Secondary menu

Public Opinion Survey Following the October 24, 2016, By-election in the Medicine Hat–Cardston–Warner Riding

Introduction

Elections Canada commissioned Phoenix Strategic Perspectives to conduct research to help evaluate the October 24, 2016, by-election held in Alberta in the federal constituency of Medicine Hat–Cardston–Warner.

Background and Objectives

Elections Canada is an independent, non-partisan agency that reports directly to Parliament. The agency is mandated to conduct federal general elections, by-elections and referendums, administer the political financing provisions of the Canada Elections Act, monitor compliance, and enforce electoral legislation.

As part of its evaluation program, the agency wanted to conduct a survey of eligible electors in the electoral district of Medicine Hat–Cardston–Warner (Alberta), where a by-election was held on October 24, 2016. The purpose of the survey was to evaluate electors' opinions, experience, attitudes and knowledge with respect to the agency's services and various aspects of the electoral process.

More specifically, surveyed electors were consulted on the following issues:

The results will be used to assist in evaluating and refining Elections Canada's programs and services to the electorate, which may help in developing the Chief Electoral Officer's reports to Parliament.

Methodology

A 10-minute, dual-frame (landline and cellphone), random-digit-dial telephone survey was conducted among 750 eligible electors from October 29 to November 13, 2016. Eligible electors were Canadian citizens at least 18 years old on polling day (October 24, 2016) who were residents of the Medicine Hat–Cardston–Warner electoral district (i.e. had an address of ordinary residence in that electoral district) from the first day of the revision period until election day. Based on a sample of this size, the results can be considered accurate to within ±3.6%, 19 times out of 20 (finite population correction factor applied). The margin of error is greater for results pertaining to subgroups of the total sample. The sample was weighted to reflect the distribution of the population in the electoral district.

For a more complete description of the methodology, please refer to the methodology note available under separate cover.

Note to Readers