Opinion polling for the 2006 Canadian federal election

Opinion polling in the Canadian federal election of 2006 (held on 23 January 2006) showed a long period of variable support for the governing Liberal Party of Canada and opposition Conservative Party of Canada. Prior to and throughout much of the campaign, the Liberals held a small lead over the Conservatives; as of early January 2006, the Conservatives had taken the lead. This was confirmed on election day when the Conservatives won a plurality of votes and seats, being empowered to form a minority government in the 39th Canadian parliament.

__TOC__

Summary In the leadup to the 2006 federal election, several opinion polls were commissioned to gauge the voting intentions of Canadians, particularly in the wake of Jean Brault's testimony at the Gomery Commission on 7 April 2005. The results of these polls showed a dip in support for the Liberals, which encouraged the Conservatives to seek an early election by tabling a non-confidence motion. However, Liberal support recovered following an agreement with the New Democratic Party (NDP) to support some changes to the federal budget and a number of incidents involving Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) Gurmant Grewal that hurt the Conservatives. Consistently since the Brault testimony, the polls have indicated that an election would result in an increase in the number of seats for the Bloc Québécois and NDP, and cyclical gains and losses for the Conservatives inversely to the Liberals.

In November 2005, the first report by Justice John Gomery was released to the public; subsequently, the poll numbers for the Liberals again dropped. Just days later, a new poll (Strategic Counsel: 6 November 2005) showed the Liberals were already bouncing back. On 28 November 2005, the minority Liberal government succumbed to another Conservative non-confidence motion supported by the three opposition parties and the writs for an election were dropped. The Conservatives achieved near parity but, early in the campaign, again fell back behind the Liberals. Renewed accusations of corruption and impropriety at the end of 2005 – amid Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) criminal probes concerning possible government leaks regarding income trust tax changes and advertising sponsorships – led to an upswing of Conservative support again and gave them a lead over the Liberals, portending a possible change in government.

Polling figures for the NDP increased slightly, while Bloc figures experienced a slight dip; figures for the Green Party did not change appreciably throughout the campaign.

Poll results

The dates listed are normally the date the survey was concluded. Most news and political affairs sources use the convention of using the last date that the poll was conducted in order to establish the inclusion/exclusion of current events.

