn't willing to touch that third rail."

    I've lived in BC for about eight years now and still don't understand how Campbell has earned the rightwing fanatic label. He introduced a carbon tax, the HST, and has invested heavily in green energy. None of those strike me as particularly rightwing. Just because he doesn't go out of his way to drive business out of the province, as the NDP did, doesn't make him some kind of rabid neocon. Sure he cut spending in his first few years of government, but that was only because BC couldn't afford the spending at the time. Since then, healthcare and education spending has steadily increased. I think the "rightwing fanatic" label is applied to any politician a person happens not to like.

    Carole James opposed the carbon tax and HST. I'm going to start calling her a rightwing fanatic :o)

    ReplyDelete
  10. I doubt the Liberals would go into an election with a platform based just on two-tier health care. As well with a two-tier health care system already in place why would they mention it?

    ReplyDelete
  11. ...right now the only real issue is the h.s.t. if the new liberal leader knows what's good for them they will move forward the date on the h.s.t. referendum or just outright return to the old taxing regime.. i don't think that people are happy about the new drinking and driving regulations and the way they are being enforced either... the recall campaigns are also going to be interesting to watch as a switch of 7 seats would give the ndp a majority of i believe 43-41 seats with 1 independent... it would be kinda cool to see Diane Watts enter the ring and see a race between two women... it must be tempting to her to be anointed premier with her approval rating's sky high and 2+ years to govern before an election..

    ReplyDelete
  12. kevin michael returning to the old tax would be a disaster in my opinion.

    Liberal economic doctrine is to increase consumption taxes while decreasing income taxes.

    That's what Campbell did. But the thing is that it hurts the lower and middle class.

    So he finally increased welfare a few years ago and has all kinds of low income rebates.


    Basically the only people getting screwed are the middle class. The rich and poor are taken care of.

    Instead of cancelling the HST i'd scrap the 15% income tax deducation and instead lower the sales tax by 2%.

    ReplyDelete
  13. kevin michael,

    It will cost like $5 billion to get rid of the HST do you really think it would make sense to move up the referendum when people are still sooking about it or wait till they cool down a bit and realize it's not that big of a deal?

    As well Carole James will probably be gone as NDP leader soon so she'd have to be replaced by a woman and the Liberals would still need to pick a woman for the 2013 election for it to be a battle of the women.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "it must be tempting to her to be anointed premier with her approval rating's sky high and 2+ years to govern before an election.."

    That is also likely to be 2+ years of having to govern in a terrible economic and fiscal climate and have to make some very unpopular decisions. Its easy to be popular when you have no record and have never taken a position on any issue. The BC electorate tend to be very unforgiving of incumbent premiers. If Dianne Watts became BC Liberal leader I would say give her six until she's introduced a throne speech and a budget and watch her quickly become the most hated woman in BC.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Where does someone come up with the idea of two-tiered health care?

    BC is in top place in Canada in terms of health outcomes and also has the healthiest population in Canada. Health care doesn't even seem to be a "top of the mind" issue for BC voters and I don't see the NDP bringing it up much either.

    As for the HST, when it was first introduced there was 85% opposition but this ARS poll shows that opposition slipping with now only 66% wanting it scrapped. Alot of that anti-HST sentiment was also directed at Campbell.

    With Campbell gone, I'd wager that opposition to the HST will continue to slip as time goes on especially considering that the HST referendum won't take place until September, 2011. The issue is now in the people's hands, not the politicians.

    Strangely enough, NDP MLA Bob Simpson and former interim NDP leader Dan Miller also are now on record in support of the HST and the NDP doesn't have a clear position on what it would do with same.

    And as for recall campaigns in the early new year, the momentum in the anti-HST campaign has run its course and with Campbell resigning that further takes away from any success. The bar for successful recall is too high in any event.

    Out of 20 recall campaigns in the past only one has ever been successful and that was due to the fraudulent personal transgressions of an MLA. That was the intent and purpose of the legislation in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  16. DL said - "If Dianne Watts became BC Liberal leader I would say give her six until she's introduced a throne speech and a budget and watch her quickly become the most hated woman in BC."
    ___________________________________

    I would wager that if Dianne Watts became leader of the Liberals her approval ratings would skyrocket to the levels of Gary Doer in MB (60%+), Brad Wall in SK (73%) or Danny Williams in Nfld (80%+).

