Newfoundland and Labrador election, 2015-An island of volatility

The Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador will be holding an election to its unicameral legislature, the House of Assembly, on November 30. Newfoundland and Labrador is the easternmost province of Canada. It is also the newest province, having joined Canada in 1949.

Due to its position on the east coast, Newfoundland was one of the first British colonies in America. It was granted self-government and its own legislature in 1854. Elections in the colony were between the Liberal and Conservative parties. The Conservative premier, Fredrick Carter, expressed interest in joining Canada when the nation was federated in 1867, but his defeat by the Anti-Confederation Party (mostly comprised of Liberals) in the 1869 election stopped this.

Newfoundland was granted Dominion status in 1907, a similar status to that given to Australia and New Zealand until the 1950s. This made it a technically independent country, with its own legislature, and with its own Prime Minister.  The government, however, faced the issues that happen when you have a large, sparsely-populated country; the construction of a railway across the island of Newfoundland, and its need for government support, put the government in debt. 

The Great Depression hurt Newfoundland badly, and a drop in fish prices (fish being one of Newfoundland's major commodities) as well as high debt meant that the province was in serious crisis. In the 1932 election, the United Newfoundland Party, running on a platform of handing back government of Newfoundland back to the British in exchange for financial aid, defeated the incumbent Liberal government, and the functions of government were handed to an unelected Commission.

The Americans and Canadians spent significant amounts of money on Newfoundland during the war, which improved the economy. The government then decided, now that the crisis was largely over, to hold a Constituional Convention. After discussing a range of options, including the possibility of joining the United States, the convention agreed that a referendum should be held, in which the public would be given three options; returning to dominion status, continuing the Commission of Government, or Confederation with Canada (the Convention had not wanted this option to be on the ballot, but the British insisted)

The first referendum took place in June 1948. Off an 88% turnout, 44.5% voted for Confederation, 41.1% voted for dominion status, and the remaining 14.3% voted for the continuation of the Commission.

In order to ensure that the chosen option had majority support, a runoff referendum took place in July. The top two polling options were on the ballot, and Confederation won, with 52.3% of the vote to 47.7% for Dominion status. As a result, Newfoundland joined Canada in April 1949, and the rest of Canada were welcoming.

The first election to Newfoundland's provincial legislature took place a month after Newfoundland entered Canada. The result was a win for the Newfoundland Liberal Party, under the leadership of member of the Constitutional Convention Joey Smallwood. The Liberals won 22 seats, to 5 for the Progressive Conservatives and one for an Independent.

The Liberals were re-elected easily until 1971, all under Smallwood's leadership. During this time, the Newfoundland New Democratic Party was formed. However, the New Democrats were failing to make much of an impact in Eastern Canada, and the Newfoundland branch was no exception; it did not win any seats, and it won below 8% of the vote in every election it contested. In 1971, with the Smallwood government ageing, the Progressive Conservatives won 21 seats to 20 for the Liberals and one for the Labrador Party (Labrador being the section of the province not on the island of Newfoundland). The Labrador Party member backed the Liberals, meaning that there was a 21-21 tie (and this is why odd numbers are important when you are figuring out how many seats you want in a legislature).

Smallwood resigned in January of 1972, and Conservative leader Frank Moores took over the reins of government. However, he quickly realised that it would be near-impossible to govern a province with an exact tie in the legislature, and called an election for March. This election was won by the Progressive Conservatives with a massive landslide; they won 60.5% of the vote and 33 out of 42 seats.

Following this defeat, the Liberal Party removed Smallwood as leader. In 1974, Smallwood ran against new Liberal leader Ed Roberts, but was defeated in the convention 403-298. He then left and formed the Liberal Reform Party. The same year, an election took place. At this election, the Progressive Conservatives were returned to government, with 45.5% of the vote and 30 out of 51 seats. The Liberals won 16 seats and 37.1% of the vote, Smallwood's Liberal Reform Party won 4 seats and 12% of the vote (with only 28 candidates), and the NDP won 4.3% and no seats, again with a limited slate of candidates. One Independent Liberal was elected. Had Smallwood's party not run, and had all his votes gone to the Liberals, the Liberals would have won 26 seats to 25 for the PCs.

The next few elections saw the PCs gaining strength, and consistently winning both majorities of votes and seats. 1984 saw the first elected NDP member, when Peter Fenwick was elected for the Labrador district of Menihek, with a 26% swing towards his party. In the election next year, the NDP won 14%, a gain of about 10% (although some of this was due to the NDP running substantially more candidates). However, they only won the one seat, to 36 for the PCs off 48.6% of the vote and 15 for the Liberals off 36.7% of the vote.

The next election in 1989, however, saw the defeat of the Progressive Conservatives, after the failure of a controversial greenhouse project. At this time, however, Newfoundland was experiencing significant growth; the result of substantial petroleum deposits off the coast. The previous PC premier, Brian Peckford, had been involved in conflicts with the federal government, and this would continue over the next years.

However, the election victory was far from a clean win. Despite winning 47.6% of the vote, the PCs only won 21 seats, to 31 for the Liberals off 47.2% of the vote and 4.4% for the NDP, which won no seats. The average Liberal candidate was elected with 4% fewer votes than the average elected PC candidate, which suggests that the reason the PCs lost was because their vote spread was inefficient.

