Skip to main content

A strong majority of Canadians are concerned about how political parties use the personal information they collect, according to a new Nanos Research survey for The Globe and Mail.

The findings come as the Liberal government resists repeated calls by a parliamentary committee and the federal Privacy Commissioner for new legislation that would require political parties to comply with existing privacy laws.

Conservative MP Bob Zimmer, the chair of the House of Commons committee on Access to Information, privacy and ethics, recently expressed frustration as he released a report raising concerns about privacy and social-media companies that Canadians do not appear to be engaged on such issues. However, the poll results suggest that may not be the case.

Story continues below advertisement

The survey found a majority of Canadians said they are concerned (36 per cent) or somewhat concerned (37 per cent) about how political parties use the personal information on voters they collect.

The unease is even stronger when it comes to how Canadians view the safety of their personal information on Facebook and other social-media platforms, with more than eight in 10 respondents saying they are either concerned (49 per cent) or somewhat concerned (34 per cent). Only 10 per cent said they were somewhat unconcerned and 6 per cent said they were unconcerned.

“This is definitely on the radar and the concern basically cuts across gender and age,” pollster Nik Nanos said. “It doesn’t really make any difference whether you’re a younger Canadian, a millennial or a retired Canadian. You have a significant dose of concern related to your privacy.”

The random phone and online survey of 1,000 Canadians was conducted between Nov. 30 and Dec. 5. A survey of that size has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

As for the Liberal government’s decision not to subject political parties to privacy laws, Mr. Nanos said that could hurt the Liberal Party’s support if the opposition parties do more to highlight the issue.

“I would hazard a guess that, for many Canadians, they’d probably be surprised to learn that there are different rules depending on whether you’re a political party or not a political party in terms of the protection of personal information,” he said.

It has been a rough year for large social-media companies such as Google’s parent company, Alphabet Inc., Facebook and Twitter. The Financial Times dubbed “techlash” as the one word that best encapsulates 2018.

Story continues below advertisement

Facebook was dogged by the Cambridge Analytica scandal, which saw a British consulting firm access the Facebook data of 87 million customers for use in unauthorized ways in political campaigns around the world.

Social-media companies are also under scrutiny for how their platforms can be used to spread fake news and polarize election campaigns.

After a detailed study, the House of Commons ethics committee issued a report in December calling on the federal government to impose new regulations on social-media companies to prevent hate speech and curb the spread of misinformation.

In response to the committee’s findings, Facebook Canada’s head of public policy, Kevin Chan, said in a statement that the company is taking “significant steps” to improve safety and security on the platform in preparation for the next federal election in October, 2019.

The company says these measures will include third-party fact-checking and helping political parties safeguard their accounts.

“We are taking our responsibility in these areas very seriously and are already working hard to tackle many of these challenges,” Mr. Chan said.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter
To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies