July 27, 2026
Prime Minister Mark Carney’s first Senate appointments have reopened a debate that had largely faded from public view over the past decade: how much political experience is too much political experience for someone appointed to Canada’s upper chamber?
On July 7, the Prime Minister announced four new senators: Conservative MP Richard Martel, cancer researcher Dr. Rodney Ouellette, chartered professional accountant Geeta Tucker, and Carney’s principal secretary, Tom Pitfield.
The appointments came with a significant change to the selection process. The government retained the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments and its open application process, but removed the non-partisanship criterion that had been in place since the board was created in 2016. The government also expanded the criteria to place more emphasis on expertise in strategic industries, regulatory systems, and emerging economic and social issues.
Carney defended the decision by arguing that experience in elected office, government, and legislative processes can make the Senate more effective. But a new Abacus Data survey finds Canadians are not entirely convinced that strong party backgrounds should become a more regular feature of Senate appointments.
Canadians Want the Advisory Board to Remain
A majority of Canadians, 56%, believe Senate candidates should continue to be selected through the independent advisory board.
But they are divided about whether people with strong political party ties should be eligible.
The largest group, 34%, says candidates should go through the advisory board and people with strong party ties should not be eligible. Another 22% supports using the advisory board but does not believe someone’s partisan background should disqualify them.
Only 8% would prefer the Prime Minister to appoint senators directly without an advisory board. Another 12% says the selection method makes no real difference to how the Senate operates, 9% does not care, and 15% is unsure.
The preference for excluding people with strong party ties crosses political lines. It is the most common response among Conservative voters at 39%, NDP voters at 45%, and Bloc Québécois voters at 34%.
Liberal voters are more divided. Among them, 30% prefer keeping candidates with strong party ties out of the process, while 27% support allowing people with partisan backgrounds to be considered.
Regionally, support for maintaining the restriction is highest in Atlantic Canada at 40%, followed by British Columbia and Alberta at 38% each. It is lowest in Quebec at 29%.
Canadians Are Split on the Appointments Themselves
When Canadians are told that the recent appointments included a longtime strategist for the Prime Minister’s party and a sitting opposition MP, public opinion is closely divided.
Overall, 35% approve of appointing people with political party backgrounds to the Senate, while 31% disapprove. Another 19% does not care either way and 15% is unsure.
The intensity of opinion leans somewhat negative. Only 7% strongly approve, compared with 14% who strongly disapprove.
Liberal voters are the only major political group clearly supportive of the change. Almost half, 47%, approve, while 21% disapprove.
Conservative voters are more skeptical, with 32% approving and 42% disapproving. NDP voters respond similarly, with 27% approving and 41% disapproving. Among Bloc voters, 22% approve and 36% disapprove.
Younger Canadians are somewhat more receptive than older Canadians. Among those aged 18 to 29, 43% approve and 31% disapprove. Among Canadians aged 60 and over, opinion is evenly divided at 31% approve and 31% disapprove.
The regional differences are relatively modest, although approval is lower in Quebec and Atlantic Canada than elsewhere in the country.
Most Canadians Still Want Major Senate Reform
The debate over Carney’s appointments is taking place against a broader backdrop of dissatisfaction with the Senate itself.
When asked what should happen to the institution in the future, 35% of Canadians say it should be reformed so senators are elected directly by voters. Another 21% would abolish the Senate entirely.
Together, 56% favour a fundamental change to the institution.
Only 16% want to keep the Senate as it currently operates. Another 12% does not care what happens to it and 16% is unsure.
Support for an elected Senate is highest among Conservative and NDP voters, at 44% for both groups. It is also the preferred option among 40% of British Columbians and 39% of residents in Ontario, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Atlantic Canada.
Quebec stands apart from the rest of the country. Just 24% of Quebecers favour an elected Senate, while 27% would abolish it and 23% says they do not care what happens to the institution.
Among Bloc voters, abolition is the clear preference. Four in ten would eliminate the Senate entirely, while only 18% would move to an elected model.
More Canadians Feel Negative Than Positive About Carney’s Approach
For most Canadians, the appointments do not immediately change how they feel about the Prime Minister or his government.
Forty-three percent says the approach makes no difference to their opinion. Another 15% had not been aware of the appointments before completing the survey and 9% is unsure.
But among those whose views are affected, the reaction is considerably more negative than positive.
Twenty-three percent says the way Carney is making Senate appointments leaves them feeling more negative about him and his government. Just 10% says it makes them feel more positive.
The downside is most pronounced among Conservative voters. Thirty-nine percent says the appointments make them feel more negative, compared with only 6% who feel more positive.
The impact is also negative among NDP voters, at 24% negative and 7% positive, and among Bloc voters, at 28% negative and just 1% positive.
Liberal voters react differently. Eighteen percent feels more positive, 11% feels more negative, and 54% says the appointments do not change their view.
There is also a notable gender divide. Twenty-nine percent of men says the appointments leave them feeling more negative about Carney and his government, compared with 18% of women. Women, however, are twice as likely as men to say they had not previously heard about the appointments.
Important, but Not a Defining Issue
Despite the potential political downside, Senate appointments are unlikely to become the issue that defines how most Canadians judge the federal government.
Four in ten, 41%, says the appointments will be important in shaping their view of the government over the next year. This includes 10% who considers them one of the most important issues and 31% who says they are important, but less important than other issues.
By comparison, 26% describes the appointments as a minor issue and 19% says they will not be a factor at all. Another 15% is unsure.
Younger Canadians are more likely to consider the issue important. Forty-eight percent of those aged 18 to 29 and 47% of those aged 30 to 44 say it will matter to their assessment of the government. That falls to 35% among those aged 45 to 59 and 36% among those aged 60 and over.
The Upshot
According to Abacus Data CEO David Coletto:
“The decision to change the Senate appointment rules has not created a major public backlash.
Most Canadians still want the independent advisory board involved in selecting senators, and the largest group believes people with strong party ties should continue to be excluded. There is some openness to appointing people with political experience, but Canadians are far from convinced that partisanship should return as a normal qualification for the Senate.
It’s clear this issue likely didn’t break thought and is not likely to become a defining issue on its own. Most Canadians either see it as a minor issue, say it will not be a factor, or were not aware of the appointments before the survey.
The risk for the government is cumulative. Moves like this can reinforce a perception that a government is becoming more conventional, partisan, or focused on accumulating political power. That matters because one of Carney’s biggest political strengths has been the sense that he approaches politics differently from those who came before him.”
Methodology
The survey was conducted online with 2,705 Canadian adults from July 9 to 15, 2026.
A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey through a set of partner panels. These partners are typically double opt-in survey panels, blended to help manage potential skews that can arise from relying on a single source.
The data were weighted according to census figures to ensure the sample matched the Canadian population by age, gender, educational attainment, and region.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is plus or minus 1.9 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
Totals may not add to 100 because of rounding.
The survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.
About Abacus Data
We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.
We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail, and exceptional value.
And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.
Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.
Contact us with any questions.
Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.