The Liberals were reelected in 1993, in a victory that is potentially attributable to the landslide Liberal victory nationwide of the same year and the decision by the national Progressive Conservative government to close the cod fishery in Newfoundland due to a lack of fish, which led to the loss of tens of thousands of jobs in the province. The Liberals made minor vote gains, and the NDP won 7.4% (a gain of about 3%) and won a seat. In 1996, the Liberal government repeated this feat, winning 55% of the vote and 37 out of 48 seats, to nine for the PCs and one for an Independent and for the NDP.

Again, the Liberals were re-elected in 1999, with 49% of the vote and 32 seats, to 14 for the PCs and two for the NDP. A weak economy in the province, however, meant that in 2003, the Liberal government was defeated by the Progressive Conservatives, led by Danny Williams. Williams led the PCs to a landslide win. The party won 58% of the vote and 34 of 48 seats, to 33% and 12 seats for the Liberals and 6% and two seats for the NDP.

While the government was initially unpopular due to public service cuts, Williams' popularity soon rebounded dramatically after he was involved in a fight with Prime Minister Paul Martin involving equalisation payments. Newfoundland and Labrador wanted to keep all of its oil and gas revenue and receive equalisation payments until Newfoundland became as rich as the national average but the federal government wanted to take a share of oil and gas revenue or reduce payments. After a lengthy standoff, which included a controversial decision by Williams to stop displaying Canadian flags in the province, the government finally reached a deal, whereby Newfoundland would receive equalisation payments and would be able to keep its revenue from resources. This led to Williams becoming very popular in the newly wealthy province.

The 2007 election was therefore something of a foregone conclusion. Williams had massive support, and it was even speculated that the Progressive Conservatives would be able to win every seat, a feat that had only happened twice before in Canadian history. In the end, the PCs won 44 out of 48 seats off 69.5% of the vote. This was higher support than the Liberals had received in Prince Edward Island in 1935 (58%) and in New Brunswick in 1987 (60%), although both cases had resulted in one party winning all the seats in the legislature. The Liberals were able to hold on to three seats (two with over 60% of the vote, which may go some way to explaining why the party was still in the legislature; freakishly high support in small areas) off 21.7% of the vote, whereas the NDP won one seat off 8.5% of the vote.

Williams was involved in another public fight with Prime Minister Stephen Harper in 2008, after Harper decided to cap the amount of payments Newfoundland could receive. While this was fairly popular in other provinces, Williams was furious, and decided to campaign against the Conservatives in the federal election of that year. He formed the Anything But Conservative campaign, and his party campaigned for the election of federal Liberal and NDP candidates. The campaign had dramatic effect; the Conservatives polled only 16.5% of the vote in the province, their lowest total nationwide, and won no seats.

In 2010, Williams resigned, and was replaced by Deputy Premier Kathy Dunderdale. While this was initially on an interim basis, Ms Dunderdale chose to run for PC leader, and therefore Premier, on a permanent basis. She ran in a leadership convention unopposed, and was thus therefore made premier.

The election of the next year was widely expected to be another easy win for the PCs. With a wide lead in the polls and strong growth. The Liberals were struggling to make an impact, but the NDP gained support dramatically in the late days of the campaign, and it was considered possible that they would be able to finish second. At this point, the New Democrats were gaining support nationwide, in places where they had not had much support before (like Quebec).

In the end, the NDP finished second in terms of votes, with 25%, but third in seats, with 5 seats out of 48. The Liberals won 6 seats and 19.1% of the vote, while the PCs won 37 seats and 56%. Most of the NDP seats were won in St John's, the capital city, while the Liberals were strongest in Labrador and the west of the province.

Dunderdale's government started off popular, but has declined in support since the last election. This has been due to a variety of factors; the declining price of oil, an increasing provincial deficit, and cuts to education, amongst others. One year out from the election, the government had fallen into second place in the polls, behind a surging NDP.

With her polls collapsing, Dunderdale resigned in January 2014. She was replaced on an interim basis by Deputy Premier Tom Marshall. The first attempt to elect a permanent leader took place in March of the same year. Energy businessman Frank Coleman was the only candidate, but declined the leadership for family reasons, and Health Minister Paul Davis was elected narrowly in September.

However, the New Democrats eventually fell back. This was due to a leadership scandal that took place in late 2013 when NDP leader Lorraine Michael was criticised by her caucus (her entire caucus), who sent a letter asking that a leadership convention be held. Two members of the caucus backed out on the letter, while the other two stood by their words and left the party, later joining the Liberals.

A leadership review held in May 2014 allowed Michael to stay in office, but after dismal performances in the Conception Bay by-election (where there was a 21% swing against the NDP candidate) and the Trinity-Bay de Verde by-election (where the NDP candidate lost 8%), as well as fast declining polls, she resigned. In a leadership election, union leader Earle McCurdy was elected leader by 68%. McCurdy improved the party's polling for a short time, but in recent weeks they have fallen back, and their support has gone to the Liberals.

The Liberals have performed well over the past few years. Following the 2011 election, Kevin Aylward resigned, and was replaced by Dwight Ball, the member for the rural district of Humber Valley. The party has been leading the polls since August 2013, and has gained ten seats through defections and by-elections. The recent Conception Bay by-election saw a 42% swing towards the Liberals, and the Humber East by-election resulted in a 47% swing towards the Liberal candidate.

