A royal revival? Canadians warming to the monarchy again, Ipsos poll finds
As King Charles III gears up to open Parliament Tuesday, a royal revival is sweeping Canada, with new Ipsos polling showing more Canadians seeing the monarchy as a meaningful part of our national identity — something that helps distinguish us from Americans.
The poll, released Tuesday by Ipsos Public Affairs exclusively for Global News, found that 66 per cent of respondents believe Canada's relationship with the monarchy is useful because it helps set us apart from our neighbours to the south.
That's up from 54 per cent in April 2023 — a notable jump in royal favour.
Sixty-five per cent of respondents also said our ties to the monarchy are an important part of Canada's heritage and play a role in shaping who we are, up from 58 per cent in April 2023.
Story continues below advertisement
Two years after King Charles III's coronation, Canadian attitudes toward the monarchy seem to be warming. Support for cutting ties with the Crown has dropped by 12 points since 2023, while more people now think the King is doing a good job, up five points.
1:38
King Charles, Queen Camilla visit Canada House in London ahead of Ottawa trip
The King's visit comes at a time when Canada's sovereignty has been repeatedly threatened by U.S. President Donald Trump, who has said multiple times since his re-election that Canada should be the 51st state.
Parliament was prorogued in January while on winter break, and the previous session ended when the federal election was called.
The start of a new Parliament will include electing the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Speech from the Throne. Normally delivered by the governor general — who is the representative of the monarch — this speech lays out the government's agenda and priorities.
Story continues below advertisement
Though King Charles III is Canada's head of state and the country remains a constitutional monarchy within the Commonwealth, his role is mostly ceremonial.
Royals are making a comeback — sort of
In 2023, Ipsos polling found 67 per cent of Canadians believed the King and the Royal Family should have no formal role in Canadian society, seeing them as 'celebrities and nothing more.'
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
However, the recent Ipsos polling shows that number has dropped to 56 per cent
While 46 per cent of Canadians believe the country should end its formal ties to the British monarchy, this number is the lowest level of anti-monarchist sentiment since 2016, down from 58 per cent two years ago.
That said, Quebecers are still more likely than others to support cutting those ties.
Story continues below advertisement
Recognition of the Prince and Princess of Wales' contributions to sustaining the monarchy's relevance has also risen to 60 per cent (from 53 per cent in 2023).
Since 2023, some royals have also improved in favourability among Canadians, with King Charles III's popularity rising from 37 per cent to 41 per cent and Prince William and Catherine increasing to 56 per cent (from 52 per cent) and 51 per cent (from 47 per cent).
Approval ratings for other members of the Royal Family have either stalled or dropped.
Camilla, Queen Consort, saw her favourability decline by one point, as did Prince Harry, while Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, dropped by two points.
Older Canadians continue to show greater support for the Royal Family, highlighting a persistent generational divide.
Story continues below advertisement
Despite these gains, the monarchy still faces challenges in achieving widespread support, especially among younger Canadians.
What matters most for Canadians
As Parliament gets ready to open following the April election — which saw the Liberals return with a minority and Prime Minister Mark Carney at the helm — most Canadians seem content with the idea of a Liberal minority government.
But that optimism isn't shared evenly across the country.
Albertans were the least likely to be satisfied with the election outcome, according to the poll.
Just 41 per cent expressed any level of satisfaction, while 59 per cent said they'd be unhappy with a Liberal minority—37 per cent of them 'not at all satisfied.'
That frustration appears to reflect a broader sense of western alienation, echoed by leaders like Alberta Premier Danielle Smith.
Story continues below advertisement
In contrast, support for a Liberal minority was much stronger in Atlantic Canada and Quebec, where 58 and 57 per cent of respondents said they were satisfied with the result.
The poll also gave a snapshot of what Canadians want the Liberal government to focus on.
At the top of the list: protecting Canada's interests (27 per cent), followed closely by affordability and the cost of living (26 per cent).
Another 20 per cent said the economy in general should be the main focus, while 11 per cent pointed to pipelines and other resource infrastructure. Just three per cent listed health care as a top priority.
These priorities varied by province, the poll found.
In Ontario, affordability topped the list, with 29 per cent of respondents saying it should be the government's main focus. In Quebec, 30 per cent of respondents said protecting Canada's interests was the top priority. Support for approving pipelines and other resource infrastructure was lower overall at 11 per cent, but jumped to 27 per cent in Alberta.
