SASKATOON-The CBC's new opinion poll results, which suggest that the two main parties are neck and neck in overall popular support, provide insight into how the parties will handle the last week of campaigning.

Western Opinion Research collected interviews from 800 Saskatchewan respondents from Oct. 20 to Oct. 26. When asked which party they would support if an election were held that day, 31 per cent of respondents said the NDP, 28 per cent chose the Saskatchewan Party, while the Liberals grabbed 12 per cent and 1 per cent of people indicated other parties. A fairly large portion of the group — 24 per cent, said they didn't know whom they would support, while those refusing to answer or cast a ballot totalled 3 per cent and 1 per cent, respectively. The overall margin of error for the total sample is plus or minus 3.5 per cent, nineteen times out of twenty.

Early media stories under reported the actual number of undecided voters. Since it is likely that one in four voters has yet to make a choice, all the parties are pursuing this group vigorously. For example, in Tuesday's leaders' debate, the Sask Party leader sought to send a clear and unequivocal message about his party's position on the provincial Crowns.

"We are not planning to sell any of the four core Crowns," pledged Elwin Hermanson.

The Sask Party has been moving toward this position gradually over the last two weeks, partly because Lorne Calvert has effectively captured headlines with charges that his opponents are harbouring secret privatization plans.

In what is probably the briefest pamphlet of the campaign, the Saskatchewan Party told voters that the NDP's Crown privatization charge is "a big lie." The New Democrats responded with an oversized, glossy brochure restating the Premier's charges. Obviously, some crucial undecided votes hinge on this issue.

In the same brochure and in the leaders debate Mr. Calvert reiterated his party's commitment to improved public health care. There is no doubt that most Saskatchewanians have the most trust in the NDP on this issue. The CBC poll reported that 44 per cent of respondents chose Mr. Calvert's party when asked who would do the best job in ensuring high quality health care. In contrast, 26% chose Mr. Hermanson's party while 10 per cent selected Mr. Karwacki's team. On health care issues and also social programs, the New Democrats unsurprisingly dominate the other parties.

The government party is weakest on economic questions and rural issues. This was quite apparent in the debate, where the premier was forced to insist that extraordinary circumstances demanded unusual expenditures and the forfeiture of annual balanced budgets. Both the Liberal and Sask Party leaders charged that the NDP unnecessarily are losing as extra $1 million to $1.5 million per day, owing to their lack of fiscal responsibility. Moreover, Mr. Hermanson seized an opportunity to restate his party's plan to eliminate the tax on small business as part of his economic stimulation plan. The opinion poll suggests that 41 per cent of respondents selected the Sask Party as the best at promoting economic growth; the NDP was chosen by only 26 per cent of people while the Liberals captured 14 per cent of support.

It is worth considering those areas where each of the main contenders for the premier's office seek to attract support from alienated voter groups through targeted messaging. In part, such strategies are based in sheer bravado, or a desire to carry the fight to the opponent's doorstep. At the same time, the competition for votes necessitates that each party builds the broadest possible base of support.

Across the span of the campaign, and in the debate Tuesday night, the NDP has consistently tried to signal its support for the agricultural community. Indeed, Mr. Calvert defended his government's budget choices by asking his competitors whether, in his shoes, they would have chosen budgetary balance over aid to stricken farmers. Regarding farms and rural areas, the NDP's level of support in the polling responses is so small as to be statistically meaningless. Yet Calvert clearly sought to communicate that the NDP's plan will aid rural and farm populations.

Mr. Hermanson's main pitch to a non-traditional demographic group aimed squarely at unionized voters. In response to a question from one of the journalists invited to the panel, Hermanson clearly emphasized his desire to see business, government and labour working closely together to foster economic growth and create more jobs. He underscored that his party's plan to grow the population means more jobs and more union members, and that many union members want changes in Saskatchewan's labour legislation.

"We are the friends of labour," Hermanson said to Calvert and Karwacki's chagrin.

While the poll does not supply information on how union members plan to vote, surely this is a key group for the party in city constituencies.

In Tuesday's debate, both Hermanson and Karwacki repeated their message that it is time for a change in the government. This message is a predictable and perennial feature of all election campaigns. Yet, the polling data suggests that this sentiment may be more important than usual. In response to a question asking whether Saskatchewan needs a change in government, 44.7 per cent of all respondents said they were very certain such change is needed. A further 20 per cent suggested that they were somewhat certain that a change in government is needed. So, about 65 per cent of all possible respondents are at least somewhat sure that Saskatchewan requires a change in government. This number dwarfs declared support for any of the parties. If I were a government party strategist, this data might make me a little nervous.

to top