Expected results, and what they mean

It looks almost certain that the Liberals will win this election. The poll aggregator site ThreeHundredEight projects that the Liberals will win 57% of the vote and 30 out of 40 seats. Despite Canadian opinion polling's previous poor performances, it would take a significant fail on the part of pollsters to call this election wrong.

While part of this is local factors, another part is that the election has been timed well for the Liberal Party. It takes place during the honeymoon of the federal Trudeau Liberal government, which is not insubstantial (a recent poll gave the Liberals 55% of the vote to 25% for the Conservatives and 12% for the NDP). The election of the Trudeau government boosted the support of the provincial Liberals substantially.

Another impact of this election regards the NDP, and their position in Atlantic Canada. While the party gained significant support in Atlantic Canada in 1997, they have no seats in the area at this point. In terms of provincial governments, too, the NDP has not done so well in recent elections. Despite positive polls in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, the party won no seats in both elections. They had more luck in Nova Scotia, winning government there for one term, but are now in third place. A loss in this election would represent another setback for the NDP in this region.

The loss for the Progressive Conservatives does not, as happened in Alberta, mean that they will be likely shut out of power for a long time. While the voters of Newfoundland seem to like strong government and large majorities, the performance of the last term suggests that a large majority will not make the Liberals invulnerable.

Canada 2015-What does it mean for political reform?

At this point, it should now be clear that the Liberal Party of Canada has won the 2015 Canadian election, with 184 seats to 99 for the Conservative Party, 44 for the New Democrats, 10 for the Bloc Quebecois, and a single seat for the Green Party. The Liberals will have a majority of 14 in the new parliament.

This is a fairly unexpected result. The campaign period saw the Liberals pull out a narrow lead over the Conservatives, with the NDP relegated to third place. However, in the end, it appears pollsters overstated the NDP vote at the expense of the Liberals. This may have been because NDP voters tactically switched to the Liberals to prevent a Conservative government. At this point, it's a bit unclear. Canada's polling industry has had some significant errors recently; for example, all polls for the 2013 British Columbian election had the NDP in the lead, but the Liberals actually won. This is a less egregious error, and it has to be seen in the context of a long and complicated election campaign.

Despite Trudeau's small majority, it's certain that he will be able to pass his agenda through the House of Commons. Canada has strongly disciplined parties, and in the last parliament, even the most rebellious of MPs voted with their parties more than 95% of the time. The NDP will also offer support on some issues.

One interesting thing about this election is its similarity to the last one. The below image shows the results of both elections, side by side.

Click on the image for a larger size

While the colours change, the ratio is the same. There is a government party, with a small majority. The opposition has about 30% of the seats, and the third party has 10-12%. The fourth party is very minor, although the identity of this one has not changed. 

The above chart shows that the 2015 and 2011 results are perhaps a return to pre-1993, when Canada had a complete three-party system. The emergence of the Bloc and the splitting of the right between the Progressive Conservatives and Reform Party changed this, but both of these trends have now seemingly reversed.

Whether this will last is, again, unclear. However, I think it is very likely that the current state of affairs will persist. The Bloc polled badly despite Giles Duceppe's return as leader, and the Greens are shrinking. Of course, freak events like the NDP surge in 2011 might happen, and no one can really tell what the future holds. Trudeau may perform badly, and disappoint NDP or Conservative switchers. Or the Conservatives might split, or the Bloc might make a comeback. Who knows?

The election and political reform

Trudeau faces one issue when he gets into office. The Senate of Canada, a wholly appointed body, currently has a Conservative majority. There are 47 Conservative Senators, to 29 Liberal (affilated) Senators and seven independents. Now, this looks bad, but it is important to note that this is not the entire Senate. There are 22 seats that have fallen vacant, but have not had appointed members. Former Prime Minister Harper did not appoint people to these seats, as part of his sporadic enthusiasm for Senate reform.

Normally, Trudeau would appoint Liberals to all 22 seats, and that would be that. However, there are two factors in play here that will make this harder. First of all, the Liberals do not actually have a Senate caucus. Trudeau expelled all Liberal Senators from the party caucus in 2014, although the Senators quickly decided to call themselves Independent Liberals (a genius plan! How could Trudeau have seen it coming?).

Of course, this is fine for the current Senators. But Trudeau now has to make appointments. He is faced with the dilemma of having made promises not to appoint any Liberals, and having to appoint enough Senators who will toe the Liberal line in order to pass his agenda. One of those things may have to go, and I am willing to reckon it will be not appointing Liberals.

The other issue is that Trudeau will apparently not be in control of Senate appointments. The Liberal platform calls for the creation of a "new, non-partisan, merit-based process to advise the Prime Minister on Senate appointments". What this will exactly look like is really, really unclear. However, such a vague commitment gives the Liberals no shortage of room to wriggle out of this commitment. While this may seem cynical, I think that the 22 new Senators will most likely be fairly supportive of the Liberal Party.

Electoral reform is another matter. The Liberals made a more specific promise in this area, saying that they are "committed to ensuring that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the post voting system". They say that they will convene a committee to discuss ideas, and then within 18 months they will pass legislation to introduce a new electoral system.

