Liberal - NDP: 17 Point Poll Gap

The latest Ipsos-Reid poll is worse for New Democrats than many media reports indicate. The detailed results show that the BC Liberals are ahead of the NDP in every category: region, gender, age, education, and income. The poll was "conducted between April 4 and April 10, 2007. The poll is based on a randomly selected sample of 800 adult British Columbians. With a sample of this size, the results are considered accurate to within ± 3.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, of what they would have been had the entire adult population of BC been polled."

The poll indicated that if an election were held today 49% of decided voters would vote for the Liberals, and 32% would vote NDP; only 15% were undecided. The Liberals have not climbed back to the peak of 51% that they enjoyed in Ipsos-Reid's June 2006 poll, but in that poll the NDP was higher, at 35% support. The difference between a 17 point gap now, and a 16 point gap in June 2006, is not significant. The June 2006 poll showed the Liberals ahead of the NDP in all categories except for voters with a high school education or less, and voters with less than $40,000 in income. That poll also showed the Liberals ahead of the NDP in both union and non-union households, a category not reported in the April 2007 poll. In April 2007 the Liberals had 42% support among those with high school education, compared to 36% for the NDP, and they had 39% support for those with less than $40,000 in income, compared to 37% for the NDP.

In the general election on May 17, 2005, the results were more balanced. The Liberals received 45.80% of the popular vote; and the NDP 41.52%. The seat count was 46 for the Liberals and 33 for the NDP. According to the Ipsos-Reid polls, the narrow gap between the parties was maintained through March 2006. It was generally accepted amongst political watchers that the NDP did not perform as well in the spring 2006 legislative session as it had done in the fall 2005 session, but it is unlikely that accounts for the chasm that has opened in the difference in support between two parties.

When commenting in the April 17th Vancouver Sun on approval ratings for the leaders, which show James stalled at 51% and Campbell rising to 53% (from 44% in 2005), Ipsos-Reid vice-president Kyle Braid was quoted as saying: "It allows those who want to question James' leadership to do so quite loudly. She's lost all the ground that she gained in her performance in the last election campaign." That's wrong on two counts. First, the NDP is still far ahead of where it was at the start of the last election. James took the party from 3 seats to 33, from 36% behind the Liberals in 2001 to nipping at the heels and almost forming government. Second, every party has a few malcontents who take shots at the leader, but no credible New Democrat is going to challenge James this close to the next election. Her approval rating continues to be substantially ahead of the party, and there is no heir apparent.

On May 16, 2001, the Liberals swept with the biggest majority in the province's history, taking 57.62% of the popular vote, and the NDP 21.56%. That lopsided result left the NDP with 2 seats to the Liberals' 77. If the parties go into the next election more than 10 points apart in the polls, BC could end up with another lopsided legislature. That can hurt the government and the province more than it hurts the losing party. Good government requires a good opposition.

Gordon Campbell has done a 180 on so many policies that observers could get whiplash. Public sector bargaining, welfare rates, recognition of human-caused climate change and treatment of first nations come to mind immediately, but there are also dozens of minor issues where the government has responded to criticism promptly and changed course. Campbell came out of the 2005 election realizing that he could have lost and change was essential; the NDP came out celebrating as if they had won. After the 1996 election the Liberals gave the NDP no honeymoon; together with their allies, they immediately continued an attack that made the election campaign look tame. After the 2005 campaign, Campbell had it easy and he changed his image, even though he put tax cuts for businesses and high income earners ahead of all other priorities in the legislative sessions of both September 2005 and February 2007.

New Democrats have to work harder; they can't let the government appear to win the 30 minute question periods, as many observers feel routinely happens. Instead of standing up and reading questions prepared by researchers, critics need to demonstrate that they can think on their feet and are serious about holding the government to account, not by shouting louder, but by thoroughly understanding their topics. New Democrats have to act as advocates for their traditional values. It took until last week before the caucus came out in support of the campaign for a $10 minimum wage. There are many more issues affecting those who have been left behind by the Campbell government that need the attention of well financed and capable advocates. The Opposition also has to use the accountability framework set out in the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. Every critic should be familiar with the goals and performance measures for their respective Ministry, and the critics should say what alternative goals and measures should be in the service plans. An NDP government, encouraged by former Auditor General George Morfitt, brought in the requirements for service plans, but they are now virtually ignored.

A lot can happen in two years, but from today's perspective it looks like Campbell could have a run that is longer than WAC Bennett's. Those that are troubled by that prospect need to say why in terms that persuade others. New Democrats cannot try to please all people on all issues, and they can't appear to simply be doing the bidding of major supporters. The role of Site C in meeting the province's energy needs, the trade-off between the agricultural land reserve and treaty settlements, twinning the Port Mann Bridge, increased compensation for MLAs and BC-STV are a few of the issues where a clear statement on the position of the caucus might not please everyone, including everyone in the NDP, but it might win enough respect to become competitive.