    You obviously aren't from BC as it's clear that you don't know the lady. She's a rare breed of politician and it's no wonder that her approval ratings are sky high with BC'ers as confirmed by Ipsos. Watts also has the support of many moderate New Democrats.

    I believe this letter to the Vancouver Sun sums Watts up nicely:
    _______________________

    "Although we've voted NDP since 1974, if Dianne Watts was premier my wife and I would vote Liberal.

    This well-respected mayor of Surrey is intelligent, charismatic, fair, honest, trustworthy, politically experienced, leads people well and gets positive results without offending the public.

    We need someone like her to lead B.C. into political harmony and prosperity. Lord knows it's a long time overdue.

    Marcel Hill
    Surrey

    http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Dianne+Watts+premier/3811033/story.html#ixzz15BLyTnQZ
    _______________________

    The question remains - Will Watts go for it?

    ReplyDelete
  17. I find it amusing how when the HST was introduced, the BC Liberals went to great lengths to tell everyone that it was 100% REVENUE NEUTRAL and would not create one penny of extra tax revenue for the provincial government. Now they claim that getting rid of it will cost the government $5 billion. So were they lying then or are they lying now or are they lying both times?

    ReplyDelete
  18. DL said: "Now they claim that getting rid of it will cost the government $5 billion. So were they lying then or are they lying now or are they lying both times?"
    _________________________________

    I'm don't want to sound like a Liberal apologist but here are the facts.

    That $5 billion figure was derived from documents obtained through an FOI request by the Globe and Mail from internal Ministry of Finance documents.

    And that was if the HST was terminated WITHOUT the PST re-instated. The 7% PST brought in about $5 billion/year into provincial coffers. A zero sum game.

    Of course, if the HST was extinguished the PST will be bought back, so that $5 billion figure is a moot point.

    Even BC Finance Minister Colin Hanson confirmed that yesterday.

    ReplyDelete
  19. so now that we know that there is no cost to getting rid of the HST and going back to the old system - why not do it - and as for the $1.5 billion bribe that Harper paid BC to get them to bring in the HST - I think the BC government should simply refuse to pay the money back and if Harper makes a fuss - all the BC parties can ask people in BC to vote ABC in the spring federal election and tell Harper to give up on the money or watch every single Tory MP in BC get crushed.

    ReplyDelete
  20. DL,

    You are a wickedly clever political strategist. I sincerely hope we are on the same side!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Ron he's not on your side, I believe DL is NDP and you're Liberal these days.

    Nor is it a good strategy.

    If the feds want their money back they can simply deduct the cost from future transfer payments.

    Its also insulting to British Columbians.

    We're not the type to take something for nothing.

    Exploiting tax payers in the rest of Canada for a free lunch doesn't fly out west.

    (Even if that's how things might be done back east.)

    ReplyDelete
  22. DL said - "as for the $1.5 billion bribe that Harper paid BC to get them to bring in the HST - I think the BC government should simply refuse to pay the money back and if Harper makes a fuss - all the BC parties can ask people in BC to vote ABC in the spring federal election and tell Harper to give up on the money or watch every single Tory MP in BC get crushed."
    ___________________________

    You must be kidding..... right???

    Jack Layton goes to Nova Scotia and says that they are "fiscally prudent" when the NDP government ups their HST rate from 13% to 15%.

    You want Jack Layton to come to BC, with a different message, and tell them that they should keep the $1.6 billion HST inducement and cancel the HST?

    And then Layton goes back to Ontario and tells them that they can't do same with their $4 billion+ inducement if they keep the HST?

    What would Quebec then think when they have not even received any federal financial inducement for their quasi-HST at all?

    What you are saying will crush the NDP federally in Canada esp. in BC when voters already know that, with their rejection of the HST, BC would be stealing money from the federal crown for wrongful purposes.

    That's not a populist issue in BC and both the provincial NDP and federal NDP will dismiss that tactic forthwith.

    In fact, this matter has already been previously vetted on CKNW, the radio station in western Canada with the highest ratings.

    The overwhelming consensus was to repay the funds to Ottawa.

    Now your idea might work in Ontario as they also overwhelmingly oppose the HST. Let Ontario take the stand that they won't repay the $4 billion if they remove the HST.