Of course, it's kind of hard to tell what system the Liberals will introduce. However, one can guess that they might go with some form of preferential voting, most likely single-transferable vote in single member districts/preferential voting/alternative vote. As the centrist party, they will receive preferences from the Conservatives against the New Democrats (although, if it is optional preferential, this flow will be fairly weak) and New Democrat and Green preferences against the Conservatives. It may be a way to solve the vote-splitting issue on the Canadian left without a merger of the two major parties, which would be acrimonious. Single-member districts will likely be maintained; only the much reduced NDP and the unimportant Greens have consistently been in favour of proportional representation with multi-member districts.

I would expect such a change to be heavily resisted by the Conservatives, who will try to block it in the Senate. They will argue that the proposal will not have democratic legitimacy, as it has not been presented to voters. If the Liberals have trouble passing it through the Senate (not likely), they might resort to a referendum on the issue.

The Canadian Senate has seemingly survived this election, although some more scandals may put Trudeau under pressure to make more changes. However, from a tactical perspective, electoral reform would be one Liberal promise worth keeping.

Canada 2015-the election and political reform

The northern American nation of Canada will be holding an election on October the 19th. The election will be for all the 338 seats in the House of Commons, the lower house of the Canadian Parliament. Canada has a parliamentary system, and is a constitutional monarchy under the Queen of the United Kingdom.

The political system

Ever since it was created as an autonomous Dominion of the United Kingdom in 1867, Canada has stuck faithfully to the Westminster political system. It has a bicameral parliament, with 338 members of the House of Commons, the lower house, and 105 members of the Senate, the upper house. Legislation has to pass both houses of Parliament, and then has to be approved by the Governor-General, the representative of the Queen appointed on advice of the Prime Minister (who basically rubber-stamps legislation passed by the Parliament). The main difference between Canada and the UK is that Canada is a federal nation, so it is not as centralised as the United Kingdom.

Unlike some other post-British Empire states, Canada has kept the tradition of an appointed upper house. Senators are appointed on the advice of the Prime Minister, who is required to appoint a certain number of Senators for each province. Since 1965, Senators serve until the age of 75; up until this point, they could serve for life. The Senate is the least important house; it is very rare for cabinet members to sit in the Senate, except as a temporary measure before entering the House.

This part of Canada's constitution has been controversial, as it means that Senators are unaccountable to the electorate. A number of scandals involving Senators misusing their expenses have led to public support for the scandal, with only 14% supporting the status quo. Some Senators are actually elected; the province of Alberta holds elections for 'senators-in-waiting' using the multiple non-transferable vote system, and the current Conservative government has agreed to appoint these people to fill Albertan vacancies: no great hardship, given that all the Senators elected in positions that have led them to be appointed up to now have been members of the Conservatives.

Like the United Kingdom, Canada uses the single-member plurality system (voters vote for one candidate, the candidate with the most votes wins, abbreviated as SMP). Up to 1967, some districts elected more than one member, using the multiple-non-transferable vote system (voters vote for M candidates, where M is the number of members to be elected, the M highest polling candidates are elected). The system is fairly majoritarian, and in most countries where it is used, it leads to majority governments off plurality votes and two-party systems.

However, Canada has not had an especially strict two-party system. In the early days of the dominion, there were two parties, the Liberals, who were in favour of economic and social liberalism, and the Conservatives, who were in favour of economic and social conservatism.

 In 1921, the first major new party, the Progressives, won 58 seats in the House of Commons to 118 for the Liberals and 49 for the Conservatives. The Progressives were an agrarian party, supportive of socialism, and gained most of their support from the farming provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. The party did not last, however, with pressure from the similar United Farmers of Alberta party pushing them down to just 11 seats in 1926. These two parties did not suffer so much from the majoritarian effects of SMP, as their support was heavily concentrated in certain regional areas.

1935 saw the Great Depression wreaking economic havoc in Canada, with unemployment high. Two new parties won seats at the federal level; the Social Credit Party, a socially conservative but economically left-wing party, and the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), a socialist party. They won 17 and 7 seats respectively, although the vote share for the CCF, at 9.3% was higher than the 4.1% for Social Credit. This was because Social Credit were completely dominant in the province of Alberta, where they won all but two of their seats, while the CCF lacked this dominance anywhere. The election also resulted in the complete destruction of the Farmer-Labor and Progressive parties.

The Liberals and Conservatives remained dominant, however, through the next years. The Conservatives renamed themselves the Progressive Conservatives. The CCF changed their name in 1961 to the New Democratic Party (NDP) and Social Credit split into an English-speaking and a Quebec party; the English party quickly disappeared, while the Quebec party stuck around for a while, although with few seats.

Significant changes took place in 1993. The Progressive Conservative government of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney had become unpopular after introducing a Goods and Services Tax, increasing the budget deficit, and spending a lot of time on constitutional affairs. Mulroney had resigned, and was replaced by Kim Campbell, who became the first female Prime Minister of Canada.

Despite this, the Progressive Conservatives won just two seats at the election, down from 169 seats at the last election. The NDP won 9 seats, down from 44. They lost seats to the Liberals, who won government at this election, but also to two new entrants; the Bloc Quebecois, a party favouring independence for the province of Quebec, which won 54 seats and formed the Opposition, and the Reform Party, a right-wing party with strong support in the western provinces, which won 52 seats.

Interestingly, the Bloc Quebecois won a smaller share of the vote than the Progressive Conservatives (13.5% for the Bloc, 16% for the Progressive Conservatives), but due to their regionally concentrated support, the Bloc (and Reform, which won 18.7%) won more seats than the Progressive Conservatives.

