The article you just read was brought to you by a few thousand dedicated readers. Will you join them?

Thanks for coming by The Tyee and reading one of many original articles we’ll post today. Our team works hard to publish in-depth stories on topics that matter on a daily basis. Our motto is: No junk. Just good journalism.

Just as we care about the quality of our reporting, we care about making our stories accessible to all who want to read them and provide a pleasant reading experience. No intrusive ads to distract you. No paywall locking you out of an article you want to read. No clickbait to trick you into reading a sensational article.

There’s a reason why our site is unique and why we don’t have to rely on those tactics — our Tyee Builders program. Tyee Builders are readers who chip in a bit of money each month (or one-time) to our editorial budget. This amazing program allows us to pay our writers fairly, keep our focus on quality over quantity of articles, and provide a pleasant reading experience for those who visit our site.

In the past year, we’ve been able to double our staff team and boost our reporting. We invest all of the revenue we receive into producing more and better journalism. We want to keep growing, but we need your support to do it.

Fewer than 1 in 100 of our average monthly readers are signed up to Tyee Builders. If we reach 1% of our readers signing up to be Tyee Builders, we could continue to grow and do even more.

If you appreciate what The Tyee publishes and want to help us do more, please sign up to be a Tyee Builder today. You pick the amount, and you can cancel any time.

Support our growing independent newsroom and join Tyee Builders today.
Before you click away, we have something to ask you…

Do you value independent journalism that focuses on the issues that matter? Do you think Canada needs more in-depth, fact-based reporting? So do we. If you’d like to be part of the solution, we’d love it if you joined us in working on it.

The Tyee is an independent, paywall-free, reader-funded publication. While many other newsrooms are getting smaller or shutting down altogether, we’re bucking the trend and growing, while still keeping our articles free and open for everyone to read.

The reason why we’re able to grow and do more, and focus on quality reporting, is because our readers support us in doing that. Over 5,000 Tyee readers chip in to fund our newsroom on a monthly basis, and that supports our rockstar team of dedicated journalists.

Join a community of people who are helping to build a better journalism ecosystem. You pick the amount you’d like to contribute on a monthly basis, and you can cancel any time.

Help us make Canadian media better by joining Tyee Builders today.
We value: Our readers.
Our independence. Our region.
The power of real journalism.
We're reader supported.
Get our newsletter free.
Help pay for our reporting.

Canadians Split on Electoral Reform Referendum

New poll offers insight into how voters of various stripes feel on the issue.

By BJ Siekierski 13 Jun 2016 | iPolitics

BJ Siekierski writes for iPolitics, where this article first appeared. Thanks also to EKOS for the numbers.

image atom
What's your view? Referendum or not?

As they were in April, Canadians are evenly divided on whether the Liberal government should hold a referendum on changing the electoral system, a new poll from EKOS Research finds.

From June 3 to June 7, EKOS asked 1,158 Canadians the following question: ''Some people say that any change to the electoral system is so fundamental that it would require a national referendum. Others say that a rigorous program of public engagement and Parliamentary review should be sufficient. Which statement is closer to your point of view?''

With a margin of error of +/- 2.9 per cent, 19 times out of 20, just under half of respondents -- 49 per cent -- told EKOS a referendum is unnecessary. Forty-four per cent said it was necessary and seven per cent didn't know or didn't answer.

That's a slight change from EKOS' April results, but the overall numbers are essentially the same.

On April 14 and 15, EKOS reached 1,176 Canadians, asking the same question: 46.7 per cent felt a referendum was necessary, 46.7 per cent didn't, and 6.6 per cent skipped the question.

The most recent EKOS poll began a day after the government reversed course, amending and then supporting NDP MP Nathan Cullen's electoral reform motion, giving up their majority on the yet-to-be-formed parliamentary committee on electoral reform.

The motion was adopted by the House on Tuesday, with only the Conservatives voting against it.

That division in the House vote is largely reflected in the breakdown of EKOS' numbers by party support.

The majority of Conservative supporters (67 per cent) insist, like their party, on a referendum. Liberal supporters are almost the mirror opposite.

Only 33 per cent think a referendum in necessary, while 64 per cent don't.

A slight majority of NDP supporters are fine without a referendum, whereas most Bloc supporters want one. In both cases, however, the margin of error is high and the result needs to be interpreted with caution.

Regionally, support for a referendum is highest in Alberta (61.7 per cent) and lowest in Quebec (38.1 per cent).

Conservatives pushing referendum

The latest EKOS poll comes weeks after Ipsos Public Affairs asked a variation of the referendum question and got a much different result.

Ipsos found 73 per cent of Canadians in favour of a referendum -- a result the Conservatives have highlighted almost daily in question period.

''The Prime Minister said yesterday, 'Conservatives are the only ones pushing for a referendum.' I guess the Prime Minister must have missed the poll showing 73 per cent of Canadians want a referendum,'' Conservative democratic reform critic Scott Reid charged Wednesday.

Ipsos Public Affairs CEO Darrell Bricker weighed in on the widely divergent results in May, telling iPolitics he firmly believes most Canadians, given their druthers, would prefer a referendum.

''But if you could convince them that (an alternative) process, whatever it was, was legitimate -- did a better job and all those things -- they would be prepared to at least look at it, which divides the population in about half,'' he said.  [Tyee]

Share this article

The Tyee is supported by readers like you

Join us and grow independent media in Canada

Facts matter. Get The Tyee's in-depth journalism delivered to your inbox for free


The Barometer

Tyee Poll: Are You Preparing for the Next Climate Disaster?

Take this week's poll