Polling firm Last dateof polling Link LPC CPC NDP BQ GPC Marginof error Samplesize Polling method Lead Election 30.2 36.3 17.5 10.5 4.5 N/A 14,817,159 6.1 Strategic CounselPDF273719116± 2%2,500 10Nanos ResearchPDF30.136.417.410.65.6± 3.1% 1,200 (1/3)Telephone (rolling) 6.3Ipsos-ReidHTML273819124± 1.1%9,648 11Nanos ResearchPDF28.137.017.711.36.0± 3.1% 1,200 (1/3)Telephone (rolling) 8.9Strategic Counsel21 January 2006PDF273718116± 2.2%2,000 10Nanos Research20 January 2006PDF29.436.217.311.06.1± 3.1% 1,200 (1/3)Telephone (rolling) 6.8EKOS20 January 2006PDF26.9 37.119.511.54.6 10.2EKOS20 January 2006PDF24.4 38.419.811.95.4 14Ipsos-Reid19 January 2006PDF26 3819115 12EKOS19 January 2006PDF27.0 37.119.711.24.5 10.1Strategic Counsel19 January 2006PDF28 3817117 10Nanos Research19 January 2006PDF29.0 35.518.811.15.6± 2.9%1,200 (1/3)Telephone (rolling)6.5EKOS19 January 2006PDF27.3 37.420.810.13.9 9.9Strategic Counsel18 January 2006PDF28 3716127 9Nanos Research18 January 2006PDF30.7 37.016.610.74.9 6.3EKOS18 January 2006PDF29.3 35.118.012.64.4 5.8Leger Marketing17 January 2006PDF29 381711 9Strategic Counsel17 January 2006PDF25 4117125 16Nanos Research17 January 2006PDF31.5 36.917.610.04.0 5.4EKOS17 January 2006PDF27.2 36.919.611.04.8 9.7Strategic Counsel16 January 2006PDF24 4217125 18Nanos Research16 January 2006PDF30 3718104 7EKOS16 January 2006PDF29.6 35.819.411.63.4 6.2Decima Research15 January 2006PDF27 371811± 3.1%1017telephone 10Ipsos-Reid15 January 2006PDF26 3819125 12Strategic Counsel15 January 2006PDF27 4016116 13Nanos Research15 January 2006PDF29 3718115 8EKOS15 January 2006PDF27.2 38.618.610.64.4± 3.2968Telephone11.4Nanos Research14 January 2006PDF30 3817106 8Strategic Counsel14 January 2006PDF27 401611613Nanos Research13 January 2006PDF29 38161179Strategic Counsel12 January 2006PDF28 381611610Ipsos-Reid12 January 2006HTML2937181058Nanos Research12 January 2006PDF314014106 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)9EKOS12 January 2006PDF28.337.618.111.63.7 ± 2.0 2,0459.3EKOS12 January 2006PDF27.438.118.111.54.510.7Strategic Counsel11 January 2006PDF27391612612Nanos Research11 January 2006PDF293816125 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)9EKOS11 January 2006PDF28.836.317.913.32.87.5Strategic Counsel10 January 2006PDF283916121,50011Nanos Research10 January 2006PDF303916124 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)9EKOS10 January 2006PDF29.937.117.611.63.27.2Strategic Counsel9 January 2006PDF28381612610Nanos Research9 January 2006PDF313517135 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)4EKOS9 January 2006PDF26.839.116.212.65.412.3Ipsos-Reid8 January 2006PDF26371813511Decima Research8 January 2006PDF2736201159Nanos Research8 January 2006PDF313417116 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)3Strategic Counsel8 January 2006PDF293715136 ± 2.5 1,500 8Nanos Research7 January 2006PDF323417116 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)2Nanos Research6 January 2006PDF323517106 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)3Ipsos-Reid5 January 2006PDF313518105 ± 2.2 2,0044EKOS5 January 2006PDF30.836.017.510.64.7 ± 2.21,9685.2Strategic Counsel5 January 2006PDF3133171362Nanos Research5 January 2006PDF333417115 ± 3.2 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)1Leger Marketing4 January 2006PDF3234161152Strategic Counsel4 January 2006PDF3232171360Nanos Research4 January 2006PDF333515125 ± 3.2 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)2EKOS4 January 2006PDF30.436.217.910.44.7 ± 2.7 1,3865.8Strategic Counsel3 January 2006HTML323217136 ± 2.5 1,500 0Nanos Research3 January 2006PDF33 3615134 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling) 3Strategic Counsel31 December 2005PDF333117146 2Nanos Research30 December 2005PDF353514134 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling) 0Ipsos-Reid30 December 2005PDF323318125 ± 3.1 1,000 Telephone 1Decima Research30 December 2005PDF32301814 2Nanos Research29 December 2005PDF353414135 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)1Nanos Research28 December 2005PDF383214134 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling)6Nanos Research23 December 2005PDF383115125 ± 3.1 1,200 (1/3) Telephone (rolling) 7Ipsos-Reid22 December 2005PDF333216135 ± 3.1 1,000 Telephone1Strategic Counsel22 December 2005PDF3629171357Nanos Research22 December 2005PDF39291512510Environics21 December 2005HTML353017125 ± 3.1 1,0105Strategic Counsel21 December 2005PDF3330181453Leger Marketing21 December 2005PDF3628171258Nanos Research21 December 2005PDF3729151268Strategic Counsel20 December 2005PDF3430161554Nanos Research20 December 2005PDF3731141366Strategic Counsel19 December 