This, of course, was all brilliant for the Liberal Party. They were able to govern for the next decade with weak and splintered opposition. The Progressive Conservatives and NDP formed the opposition to the Liberals in the East, the Bloc formed the opposition in Quebec, and Reform opposed the government in the west. Seeing as neither party was especially interested in forming a coalition with another, the Liberals could count on split opposition votes, which meant that they could stay in government.

This situation was recognised by leaders of both right-wing parties as being unsustainable, and in 2003, the Progressive Conservatives and the Reform Party (by this point named the Canadian Alliance) merged into the Conservative Party. This party would be led by Canadian Alliance leader Stephen Harper, a MP from Alberta.

The Conservatives won a minority government (Not sure what this is? See below) in the 2006 election, with the Liberal Party forming the opposition, the Bloc being the third party, and the NDP being the third (in the case of the last two, the vote shares were the reverse of the seat shares). This was repeated in the 2008 election, only with the Liberals weakened and the Conservatives and NDP strengthened.

The next election, which took place in 2011, was rather different. The Liberals were led by Michael Ignatieff, a well-known academic. However, he was criticised by both the Conservatives and the NDP for not being resident in Canada. The NDP leader, Jack Layton, experienced an upswing of popularity in Quebec, traditionally a NDP-free zone. This was mostly at the expense of the Bloc.

In the end, the results were 166 seats for the Conservatives (a majority government, the first since 2004), 103 seats for the NDP, 34 seats for the Liberals, 4 seats for the Bloc, and one seat for the Greens. The result was the strongest result ever for the NDP, and weakest ever for the Bloc.

What are minority governments?

Despite Canada's usage of the single-member plurality system, there is a multi-party system, as this graph shows.

The effective number of parties is a measure used to gauge how many parties of the same size would be in the Parliament after an election. As you can see, Canada's score is consistently above two. The existence of a multi-party system owes a lot to regional differences, with different parties getting support in different areas.

Of course, multi-party systems tend to lead to parliaments in which no party has a majority. Canada is no exception to this. Since 1972, 5 out of 16 elections have resulted in parliaments where no party has a majority.

So, how do governments get formed out of minority parliaments? In most countries, parties would form a coalition in order to control a majority. However, in Canada, the largest party in terms of seats forms the government. It then has to avoid a no-confidence motion. It usually avoids this by making informal arrangements with other parties (policies in exchange for votes), or, if one of the major opposition parties is unpopular, relying on that party to not vote no-confidence in the government.

Formal coalition governments are very rare in Canada. Following the 2008 election, there were plans for the Liberals and NDP to form a coalition government, with outside support from the Bloc and Greens; however, these fell through after Prime Minister Harper prorogued (temporarily suspended) Parliament to avoid a no-confidence vote, and Michael Ignatieff rose to the Liberal leadership.

There has been talk of a coalition government following this election between the Liberals and NDP. However, such a coalition would prove controversial, especially if the Conservatives won the most seats but not a majority. The Conservatives would claim that they would have the right to govern; while a successful no-confidence motion would probably stop this, it might be looked upon unfavourably by the electorate. Liberal leader Justin Trudeau has said that he will not take part in a formal coalition, but has not ruled out supporting a NDP government from the outside.

The parties

The Conservative Party is the major right-wing party in Canada. It is led by Stephen Harper, an Albertan MP who has led the party since it was formed. The party is a coalition of more radical right-wingers from the West, and more moderate conservatives from Ontario and the Atlantic provinces. Much of Harper's popularity has come from a fairly strong economy despite the international recession, caused by increasing oil exports. However, with the recent reduction in the global price of oil, Canada's economic growth has paused. Despite contrary expectations, he did not reverse the decision of the Canadian parliament to legalise gay marriage in 2005.

Prime Minister Harper has also introduced a number of changes to Canada's political system. He is an opponent of the status quo in the Senate, but due to the convuluted nature of Canada's constitution, this has not happened; a plan to introduce elections was struck down for want of approval from seven provinces and 50% of the population. He has also passed changes to the electoral law, which introduced (fairly liberal) identification requirements, restrictions on political advertising, and repealing the ban on publishing electoral returns before the close of the polls nationwide.

Polls since the last election have been somewhat negative for the Conservative Party. They led until March 2012, where they entered into a tight two-way race with the NDP. The NDP surge had abated by November, and they led (but only with 30-35%, short of the 39% from the general election) until April, when the Liberals took the lead. By the start of 2015, their polling had strengthened, but this year they have been pushed out of the way by the Liberal surge.

The New Democratic Party (NDP) are a left-wing social democratic party. As explained above, they traditionally have been a minor group, but they gained support dramatically in 2011 in Quebec. At that election, they were led by Ontario's Jack Layton, but he died of cancer shortly after the election. He was replaced by Thomas Mulcair after a tight leadership race. Mulcair is a Quebec MP, who was elected in 2007 in a by-election; he was only the second NDP MP from Quebec. The party is in government at the provincial level in Manitoba and Alberta, and is traditionally strongest in the western provinces. However, it has gained support in the East in recent times, although there is still no provincial NDP.

The NDP has some fairly radical proposals for political reform. They propose the abolition of the Senate, and the introduction of proportional representation. The former proposal has the serious issue that it would require unanimous consent from the provinces; certainly, this would be quite a task. While the two provinces governed by the NDP would likely give their consent, it seems likely that provinces that are overrepresented in the Senate (Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick) and are governed by the Liberals would almost certainly exercise their veto.

