Conventional wisdom tells us that Pearson is the airport people love to hate. But a new survey of 2000 Ontarians conducted by Abacus Data (posted on Substack) shows that it actually has strong public support. The study was commissioned by Pearson Airport in response to its LIFT expansion program, which was unveiled last May, and which I discussed in a previous post. The new study does not appear to have asked questions about Billy Bishop Airport (BBA), but I will discuss what I think are its implications for the question of expanding, or even retaining, BBA.

Abacus reports that 91 percent of people in its survey who had used Pearson were satisfied with it. Pollara, another survey firm, found that satisfaction with Pearson had risen from the mid-70s in 2023 to 89 percent in 2026.

While passengers who had recently used Pearson were overwhelmingly satisfied with the experience, they were also overwhelmingly – 86 percent – of the view that it is at or near capacity. The logical response to this situation is to expand capacity at Pearson. And the survey showed that 61 percent of all respondents (which includes those not using the airport) favour the multibillion-dollar expansion of airside operations and terminals encompassed by the LIFT program. Only 7 percent of those surveyed do not.

Gateway to a Confident Country

The survey also asked the respondents’ preferences about the characteristics of the expanded airport. In terms of the airport’s ambiance and aesthetic, roughly seventy-five percent of those surveyed consider Pearson to be national infrastructure and the first impression many visitors have of Canada. They want Pearson to be seen as a world-class airport that, in addition to being efficient and reliable, looks and feels like it belongs to a confident and modern country that wants to attract investment, talent, and visitors.

How Pearson does this is another matter. Maybe after the committee of distinguished architects chaired by Moshe Safdie that is reviewing proposals to make 24 Sussex Drive a prime ministerial residence that reflects a confident and modern country, they can undertake a similar exercise for Pearson Airport. I am not being facetious. Designing a structure as large and complicated as an airport to make this type of statement is a challenge for public architecture. Safdie redesigned Singapore’s Changi Airport to embody a paradise garden, presenting Singapore as a city in a thriving natural setting.

Maitre Chez Nous

The second aspect of a redeveloped Pearson Airport that the survey respondents report clear views on is its ownership. They strongly oppose (55 to 19 percent) outright sale to private investors and even the sale of a minority stake to investors from outside Canada (41 to 28 percent). The only form of privatization that has majority support was sale of a minority stake to Canadian investors such as pension funds, with control staying in the hands of the airport authority (45 percent in favour, 21 percent opposed). This result is significant in light of Prime Minister Carney’s expression of interest at the Canada Investment Summit in privatization of the four largest Canadian airports (Pearson, Trudeau. Vancouver, Calgary). Carney didn’t specify what type of privatization he prefers. The survey gives a strong indication of what would be publicly acceptable.

Not in the Same League

The implications of this survey combined with last summer’s public consultation about the expansion of BBA are negative for the latter. First, public opinion strongly supports expanding Pearson and strongly opposes expanding BBA. Second, user satisfaction with Pearson has sharply increased, contradicting the image BBA’s operators try to present of their friendly and efficient little airport being preferable to the vast and bureaucratic Pearson. Third, the public sees Pearson as a national gateway that should make a statement about Canadian identity. No one envisions BBA playing that role. Fourth, if the only type of foreign ownership that would be publicly acceptable is minority ownership, then the 100 percent ownership of BBA’s terminal by a shadowy foreign financial entity with no Canadian presence – except vigorous covert lobbying – is completely antithetical to that preference.

The people have spoken yet again about BBA, not directly as was the case last summer, but indirectly, through their views about BBA’s obvious competitor, Pearson. And their demand is the same: focus on Pearson!