75 replies to this topic

[phx]

Are you expecting to have your own, personal representative in the government?

I don't see any way to do that. When you vote, you vote for who should represent your riding. You can't always get who you want.

[LJ]

Why is it that the NDP keep getting elected on the Island?

Is it the seasonal workers dependant on UI (loggers, fishermen) that comprised the bulk of the population on the north island and the union members in Victoria?

I would have thought that when these industries started declining that they would play a lesser role in electing the "working peoples party" and vote more pragmatically.

[Bernard]

Why is it that the NDP keep getting elected on the Island?

Is it the seasonal workers dependant on UI (loggers, fishermen) that comprised the bulk of the population on the north island and the union members in Victoria?

I would have thought that when these industries started declining that they would play a lesser role in electing the "working peoples party" and vote more pragmatically.

The nature of the current electoral system is that seats tend to become considered strong turf for one party of the other. Unless there is a significant change to politics, change in who wins the seats is a long term slow process.

As an example, Victoria was historically very strongly Liberal through to the 1970s. In the 1970s to 1980s there was a period of instability and transition until Victoria emerged as strongly NDP.

The political parties also do not try to win all of the seats in the province. If the NDP wins a seat on the Island by a strong margin, the Liberals put very little effort into winning it in the next election.

The media also reinforces the idea that there are ridings that are safe and will not seriously report on the race.

In 2013, only 20 of the 85 ridings will be considered in play in the election. On Vancouver Island the NDP will be considered to have most of the ridings already won before the election.

[LJ]

I agree with your statements but it doesn't answer the question - why?

In the 70s and 80s there was no provincial Liberal party just Socreds and NDP.

Was the island NDP then?

[groundlevel]

Why do people on the island vote NDP?

Well, honour and tradition for many (ie grandpappy was a CCFer -- so I'm voting like my parents and grandparents).

As to "in the 70s and 80s there was no provincial Liberal party just Socreds and NDP. Was the Island NDP then?"

Um. . . the B.C. Liberals are the Socreds.

The first socialist elected to the provincial assembly/parliament was elected in 1898. My family has lived here 'forever' -- except that branch that buggered off to California -- and the Island has been way more socialist/CCF/NDP in the past then it is now.

[Bernard]

As to "in the 70s and 80s there was no provincial Liberal party just Socreds and NDP. Was the Island NDP then?"

Um. . . the B.C. Liberals are the Socreds.

The Liberals are a very different party than the Socreds. Social Credit was a right wing populist party with a strong grass roots. Socreds were most likely to be Federal PCs than anything else. Social Credit was socially conservative.

The Liberals are a much more urban party that is not populist. It is also strongly connected to the federal Liberal party even if the two are not formally linked. The BC Liberals have the same policies as the federal Liberal party. The BC Liberal party is politically on the centre right, not the right wing as the Socreds were. The BC Liberals are socially Liberal - do not forget that in their first term one of their MLAs married his longtime male partner once same sex marriage was legal.

[Ms. B. Havin]

^ Good points, Bernard. But whether it's because partisanship is so deeply ingrained here, or whether anything that's not NDP immediately is suspect, it's a fact that many people think of the BC Liberals as right-wingers, and if not right-wingers, then as "corporatists" who can only defend "business" interests.

It's kind of funny. The party certainly has a stake in business interests, but for the most part, those are small businesses and hardly "corporatist" interests. At the same time, the unions are strong enough here to qualify as a corporate entity if ever there was one, yet no one accuses the NDP of defending corporate interests.

It's all rather confusing, except that it's partisan and basically pro- or anti-"the system"/money/capital.

Meanwhile, most of the capital/ money/ business in this province runs through the capillaries that are small business. I really don't understand why anyone should buy into polarizing thinking around this.

[Bernard]

Where I think people have a problem in understanding the political parties is when people view the Federal Liberal party as somehow on the left. One only need to look at Saanich and the Gulf Islands in the federal election and this idea that the Liberal was somehow on the left when politically she could very easily have been a BC Liberal.

Traditionally the Federal Liberals have been the primary home of the scions of corporate Canada. The Conservatives have traditionally been the home of the entrepreneurs. These two groups are very different in how they view the world and their place in it. Most entrepreneurs feel like outsiders battling the system.

Corporate scions resist change, entrepreneurs push for change.

The NDP may not be the home of the corporate elites, but the leadership in the labour movement in Canada, especially the public sector unions, is closer in attitudes and behaviours to the corporate scions in Canada than they will admit. They have become an entrenched elite that is resistant to change. The NDP long ago ceased to be an agent of change in politics.