The proportional representation proposal is more contentious. The system proposed is mixed-member proportional representation, which has been a long standing NDP proposal. However, worryingly, the NDP have said that they will not support a referendum on the proposal. This would mean that a NDP government with the support of the minority of the electorate could pass this dramatic change. It is unlikely that it will pass, however; the NDP are unlikely to win a majority, and even if they do, the Senate (where the NDP have no representation) would probably reject it.

The Liberal Party have had a rough time over the past decade. A liberal centre-left party, they were considered to be the natural party of government. However, in 2004, the party was hit by a number of scandals and the formation of the Conservative Party. Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin was defeated in the 2006 election. He was replaced by Stephane Dion, a minister in the Liberal government. However, he lost ground in the 2008 election, and was replaced by Michael Ignatieff, a well-known academic.

While Ignatieff was perceived to be popular due to his high profile, the Conservatives ran a campaign attacking his American origins. The party lost many seats, falling to just 34 MPs and third place, and Ignatieff lost his own Toronto seat; for obvious reasons he resigned. To replace him, the party turned to Justin Trudeau, a member for Quebec. Trudeau has Liberal pedigree; he is the son of Justin Trudeau, the Liberal prime minister who served from 1968 to 1979, and again from 1980 to 1984.

The Liberals are normally the traditionalists when it comes to the Senate. Their proposals call for Senate appointments to be handed to a non-partisan board, and for Senators to not be members of political parties. Trudeau followed through with this, by removing all Liberal senators from the Liberal caucus. This stunned Liberal senators, who took a full day to think of a solution; still calling themselves Liberals. The Liberal policy also calls for electoral reform, but there is not a specific proposal; instead, they just say that they will 'fully and fairly consider' all proposals, before introducing a bill. Like the NDP, there will be no referendum.

One of the other big losers from the 2011 election was the Bloc Quebecois. They are a Quebec-only party, and their main policy is independence for Quebec. They were formed in 1991, by former Progressive Conservative cabinet minister Lucien Bouchard. The party won 54 out of 75 seats in Quebec, and formed the opposition. The single-member plurality system worked in their favour, as they were a regionally based party. In 1996, Bouchard resigned as leader to become Premier of Quebec (as leader of the Parti Quebecois, a party with a similar policy). He was replaced by Giles Duceppe, who served as leader of the party until 2011, when the party collapsed following the NDP surge in Quebec, winning just 4 seats.

The party went through years of leadership turmoil, with the leadership being held by first the anonymous Daniel Paille, and then Mario Beaulieu, an old hardline supporter of Quebec independence. The party lost three of its four MPs to defections, and hold two today only because one NDP MP defected to the party. Following Beaulieu's resignation, Giles Duceppe returned to the leadership.

The party does not have much in terms of political reform, as their key policy (independence for Quebec) would involve the province being cut loose from Canada, and thus Canada's politics not mattering. However, it is considered that they are vaguely supportive of proportional representation and supportive of the abolition of the Senate.

Like in many countries, the Canadian Green Party have increased their support over the past decade. Their high point in terms of vote share came in 2008, when they won 6.8% of the vote. However, they did not win a seat; their only member, former Liberal Blair Wilson, was defeated. At the 2011 election, the party fell to 3.9%, but their leader Elizabeth May was elected in the British Colombia district of Saanich-Gulf Islands. Over recent years, the Greens won provincial seats in British Colombia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island, and they gained one member through the defection of Bruce Hyer from the NDP. The Greens seem unlikely to win many more seats; Hyer will probably not be re-elected, and no other districts look like they have much potential.

The Greens are supportive of proportional representation, although they do not offer a specific proposal; they say that they will 'consult the public' before introducing laws (although once again, without a referendum). The Greens support Senate elections, through proportional representation.

Last, and almost certainly least, there is Strength in Democracy. This is a small political party formed by two Quebec MPs; one from the Bloc and one from the NDP. The party supports Quebec regionalism, and decentralisation; unlike the Bloc, they will be running candidates throughout Canada. They support proportional representation, but their position on the Senate is unclear. They will almost certainly lose all their seats.

An auspicious outlook for political reform?

Proportional representation looks unlikely to happen in the next Canadian parliament. If the NDP wins a majority, they will introduce legislation for proportional representation, but it will get knocked back by the Senate. It is plausible that the Senate will approve a bill for a referendum, but a referendum would be another story. If the NDP win a minority and need to rely on Liberal support, a lesser reform like preferential voting might be introduced, and might (although it's not entirely clear what the NDP would do about the Senate, seeing as they have refused to appoint any members).

As for the Senate, the Conservatives seem unlikely to be able to pass reform; Harper's disinterest in any change is evident from the fact that it is rarely mentioned on the party website. The NDP certainly have a grand proposal, but unanimous provincial consent seems about as likely as a Strength in Democracy landslide, and the Liberals won't really do much. 

In effect, Canada's election does not look like it will lead to political reform. The institutions already in place make it unlikely that reform will happen, but the campaign is still young, and the stakes could change.

The strange case of the Alberta Wildrose Party

Alberta, a province in the West of Canada, has traditionally had one of the most stable and uncompetitive political environments in the world. However, recently Alberta's political environment has become oddly unstable, and a series of events has taken place involving a new political party known as Wildrose that have surprised many. The party has split, and the majority of members have left to join the government.