For the monarchy poll, these are some of the findings of an Ipsos poll conducted between May 16 and 18, 2025, on behalf of Global News. For this survey, a sample of 1,000 Canadians aged 18+ was interviewed online. Quotas and weighting were employed to ensure that the sample's composition reflects that of the Canadian population according to census parameters. The precision of Ipsos online polls is measured using a credibility interval. In this case, the poll is accurate to within ± 3.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, had all Canadians aged 18+ been polled. The credibility interval will be wider among subsets of the population. All sample surveys and polls may be subject to other sources of error, including, but not limited to coverage error, and measurement error.
Story continues below advertisement
For the government priorities poll, these are some of the findings of an exclusive Ipsos Election-Day Poll for Global News conducted on April 28. For this survey, a sample of 10,436 Canadian voters aged 18 years and over was interviewed online via the Ipsos I-Say Panel. Data were weighted to reflect the outcome of the election by region according to Elections Canada results. The precision of Ipsos online polls is measured using a credibility interval. In this case, the poll is considered accurate to within ±1.2 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, had all Canadian voters been polled. The credibility interval will be wider among subsets of the population. All sample surveys and polls may be subject to other sources of error, including, but not limited to coverage error and measurement error.
— with files from Global News' Sean Previl and Mercedes Stephenson
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
War is in the air
Opinion 'There is a clear, present risk, particularly as Vladimir Putin does see himself as being at war with the West. The homeland is again (in peril)… Air and missile attacks will potentially cause civilian casualties (in the United Kingdom) in very large numbers.' Therefore, concludes Gen. Sir Richard Barrons, the U.K. needs to bring back air-raid sirens and air-raid drills. I'm not making this up. Barrons, a former deputy chief of the defence staff who retired from the British Army in 2016, is not just an aging military fantasist longing to relive the Blitz he was too young to experience first time around. He co-wrote the British government's Strategic Defence Review, published last week, and the government adopted it wholesale. It's not just the U.K. In only four months, the NATO countries of Europe have managed to talk themselves into the belief that their continent is on the brink of war. Almost the entire Russian army has been bogged down in Ukraine for three years and there is no other military threat in sight, yet the rhetoric suggests that Armageddon is just around the corner. This is yet another consequence of that highly infectious disease, Trump Derangement Syndrome. The American president's penchant for making random radical comments, often just for the hell of it, has a way of panicking other countries into making policy decisions that are premature or just plain wrong. For example, the European members of NATO are now convinced that the United States is cancelling its eight-decade commitment to the defence of Europe. In particular they think that the U.S. is ending its guarantee of nuclear retaliation against a Russian attack, which enabled all of them (except Britain and France) to avoid getting nuclear weapons of their own. They are right to be concerned about all that, because that is certainly being considered by some factions in the Trump circus. But it is far too early to base policy on these concerns, because Trump himself has no idea where he is going with all this. Could the United States end up in a de facto alliance with Russia when the dance ends (or at least pauses for a while)? Unlikely but possible, given Trump's highly personalistic style and his bizarre but undeniably very close relationship with the Russian leader. What would become of the existing Russian-Chinese alliance in such a case? Hard to say, but Putin might prefer an American alliance that would deliver Ukraine into Russia's hands. That would be a more equal partnership (assuming continuing American decline) than Russia's current precarious alliance with a Chinese giant that has aspirations on Russian territory. Does that then leave China free to join with Europe and the more or less free-trading countries of Asia in an effort to preserve or restore the rules-based, law-abiding world order that is under attack by Russia and the United States? The possible permutations and combinations are almost endless. It is unfortunately true that flurries of last-minute changes in alliances often happen just before the great powers go into a great war, but that is another reason not to rush into radical changes now. This will require a high tolerance for make-believe on the part of Europe, but wait-and-see is probably the continent's least bad strategy for the time being. The European members of NATO should do everything possible to sustain Ukraine's resistance even when Trump cuts it off again, and rebuild their own defensive capabilities as fast as possible in case Trump does take the Russian option. But there's no need to practise bleeding, as the soldiers say: try to sustain the fiction of a united NATO as long as possible. And if you're in need of consolation as the talk of war swamps the news, remember that the only genuinely revisionist great power at the moment is Russia. People will tell you China is revisionist too, but that is untrue apart from Taiwan. Beijing believes it can overtake the United States by economic means alone, and with Trump's help it may be right. Gwynne Dyer's new book is Intervention Earth: Life-Saving Ideas from the World's Climate Engineers.