2005PDF3329171564Nanos Research19 December 2005PDF3729161358Strategic Counsel18 December 2005PDF3429191355Pollara19 December 2005HTML37341710 3Nanos Research18 December 2005PDF3829161249Nanos Research17 December 2005PDF3830151348Nanos Research16 December 2005PDF3931141258Strategic Counsel15 December 2005PDF3430181354Nanos Research15 December 2005PDF3933121256Strategic Counsel14 December 2005PDF3430171454Nanos Research14 December 2005PDF3932121257Leger Marketing13 December 2005PDF3529171266Strategic Counsel13 December 2005PDF3429171465Nanos Research13 December 2005PDF3831141257Strategic Counsel12 December 2005PDF333117136 2Nanos Research12 December 2005PDF3830131458Ipsos-Reid11 December 2005PDF3627171459Pollara11 December 2005HTML38301512 8Strategic Counsel11 December 2005PDF3430161464Nanos Research11 December 2005PDF3931141348Strategic Counsel10 December 2005PDF3530151465Nanos Research10 December 2005PDF3932141347Decima Research9 December 2005PDF3627201349Nanos Research9 December 2005PDF3930151149Strategic Counsel8 December 2005PDF3628161468Nanos Research8 December 2005PDF41261811415Ipsos-Reid8 December 2005PDF3430151454Leger Marketing7 December 2005PDF39271612512Strategic Counsel7 December 2005PDF3630151456Nanos Research7 December 2005PDF40261811414Strategic Counsel6 December 2005PDF3529161366Nanos Research6 December 2005PDF40281711412Decima Research5 December 200534262014 8Strategic Counsel5 December 2005PDF3529161466Nanos Research5 December 2005PDF3830161258Strategic Counsel4 December 2005PDF3529161466Nanos Research4 December 2005PDF3730161357Strategic Counsel3 December 2005HTML3430161464Nanos Research3 December 2005PDF3829151459Nanos Research2 December 2005PDF3631141455Ipsos-Reid1 December 2005PDF3331171452Strategic Counsel1 December 2005HTML3530161465Nanos Research1 December 2005PDF3729151458EKOS1 December 2005PDF34.127.418.414.06.06.7Strategic Counsel30 November 2005PDF3530171455Ipsos-Reid28 November 2005HTML3131181550Decima Research28 November 200536281912 8Strategic Counsel27 November 2005PDF3529171456Pollara27 November 2005HTML36311614 5Environics25 November 20053530201415EKOS24 November 2005PDF38.729.416.910.63.09.3Ipsos-Reid24 November 2005HTML3430161554Ipsos-Reid15 November 20053627161369Decima Research14 November 2005PDF33262213 7Pollara13 November 2005362820 8Nanos Research13 November 2005PDF3428201446Ipsos-Reid10 November 2005 PDF3428191446EKOS9 November 2005PDF33.027.920.913.14.95.1Leger Marketing8 November 2005PDF3426181178Decima Research7 November 2005PDF33302014 3Strategic Counsel6 November 20053528161387Strategic Counsel3 November 20052831201373Ipsos-Reid2 November 2005313019131Nanos Research27 October 2005PDF40281512412Ipsos-Reid27 October 200538261811512Pollara17 October 2005383017 8Decima Research17 October 2005PDF35291713 6Environics16 October 200538272010 11Strategic Counsel13 October 2005PDF38251514 13Pollara2 October 200536301911 6Ipsos-Reid29 September 2005PDF37271714410Decima Research26 September 2005PDF36291713 7Praxicus23 September 2005332920 4Strategic Counsel13 September 20053528171377Leger Marketing11 September 2005PDF40241513516Ipsos-Reid22 August 20053628171168Strategic Counsel15 August 2005362817 8Nanos Research8 August 2005PDF39251913 14Environics28 July 2005HTML34312011 3Decima Research25 July 2005PDF39241914 15Pollara18 July 200538271513 11Strategic Counsel16 July 20053526191379Pollara28 June 200536291811 7Ipsos-Reid28 June 20053527181368Decima Research20 June 2005PDF37252013 12Ipsos-Reid20 June 20053429161265Strategic Counsel11 June 20053426191398Pollara6 June 200538271913 11Decima Research5 June 2005PDF37232113 14Decima Research22 May 2005PDF36272113 9Leger Marketing PDF382717124± 2.6% 1,509 11Ipsos-Reid 342817 6 6Strategic Counsel 333019126 3COMPAS PDF29381713 9EKOS PDF34.728.318.412.65.6 6.4Environics 33312210 2Decima Research PDF32311914 1Ipsos-Reid 273119136 4Strategic Counsel 273120147 4Decima Research PDF 37281812 9Ipsos-Reid 323116125 1Nanos Research 36.129.517.912.24.3 6.6Pollara 31361715 5Decima Research PDF32292015 3Ipsos-Reid PDF303317125±3.1%1000Telephone 3EKOS PDF32.530.519.012.05.5 2GPC P.A. 3330131310 3Strategic Counsel 3028181610 2Ipsos-Reid PDF313418115±3.1%1000Telephone 3Decima Research PDF27322115 5Ipsos-Reid PDF30 3518125±3.1%1000Telephone 5Pollara 31351812 4Nanos Research 31.637.914.911.93.8 6.3Decima Research PDF28351814 7Ipsos-Reid PDF273615107±3.1%1000Telephone 9COMPAS 303418151 4Environics 273324112 6Environics 363019114 6Leger Marketing PDF31341813 ± 2.5% Telephone 3Ipsos-Reid PDF273019127±3.1%1000Telephone 3Decima Research PDF31321914 1EKOS PDF25.036.220.512.65.0 11.2Ipsos-Reid PDF343015107±3.1%1000Telephone 4Last election HTML36.729.615.712.44.37.1