The Singapore of the west

Alberta is the fourth most populated province in Canada, and is the second richest per capita. Its large oil reserves have kept them wealthy, and this wealth has fathered a sense of political confidence and complacency.

Albertans have never elected a party that they previously threw out of power. Government has been formed by the Liberal Party, the United Farmers Party (progressivism, social democracy), the Social Credit Party (social conservatism), and the Progressive Conservative Party (also conservative). Governments have also been long-term. No Albertan government has served for less than 14 years in office. 

The United Farmers Party was elected in 1921, and, rather oddly for a progressive party in that era, repealed Prohibition, which had been introduced by the previous Liberal government. They did introduce mandatory sterilisation for the disabled, which seems rather unsettling. However, the United Farmers coped poorly with the Great Depression, and were wiped off the map in 1935 and replaced with the Social Credit Party, led by William Aberhart. 

Social Credit introduced some good ideas, some bad ideas, and some utterly crackpot ideas under Aberhart. One of these ideas was the Accurate News Act, which would have required all Albertan newspapers to print "corrections" of stories that Social Credit members of parliament did not agree with. This bill was knocked back by State Governor John Bowen, in one of the rare cases of state Governors using their fearsome "reserve powers". 

Aberhart died in 1943, and was replaced by the more moderate Ernest Manning. Manning dumped Social Credit as an ideology, and introduced a more mainstream conservative ideology. He led his party to seven consecutive electoral victories, and rarely faced an opposition  of more than 10. Alberta had too few opposition MPs for an opposition leader from 1959 to 1963.

In 1971, the Social Credit Party, under the leadership of Manning successor Harry Strom, was thrown out of office. They lost to Peter Lougheed of the Progressive Conservative Party (PC).  Social Credit won 25 seats in the 75 member Parliament, while the PCs won 49 seats and one New Democrat (social democracy) was elected.

Lougheed  liberalised some of Alberta's more repressive laws about social issues, but didn't do much different. Social Credit collapsed, and won only 4 seats in 1975. They spluttered on for a few more years, but finally left parliament in 1982, when the PCs won 75 out of 79 seats. The other four went to 2 independents and 2 New Democrats. 

In 1985, Lougheed retired. He was replaced by the less popular Don Getty, a football player. Under the leadership of Getty. the Progressive Conservatives lost 14 seats in 1985. While they still won 61 out of 83 seats, they faced a more strengthened opposition of 16 New Democrats, 4 Liberals, and 2 members of the Representative Party (a social-credit style party).

Getty was replaced by Ralph Klein, a more popular Progressive Conservative. The 1993 election, Klein's first as leader, was a polarised contest between him and Liberal leader Lawrence Decore, with the New Democrats being wiped out. Klein won 51 out of 83 seats, with the Liberals winning 32.

For the next 18 years, Klein comfortably won election after election. In 2008, Klein's successor Ed Stelmach was elected, winning 72 seats. 

The rise of Wildrose

In 2011, Stelmach resigned as Premier. His unpopularity was growing, but Progressive Conservative support was not flowing to the Liberals or New Democrats. Instead, it was flowing to a new force; the Wildrose Party.

Formed in 2008 as the Wildrose Alliance, the party was a very conservative party that complained that the PCs have moved too far to the left. The party won no seats in 2008, but came very close to retaining the seat of its only MP; Paul Hinman, who had joined the party from the similar Alberta Alliance.

The Progressive Conservatives chose Alison Redford, a moderate within the Progressive Conservatives. Redford's centrist style alienated many within the PCs, and Wildrose began to lead in the polls. The prospect of a government change in Alberta was on the cards; and in Alberta, when governments change, they change for good.

The 2012 Alberta election was the closest contest in years. Wildrose started out with a lead in the polls, but Redford campaigned hard, appealing to Liberal voters scared of a Wildrose government to vote for her to stop Wildrose. Embarrassing gaffes by Wildrose candidates, like Alan Hunsburger, an Edmonton candidate, who wrote a ranting blog post claiming that homosexuals would "suffer the rest of eternity in the lake of fire, hell". This did not go down well, as did leader Danielle Smith's refusal to disendorse Hunsburger.

In the end, Redford won. Her Progressive Conservatives won 61 seats in the 87 member parliament, a loss of 11 seats from 2008. Wildrose won 17 seats off 35% of the vote, while the Liberals suffered a massive drop in terms of votes, falling from 26% in 2008 to just 10%. The Liberals appear to have been a victim of tactical voting; Liberals may have voted PC to stop Wildrose. However, they managed to win 5 seats, down from 8 in 2008. The New Democrats won 10% and 4 seats.

However, Redford's support didn't improve after 2012. Cuts to higher education, poor relations with unions, and expenses scandals caused dramatic drops in both support for Redford and support for her party. Redford's approval rating dipped below 20%, and Canadian election prediction blog ThreeHundredEight predicted that under some poll results, the PCs would win 9 seats under Redford's leadership.

With the knives out, on March 19, Redford quit. She was replaced temporarily by Dave Hancock and permenantly by Jim Prentice, a former federal environment and industry minister.  Prentice was a far more popular figure than Redford, and under his leadership a number of controversial initiatives were terminated in an effort to placate unions. Prentice's (relatively) clean record in federal government gave him a better image than Redford

So, what did this mean for Wildrose? Well, it was a bit of a shake up. The party that gained strength off the claimed centrism of Stelmach and Redford had some trouble against someone who at least appeared to be a populist conservative in their mould.