Toronto Star
4 hours ago
- Toronto Star
Canada Post, union trade shots Monday as progress stalls
After talks last week aimed at paving the way for binding arbitration, Canada Post and the union representing its 55,000 employees were back trading public potshots Monday, with both sides accusing the other of not negotiating seriously. Monday afternoon, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) blasted the Crown corporation, saying it was counting on government action to force an end to the dispute. 'CUPW's ultimate goal in returning to the bargaining table remains new negotiated ratifiable collective agreements,' CUPW said in a written statement. 'However, Canada Post's actions suggest it does not want to negotiate. It wants to rewrite our agreements — and is seeking to use government interference to further its goals.' The union pointed to Canada Post's request to federal jobs minister Patty Hajdu late last month to order a vote on its 'final' contract offer, as well as then-federal labour minister Steven MacKinnon's decision last December to 'pause' a 32-day strike by creating an Industrial Inquiry Commission run by veteran arbitrator William Kaplan. 'The historic rights and benefits our union has gained for our members — and for Canadian society — such as maternity leave have been won through our collective bargaining rights,' CUPW added. 'The attempt to trample over them should send a chill through the labour movement. CUPW will be standing against a forced vote — and for collective bargaining rights.' In a written statement Monday, Canada Post said two days of talks last week to set the terms for arbitration didn't result in any progress. The Crown corporation also said the union still hadn't provided an official response to its final offer. It also suggested Kaplan's report should be part of the terms of reference for any arbitration. 'The final report of the Industrial Inquiry Commission clearly outlines the critical issues we face and the immediate actions that need to be taken. It should therefore be the foundational document that guides any discussions about Canada Post's path forward. The union's refusal to recognize the IIC report and its recommendations in their proposed terms of reference for arbitration is unacceptable,' Canada Post said. 'After 18 months we urgently need a fair resolution that begins to address our challenges while respecting the important role our employees play, and the voice they have in our future.' A spokesperson for Hajdu said the minister was still reviewing Canada Post's request for a vote on the 'final offer,' and urged the two sides to get back to the bargaining table. 'Last week Minister Hajdu asked the parties to return to the negotiating table with federal mediators to do two things: to seek to negotiate terms for an arbitration process to conclude this round of bargaining, and to have the union table its response to Canada Post's last global offers,' said Hajdu spokesperson Jennifer Kozelj. 'Canadians expect the parties to resolve this dispute. Both parties must meet and pursue these paths with urgency.' Labour experts say it's unclear exactly how the impasse can be resolved. Both sides, suggested University of Toronto professor Rafael Gomez, could be waiting for clearer signals from the federal government on whether it will act on Kaplan's recommendations. 'If the government hems and haws, then of course the parties aren't going to negotiate strongly,' said Gomez, director of U of T's Centre for Industrial Relations and Human Resources. 'If they said 'here's what we're doing about the report. We're implementing everything Kaplan has said,' that would move the needle.' While a full-blown strike might be another option for the union to try and force the issue, it's not clear if it would work, argued Stephanie Ross, a labour studies professor at McMaster University. The union doesn't have nearly as much leverage as it did last winter, Ross said, because it's not nearly as busy a time of year for parcels, but also because Kaplan's report was largely in line with the Crown corporation's arguments for restructuring. 'It's not clear how much pressure a walkout is going to put on the employer right now,' Ross said. Earlier this month, Canada Post rejected the union's request for binding arbitration, saying it would take too long, and could exacerbate their financial struggles. On May 28, Canada Post made what it called its 'final' contract offer, which includes a 13 per cent wage increase spread over four years, as well as a $1,000 signing bonus. Two days later, it asked Hajdu to order a vote on the offer, a request blasted by CUPW.