What we have in BC is a governing party that is traditionally not an agent of change and an opposition that is in the same place. Interestingly the Liberals are more of an agent of change at the moment because of Gordon Campbell.

On the 'left' (I know that is not really a good term for them), it is the Greens that are espousing a politics of change.

The right wing in BC is very unhappy with the BC Liberals and therefore we are likely to see the rise of the Conservatives in BC.

[Ms. B. Havin]

Those are great insights, Bernard, particularly what you wrote about change, who's for it, who resists it. I wonder, does this help explain why Victoria (which has a reputation for resistance to change and being un-hip and stodgy) puts the NDP in power?

[Nparker]

The right wing in BC is very unhappy with the BC Liberals and therefore we are likely to see the rise of the Conservatives in BC.

You mean like we saw on May 12? How well did any Conservative candidates place in this election?

[Ms. B. Havin]

You mean like we saw on May 12? How well did any Conservative candidates place in this election?

Maybe not yet (on 5/12), but Bernard is right if he's suggesting that they're regrouping behind the scenes, getting ready to field viable candidates for next time around.

[Nparker]

I predict the Conservatives will have about as much effect on the outcome of future BC elections as the Green Party has, unless a mass exodus of Liberals takes place (which I can't see happening). As long as we have FPTP, we essentially have a two-party system. The 2013 election will more than likely be decided based on leaders and I am willing to go out on a limb and say that both the Liberals and the NDP will have new head-honchos by then.

[Bernard]

You mean like we saw on May 12? How well did any Conservative candidates place in this election?

The Conservatives only ran 24 candidates but took a reasonable amount of the vote.

Vicki Huntingdon in Delta South is a defacto Conservative and almost won (and on recount might win)

Arthur Hadland in the Peace took 1/3 of the vote as an independent.

If the Conservatives were to run 85 candidates, they would likely get 8-10% of the vote and win several seats. They would take the two peace seats and some other northern and rural ones.

The Liberals are simply too far to the left for about 1/3 of the population in this province. These people are either holding their nose and voting Liberal or not voting at all.

[Nparker]

If the Conservatives were to run 85 candidates, they would likely get 8-10% of the vote and win several seats...

This is nearly the same percentage of the popular vote that the Greens got this time and they did not elect a single member, not even their leader. I don't for a second believe that 1/3 of the electorate has chosen NOT to vote until there are Conservative candidates running in every riding. I still say that under FPTP the Conservatives, like the Green Party are NOT currently a viable force in BC politics. I wonder if there is any other electoral system out there? Oh that's right there is, but the voters turned it down.

[Bernard]

This is nearly the same percentage of the popular vote that the Greens got this time and they did not elect a single member, not even their leader. I don't for a second believe that 1/3 of the electorate has chosen NOT to vote until there are Conservative candidates running in every riding. I still say that under FPTP the Conservatives, like the Green Party are NOT currently a viable force in BC politics. I wonder if there is any other electoral system out there? Oh that's right there is, but the voters turned it down.

BC Reform elected two MLAs with less than 10% of the vote. It is all about concentration of support. The Conservatives have natural concentrations and as the party is seen as viable, they can start getting to levels of support to elect MLAs.

The Greens happen to have rather even support across the province and this works against them. Federally the Greens are more popular than the BQ most of the time but their support is across a lot more ridings. In BC a serious Conservative party is likely to win both the Peace ridings.

[mat]

BC Reform elected two MLAs with less than 10% of the vote. It is all about concentration of support. The Conservatives have natural concentrations and as the party is seen as viable, they can start getting to levels of support to elect MLAs.

The Greens happen to have rather even support across the province and this works against them. Federally the Greens are more popular than the BQ most of the time but their support is across a lot more ridings. In BC a serious Conservative party is likely to win both the Peace ridings.

I have to agree with that. NDP has only had 3 runs of government in BC's history, and each time was facing a competing party that was diametrically different in policy and approach. Greens have tried to both maintain and oppose historical party policy - coming from a special interest, singular environmental movement, and trying to make that mainstream by disposing of radicalism.

BC Liberals have played the centre perfectly - they are the boring normal. Policies for special interest group which may be wrong, never go far enough, or too light weight to make any real difference, but they are there. That satisfies most voters, it makes the BC Libs appear attentive and concerned.

A revised Conservative party in BC would change the voting profile. Same as when the Socreds gained credence. The truly conservative voters, who now vote Liberal, would sway to BCPC - and that would leave the field open for a revitalized NDP to possibly enter government again (if they could avoid a left/environmental split with the Greens)