Socio-political moods of the population of Lviv: December 2010

Press

Download report (UKR)

29.12.2010

Socio-political moods of the population of Lviv: December 2010

If elections to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine were held at the end of December, the largest shares of the vote in Lviv would go to Svoboda (28.8% among those intending to participate in the elections), Batkivshchyna (16.6%), and Front for Change (12%). Compared with November, the ratings of Svoboda increased slightly from 27% to 28.8% and those of Batkivshchyna from 13.9% to 16.6%, while Front for Change declined from 13.2% to 12%. They are followed by the Party of Regions (7.2%), Our Ukraine (5.5%), Strong Ukraine (3.2%), UDAR of Vitali Klitschko (3.1%), Civic Position (2.2%), and the European Party (2.1%). About 6% of voters support other parties, 5.8% do not support any party, and 7.5% remain undecided.
Forty percent of Lviv residents believe that parliamentary elections should take place in March 2011, while 22% favor October 2012, with the rest undecided. Supporters of Front for Change, Svoboda, and Batkivshchyna are most in favor of elections in 2011, whereas supporters of the Party of Regions, Strong Ukraine, and Our Ukraine more often favor elections in 2012.
The presidential ranking in Lviv looks somewhat different. Oleh Tiahnybok (19.5%) and Yuliia Tymoshenko (19.2%) share the lead, with Arsenii Yatseniuk close behind at 15.2%. Compared with the previous month, the positions of Tiahnybok increased from 18.2% to 19.5% and Tymoshenko from 16.5% to 19.2%, while Yatseniuk declined from 17% to 15.2%. They are followed by Viktor Yanukovych (7.4%), Viktor Yushchenko (6.8%), Vitali Klitschko (4%), Serhii Tihipko (3.4%), and Anatolii Hrytsenko (3.4%). About 4% support other candidates, 6.8% support none, and 10% are undecided.
Among local politicians, Andrii Sadovyi enjoys the highest level of trust in Lviv (58%), followed by Oleh Tiahnybok (54%). Both have a positive Trust Index of +26. Petro Pysarchuk is trusted by almost a quarter of residents, while 57% do not trust him. Former regional governor Vasyl Horbal is trusted by only one in ten residents, while 51% do not trust him. The newly appointed regional council head Oleh Pankevych and city council secretary Vasyl Pavliuk remain little known, as around 60% of respondents either do not know them or cannot form an opinion.
Overall, Lviv residents are satisfied with the results of the 2010 local elections: 58% are satisfied with the outcome of the mayoral election (28% dissatisfied), and 55% are satisfied with the city council election results (26% dissatisfied). Satisfaction with the mayoral election is highest among supporters of Andrii Sadovyi and Serhii Kubiv, as well as among voters of Batkivshchyna, Our Ukraine, and Front for Change. Satisfaction with the city council election is highest among supporters of Yurii Mykhalchyshyn and Andrii Sadovyi, as well as among voters of Svoboda, Batkivshchyna, and Front for Change.
Regarding the mayor’s positioning toward the central government, 17% of respondents believe the mayor should support the opposition and oppose the President and the government, 44% think he should cooperate with the new authorities solely in the interests of the city, and 12% believe he should politically support the President and the government. Compared with March of this year, the share of those favoring cooperation exclusively in the city’s interests declined from 57% to 44%, while the share of those who find it difficult to answer increased.
In light of the results of the latest local elections in Lviv, 42% of residents believe that responsibility for the city’s development lies equally with the Svoboda party, which won the city council elections, and with Andrii Sadovyi, who won the mayoral race. Another 30% think Sadovyi bears the main responsibility, and 8% assign it primarily to Svoboda, while 5% believe that neither bears responsibility. According to 41% of respondents, Sadovyi and Svoboda will cooperate but not without conflicts; 20% expect exclusively constructive cooperation, and 15% expect constant conflict. Expectations of constructive cooperation are highest among Sadovyi and Svoboda voters, although even among them about 10% expect only constant conflicts. The lowest expectations of productive relations are found among supporters of the Party of Regions, Strong Ukraine, and voters for Petro Pysarchuk and Serhii Kubiv.
Twenty-nine percent of Lviv residents believe the overall situation in the city is improving, 39% say it is unchanged, and 21% say it is worsening. Compared with March 2010, these assessments have hardly changed. Residents most often say that the situation has improved over the past year in road repairs (66%), water supply and street lighting (50%), cultural life (48%), and city cleaning (47%). They give somewhat lower ratings to the preservation of historical heritage, heating supply, and public transport, where 36%, 35%, and 31% respectively report improvements. The worst assessments are for housing maintenance services and healthcare facilities, with nearly one-third saying conditions in these areas have worsened over the past year.
Regarding protest moods, 41% of Lviv residents agree that revolutionary sentiments are growing in Ukraine, including 7% who definitely agree and 34% who rather agree than disagree. At the same time, 39% disagree with this statement, including 16% who definitely disagree and 23% who rather disagree, while 19% are undecided. Supporters of Svoboda, Batkivshchyna, and Front for Change are most likely to agree that revolutionary moods are rising. One third of Lviv residents believe that such sentiments could soon result in mass protests similar to those of November 2004, while 45% do not believe so and 24% are undecided. The most radical expectations are again found among supporters of Svoboda, Batkivshchyna, and Front for Change.

Methodology

Survey organization: Rating Group.
Survey population: residents of the city of Lviv aged 18 and older.
Sample size: 800 respondents.
Method: face-to-face formalized interview using a structured questionnaire.
Sampling error: no more than 2.8% for values close to 50%, no more than 2.4% for values close to 30%, and no more than 1.7% for values close to 10%.
Fieldwork dates: 18–26 December 2010.