The Province
4 hours ago
- The Province
Canada's shooting at a moving target on defence spending, say military watchers
'Two per cent is not going to cut it in terms of where the rest of the (NATO) alliance is,' said David Perry, a defence analyst who heads the Canadian Global Affairs Institute Canadian soldiers training in Latvia. Photo by Cpl Jean-Roch Chabot/DND/File Canada's plan to add more than $9 billion to defence spending this year was praised by military watchers Monday, but they cautioned that the country is shooting at a moving target. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Exclusive articles by top sports columnists Patrick Johnston, Ben Kuzma, J.J. Abrams and others. Plus, Canucks Report, Sports and Headline News newsletters and events. Unlimited online access to The Province and 15 news sites with one account. The Province ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles and comics, including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Exclusive articles by top sports columnists Patrick Johnston, Ben Kuzma, J.J. Abrams and others. Plus, Canucks Report, Sports and Headline News newsletters and events. Unlimited online access to The Province and 15 news sites with one account. The Province ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles and comics, including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Prime Minister Mark Carney announced the country would meet its commitment in this fiscal year of hitting the two per cent of gross domestic product mark that was agreed upon by NATO countries more than a decade back. 'It's very encouraging that the prime minister has come out this early in his mandate and made such a strong commitment to defence,' said Vincent Rigby, a former top intelligence adviser to former prime minister Justin Trudeau, who spent 14 years with Canada's Department of National Defence. 'You've gone from the former prime minister talking about the two per cent as a crass mathematical calculation to the current prime minister saying, no, this is actually a serious commitment. We committed to it 10 years ago and even before that. And we have to do it because we owe it to our allies. But we also owe it to the Canadian people. He made it quite clear this is about protecting Canada, protecting our national interests and protecting our values.' Essential reading for hockey fans who eat, sleep, Canucks, repeat. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. New spending could do a lot to improve crumbling military infrastructure, said Michel Maisonneuve, a retired Canadian Army lieutenant-general who has served as assistant deputy chief of defence staff, and chief of staff of NATO's Allied Command. 'The housing on bases is horrible,' Maisonneuve said. He's keen on Carney's plan to participate in the $234-billion ReArm Europe program. 'This will bolster our ability to produce stuff for ourselves' while also helping the Europeans to do the same, Maisonneuve said. 'All the tree huggers are going to hate that, but that's where we are today in the world.' Carney's cash injection includes $2.6 billion to recruit and retain military personnel. The military is short about 13,000 people. It aims to boost the regular force to 71,500 and the reserves to 30,000 by the end of this decade. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. 'There is no way we can protect Canada and Canadians with the strength that we have now,' Maisonneuve said. Carney promised investment in new submarines, aircraft, ships, vehicles and artillery. He also talked about adding money to the defence budget for new radar, drones, and sensors to monitor the seafloor and the Arctic. 'All in all, great promises; we'll just have to see what actually comes through,' Maisonneuve said. 'You can have as many drones as you want, if you want to hold terrain, if you want to protect yourself, you're going to need boots on the ground.' Prime Minister Mark Carney is flanked by Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jennie Carignan, left, and National Defence Minister David McGuinty during an announcement the Fort York Armoury in Toronto on June 9, 2025. Photo byCarney promised pay raises for those in uniform, but a technical briefing after his speech was short on details about who might get them. 'Corporal Bloggins needs a lot more than General Smith does,' said defence analyst David Perry, who heads the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. 'The senior ranks are pretty well compensated. The military has got an affordability cost-of-living issue in the lower ranks.' For people who have to move regularly, like many in uniform, 'the total compensation package hasn't kept pace with changing cost pressures,' Perry said. 'The military is having a difficult time both getting people in and keeping them there once they do join. So, I think depending on how the pay measures are actually structured, it could have quite a significant impact.' Canada spent about 1.45 per cent of its GDP on defence last year. If Canada's defence spending does hit two per of GDP by March of 2026, 'by then the target probably will have moved,' Rigby said. 'So, we've hit two per cent just as the target's likely to go to 3.5 per cent or even right up to five per cent if you throw in extra security capabilities … beyond pure defence.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. That will leave Canada 'playing serious catch up,' he said. NATO leaders are meeting later this month to discuss boosting military spending. 'Two per cent is not going to cut it in terms of where the rest of the alliance is,' Perry said. 'Pretty clearly there is a discussion about getting to a number much higher than that at the upcoming NATO summit. But given that we have been falling short of this now … 11-year-old target, I do think it's a good first step to help regain some Canadian credibility by putting the money in the window to actually get to the two per cent mark this fiscal year.' The other question is whether Canada be able to spend all of the promised money by next March, Rigby said. 'We all know that one of the problems over the last number of years is National Defence can't spend the money quickly enough.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. The Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) returns between hundreds of millions and over a billion dollars annually to central treasury, Perry told National Post earlier this year. Carney is creating a defence procurement agency to help in that respect, Rigby said. 'It's not easy setting up new agencies. There are big machinery issues. It costs money. You've got to find the people.' Read More Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here. Vancouver Canucks Vancouver Canucks News News Sports
