Pierre Poilievre’s “pro-choice” position does not align with the values of the voters he’s hoping to represent in the August 18th by-election. This is according to a public-opinion survey conducted July 23, 2025, in the federal riding of Battle River–Crowfoot.

The survey was conducted for Campaign Life Coalition by National Public Research Canada, an experienced political polling firm. With 599 survey respondents in the riding of Battle River-Crowfoot, it has a theoretical margin of error of ±4.0%, 19 times out of 20.

Out-of-step with voters on abortion

The Conservative Party leader who lost his longtime seat in an Ottawa area riding, hopes to regain entry to the House of Commons by contesting a by-election in one of the most socially conservative ridings in Canada, Battle River-Crowfoot.

The survey found that 79.4% of constituents said they were strongly opposed to the legalization of abortion in varying respects, compared with only 11.6% who support Poilievre’s position of unrestricted access to abortion throughout all 9 months of pregnancy. The remaining 9% were “undecided”.

The 79% figure broke down into categories of varying opposition to abortion with 17% opposing all abortions, nearly 27% opposing all abortions except for rape and incest, and 35% wanting to ban abortion after the first trimester.

This finding means that Poilievre’s stance places him within the small minority of just under 12% of Battle River-Crowfoot voters who support abortion-on-demand throughout all nine months of pregnancy, for any reason or no reason at all.

Strong plurality oppose taxpayer funding of abortion 

A second area where Poilievre appears to be offside with the voters he's asking to represent is taxpayer funding of medically unnecessary abortions.  Approximately 100,000 such abortions are committed in Canada per year. 

Lacking evidence to the contrary, we have to presume that Poilievre’s unequivocal pro-abortion stance, like that of Mark Carney, includes support for funding abortion with taxpayer dollars. 

In contrast, the survey found that a plurality of Battle River-Crowfoot residents, by a significant margin, would choose to stop subsidizing elective abortions with taxpayer money.

Nearly 46% of respondents told the pollster they oppose taxpayer-funding of abortion, while only 34% supported it. Twenty percent of respondents were undecided.

Banning sex change interventions for children 

The poll also asked Battle River-Crowfoot voters their views on the hot transgender ideology issues of the day.

Nearly 70% of constituents said they support legislation to ban puberty blockers and sex change surgery for children. Barely 23% opposed it. 

Therefore, championing such a ban would be a clear political winner with voters in this riding. However, Pierre Poilievre’s stance is not so clear.

First, he has never pledged that he would introduce a ban if elected Prime Minister, despite the fact that the Alberta government of Premier Smith has done exactly that, along with numerous other countries and US states.

Secondly, Poilievre voted in favour of a 2021 Liberal law (Bill C-4), which allows the state to jail parents up to five years if they discourage their gender-confused children from taking puberty blockers, or, for example, from undergoing a double-mastectomy, under the guise of outlawing “conversion therapy”.

However, during a scrum in the 2025 election campaign Poilievre did answer a reporter’s question on the topic by stating he disagrees with transgender medical interventions for underage kids.

Given his voting record on Bill C-4, it remains unclear if he would support or oppose the will of his Battle River-Crowfoot constituents, if elected their MP. Would they get the 2021 Pierre who was ok with jailing parents, or the 2025 version?

Banning biological males from competing in women’s sports

Finally, the poll gauged where Battle River-Crowfoot voters stand on legislation to ban biological males from competing in women’s and girls sports.

An overwhelming 82% of respondents said they support such a ban, while only 9% would oppose it.

How do Poilievre’s beliefs match up to those of the people he’s asking to represent?

Poilievre has never expressed support for legislation to protect women’s and girls’ sports, much less pledged to introduce such a law if he were to become Prime Minister.

His overall support of homosexual “marriage” and LGBT activism puts into question whether he would represent the will of his constituents as Battle River-Crowfoot’s MP by supporting a bill to protect female sports. Or, might he thwart their will, for example, by blocking a future private members bill on this issue from another Conservative MP?

Conclusion

Polling evidence demonstrates that Pierre Poilievre’s social liberalism is not a good fit for this small-c, conservative riding.

MP Damien Kurek, who resigned his seat in order to make way for Poilievre, was a devout Christian who strongly and publicly opposed abortion, in perfect harmony with the beliefs of the majority of Battle River-Crowfoot voters. Kurek made logical sense as their representative to Parliament.

Mr. Poilievre appears to be hoping for a marriage of convenience in this byelection, united with constituents almost solely by their common opposition to Liberals. However, a question remains... Will the voters of Battle River-Crowfoot settle for convenience, or do they want true love?

They would find a better match in any of the three pro-life, pro-family candidates who are also applying for the job of Battle River-Crowfoot MP in the August 18th byelection:

These three candidates are endorsed by Campaign Life Coalition as being pro-life.

We urge Battle River-Crowfoot voters not to vote for Mr. Poilievre due to the fact he supports killing children in the womb.

Instead, we recommend they vote their values by casting a ballot for Mr. Abraham, Mr. Bridges or Mr. Willerton.