On November 2, Wildrose MP Joe Anglin left the caucus. Smith had threatened to expel Anglin from the Wildrose caucus due to criticism of party advisors, and he was already disendorsed in advance of the next election. It seems that Anglin has left because of dissatisfaction with Wildrose, rather than any attraction towards the PCs, as he became an independent.

On the 24th of the same month, another two Wildrose members left. However, this time they joined the PC caucus. Kerry Towle and Ian Donovan quit, claiming that the party was pressuring them to vote in a certain way against their interests, and that they supported Prentice and felt opposition to him was worthless.

However, it took until December for the proverbial poop to hit the fan. Rumours started flying that Wildrose and the PCs would merge, or that there would be a mass floor-crossing. On December 17th, it happened. Smith resigned as party leader, and announced that she would leave Wildrose and join the PCs. Eight other members, including the party house leader, followed her, leaving a rather sad rump of five members.

What makes the whole experience even odder (if the majority of MPs leaving an opposition party to join a government party isn't odd enough) is that Smith, as she was heading out the door, wrote a letter to the remaining caucus members asking them to seriously consider merging with the PCs. This is extraordinary; the leader of a political party with the support of 34% of the vote at an election suggesting that the party merge with a party consistently opposed by that leader.

Danielle Smith's resignation letter by edmontonjournal

Parties such as Wildrose are already rare in Canada, a nation with a relatively stable three-party system. The New Democrats, Liberals and Conservatives have divided up most power in Canada, and the Greens have small support bases in most provinces. One exception is New Brunswick's Confederation of Regions party, a party opposed to bilingualism and the teaching of French. That party won the position of Official Opposition in 1991, but collapsed due to infighting and won no seats in 1995.

In South Korea, a somewhat similar incident took place. The right-wing Democratic Justice Party merged with two liberal opposition parties to form the Democratic Liberal Party, a right-wing party. This is especially odd given that the two liberal opposition parties were led by figures opposed to South Korea's military dictatorship, a dictatorship supported by many Democratic Justice Party members.

I'm really not aware of any other cases where this has taken place. If anyone is aware of another case, please comment.

Green breakthrough in New Brunswick

Today, the Canadian province of New Brunswick held an election for their parliament. The incumbent Progressive Conservative party (right-of-centre) was defeated, and the Liberal party (left-of-centre) was elected to a majority government, with 27 seats in a house of 49.

For a long time, New Brunswick (along with the rest of the Maritime provinces) was a strong two-party system, with the Liberals and Progressive Conservatives alternating in power. However, recent breakthroughs by New Democrats (left-of-centre, social democratic) have significantly altered this dynamic. The strongest example of this trend was in Nova Scotia, where a New Democrat government was elected in 2009 (but heavily defeated in 2013).

The New Brunswick New Democrats (awkward to say) won no seats at the last election, despite winning 10% of the vote. New leader Dominic Cardy decided that in order to get the party to be successful, they needed to become more moderate. To some extent, it worked. The party polled as high as 27%, and some polls put them above the governing Progressive Conservatives. However, a series of embarrassing mistakes in the campaign, including a spat with Liberal leader Brian Gallant over a Downfall Nazi parody video.

It now appears that the New Democrats will win no seats, despite winning 13% of the vote. Cardy has resigned after he failed to be elected in his electorate, winning 30% of the vote to Progressive Conservative Brian Macdonald's 35%. The New Democrat vote was spread too thinly across the province.

One problem for the New Democrats was the late drop in the polls for the Liberals. This may have scared New Democrat voters into voting Liberal in order to prevent a re-election of the Progressive Conservatives. Another issue was a vote split with the Greens. Cardy's centrist message may have attracted voters from the Liberals, but the late drop scared them back. Left-wing New Democrats, who might have been expected to support the party solidly, were isolated by Cardy's move away from their traditional positions, and voted Green as a protest. Former New Democrat leader Alison Brewer joined the Greens in protest against the changes.

In fact, the Greens were the big success story of the night. The party won 6.61% of the vote, an increase of 2% from the last election. A good result, but normally under the single-member plurality system, not enough for a seat. However, the Greens did win a seat. Leader David Coon was elected in the urban riding of Fredericton South in a close four-way race, becoming the third elected Green member of parliament in Canada.

Now, I don't know much about Green parties in New Brunswick. However, the New Brunswick Greens are rather new. They were only formed in 2010, and Coon is the party's second leader. The much older and more popular British Columbia Green Party took five elections to win their first Member of the Legislative Assembly, and the Ontario Greens have failed to win a seat, despite polling 8% at one election.

The result is all the more surprising when you consider that the Greens only won 6.6% of the vote, while the New Democrats won double that, but no seats.

Coon joins the rather small group of Greens who have won single-member plurality elections in single-member plurality only parliaments. There is Caroline Lucas, in the UK, the other two Greens in Canada, John Eder in the Maine House of Representatives and then... (if anyone knows any others, please comment).

In short, the New Brunswick Greens have pulled off a stunning coup. Winning a representative off 6% of the vote is a stunning result, given that in 1987 in New Brunswick the Progressive Conservatives won no seats off 28% of the vote (the Liberals won every seat). I don't know if it will be repeated, but it will certainly go down in Canadian political history