    I'll just sit back here in BC, grab a bag of popcorn, and watch that entertainment unfold.

    ReplyDelete
  23. In any case what right did Harper have to WASTE billions of dollars of OUR money bribing provinces to bring in the Harper Sales Tax??? Think of all the better things that money could have been used for. That will be the ballot question in the next federal election.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Shadow,

    "Ron he's not on your side, I believe DL is NDP and you're Liberal these days."

    Thanks, Shadow. Yes. I suspect I'm about to go to the barricades on the Afghanistan extension. If things actually go there, I imagine my leader will have about as much fondness for me as the last one did!

    Ain't politics a peach. Retirement is looking even better -- with each passing day...

    ReplyDelete
  25. A) HST won't be a federal ballot question, although the NDP will try to make it one (and fail because its associated with the premiers.)

    B) Harper didn't WASTE any money.

    All provinces get HST transition compensation.

    It goes towards things like health and education.

    Seems like a pretty darn important use for that money.

    I guess the NDP doesn't like health and education now.

    ReplyDelete
  26. If the HST "transition money" actually all goes to health and education - then why not simply give it to all provinces regardless of whether they want to buy into the Harper Sales Tax? The Harper Sales Tax is a federal policy and the since there will probably be a federal election before voters in BC and Ontario get a chance to punish their provincial governments for their complicity - the next federal election will be a golden opportunity for people in Ontario and BC to gve a big fat thumbs down to the Harper Sales Tax by voting against the Harper Sales Tax Party (aka the Conservative Party). Pass me the popcorn, this will be good!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Come on Shadow. Quebec got zip and will continue to get double zip because she refuses to accept a return to federal administration.

    This Prime Minister wants to rip the Mulroney-Bourassa accord to shreds but that isn't on -- and will never be as long as Quebec remains in the federation.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Ron Quebec's policy is a waste of money.

    They are paying for a seperate tax collection agency based in Quebec instead of letting Ottawa take over.

    If Quebec wants transition funding they'll need to have an HST based out of Ottawa.


    The idea of a "bribe" is for the federal government to create an incentive for the provinces to do the right thing.

    The money isn't "wasted". Here in BC it was used for health and education.

    It would be nice if they'd just do it on their own ...

    But you can be against the bribery aspect without making silly claims like the PM is wasting money that could be put to better use.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Great news from BC, the BC Liberals are going to have a long drawn out process to choose a new weighted preferential voting scheme to pick a new leader and it looks like they won't pick a new leader until may 2011 - so six more months for Gordon campbell to keep running his party right into the ground. Oh and BTW: Dianne Watts announced today that she has no interest in provincial politics and will not run for the BC Liberal leadership. So no Dianne Watts, no Carole Taylor - six more months of Gordon Campbell. That means that the next leader will be some discredited retread from the current cabinet of nobodies and Campbell yes-men. I think we can start the count down until the BC Liberals suffer a Tories in 1993 style wipeout.

    ReplyDelete
  30. A Tory '93 wipe out for the BC Liberals is not out of the question.

    Vote splitting caused the downfall of that party in '93.

    If the Liberals don't elect a right wing leader then the BC Conservatives under Tory MP John Cummins will likely play the role of reform in '93.

    OR they may be the ADQ in the Quebec election before last.


    Perhaps they'll catch fire and take the prize for themselves. The NDP is just so unpopular that a new, non-liberal, non-Campbell right wing party might steal the win from the NDP.

    ReplyDelete
  31. With Dianne Watts out of the picture, former cabinet minister Blair Lekstrom, now an "outsider", looks like the Liberal candidate to beat at the end of the day.

    Lekstrom has positive approval ratings and he will be entering the race sometime in the future.

    As former NDP strategist Bill Tieleman stated last week, the two candidates that the NDP should be most worried about are Watts and Lekstrom.

    The leadership convention date hasn't been announced and will likely be in March sometime.

    ReplyDelete

COMMENT MODERATION POLICY - Please be respectful when commenting. If choosing to remain anonymous, please sign your comment with some sort of pseudonym to avoid confusion. Please do not use any derogatory terms for fellow commenters, parties, or politicians. Inflammatory and overly partisan comments will not be posted. PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSION ON TOPIC.