NDP Has History on Its Side, But Not Smart Messaging
In BC races, diving economies usually turf governments.
Bennett's Socreds were only governing party to gain seats in bad times -- 26 years ago.
If history is a guide to the future, the current economic downturn means that B.C. will have a new government on May 12. That's because the time B.C. governments most often are defeated at the polls is when a general election and an economic downturn coincide.
Since 1903, when political parties made their first official appearance in provincial tilts, eight B.C. governments have been turfed from office. Those losses occurred in 1916, 1928, 1933, 1952, 1972, 1975, 1991 and 2001. (Actually, the governments doomed to defeat in 1933 and 1952 disintegrated on the eve of facing the electorate.)
On three occasions -- 1928, 1952 and 1972 -- the overthrown governments had been in power for more than a decade and were seen by many voters as long-in-the-tooth and out-of-touch. And each, to varying degrees, was wracked by internal dissent. Simply, B.C. voters believed it was time for a change.
But the other five times that B.C. governments were kicked to the curb, the province (or Canada, or our largest trading partner, the United States) was either on the cusp of, or deep in the midst of, an economic recession.
This is not to say that the economy was the sole issue in any of these five general elections -- in 1916, 1933, 1975, 1991 and 2001 -- but it was an important factor in each. Dire economic circumstances exacerbated the electoral challenges facing already beleaguered governments.
Why Liberals need rare bit of luck
We can look at the situation another way: have any B.C. governments won re-election when the province has been hit, or is about to be, by an economic downturn? Just three administrations meet this criteria: the Liberals in 1920 and 1937, and Social Credit in 1983.
Yet a closer look shows that in the first two tilts, the government was returned with a much-reduced majority over a divided opposition. In 1920, John Oliver's Liberals lost 11 seats and saw their 26-seat majority cut to just three. Liberal Premier Duff Pattullo was re-elected in 1937, but his government lost three seats and his legislative majority was reduced from 22 to 14.
Just once, when Bill Bennett's Social Credit party won re-election in 1983, has a government been returned with an enhanced legislative majority during an economic downturn. In that election, Bennett's Socreds picked up four new seats, which boosted their majority in the House from five to 13.
In sum, on eight occasions, B.C. governments have faced voters during difficult economic times. Five times the administration was defeated, and twice more won re-election with a much-reduced majority. Just once, in 1983, has a government increased its legislative majority.
It is that latter, sole example in 1983 that the B.C. Liberals -- as well as their supporters, plus many members of the news media -- point to as the paradigm for their re-election in 2009. History suggests that such a feat is akin to drawing to an inside straight: not impossible, but very rare.
Bill Bennett redux?
As the foregoing examples from 1920 and 1937 illustrate, it's possible for a sitting government to lose seats but still be returned to power. Thanks to redistribution, such a scenario in 2009 appears to be almost out of reach for the B.C. Liberals.
Four years ago, Campbell's Liberals won 46 of the legislative assembly's 79 seats. Then, in a by-election last October, the government lost Vancouver-Burrard, which cut their seat total at dissolution to 45.
For the general election now underway, six new ridings have been added to the electoral map. To win a majority, a party must capture at least 43 of 85 seats.
Because Gordon Campbell and the B.C. Liberals held 45 seats at dissolution, and must retain a minimum of 43 to maintain their legislative majority, it follows that the Campbell government can afford to lose no more than two seats they currently hold if they are to remain in office.
In this light, the Campbell Liberals' enthusiasm for Social Credit's electoral success in 1983 is understandable. Simply, nearly the only scenario by which the B.C. Liberals can retain power is to replicate what Bill Bennett did 26 years ago: pick up new government seats in the teeth of a severe economic downturn.
Flood of red ink
So, the current economic climate should assist Carole James and her New Democrats in their quest to defeat the Campbell Liberals, right? Well, most political pundits disagree, with one -- television reporter Keith Baldrey -- going so far as to opine that the NDP during the election "want[s] to talk about anything other than the economy."
How can that be? In March, the number of unemployed British Columbians jumped up to 173,000, the highest number in six years. The unemployment rate, as low as 4.2 per cent in the spring of 2008, has exploded to 7.4 per cent. The number of British Columbians receiving Employment Insurance benefits in January was 56,100 -- up 47.7 per cent from a year earlier.
Bankruptcies are shooting skyward, and a variety of industries -- notably construction, forestry, mining, real estate and tourism -- are struggling for survival. And, remarkably, the deficit-averse Campbell government this spring amended its balanced-budget legislation so as to run deficits in the current and next fiscal years.
Don't B.C. voters believe that it's time for a change? The answer, if current public opinion polls are accurate, is, no.
NDP's silver platter
So, how to explain James's New Democrats' lack of credibility on economic issues? Here are three examples.
First, consider the party's 2005 election platform, prepared under James's direction. Ten of 73 pages were devoted to the economy, but the section eschewed new ideas or innovative thinking, and instead reiterated age-old NDP nostrums -- resolving Aboriginal land claims, restricting raw-log exports, increasing the minimum wage and strengthening the agricultural land reserve -- and restated criticisms of the Campbell government.
Second, three years ago, James surveyed her caucus and decided that Jenny Kwan was the best candidate to serve as economic-development critic. The Vancouver-Mount Pleasant MLA may well have credibility on many issues, but B.C.'s economy is not one of them. (Any who disagree may peruse Hansard and post below examples of Kwan's economic acumen.)
Third, last October, the NDP leader appeared on province-wide television to rebut Gordon Campbell's earlier TV address on the worsening global economy. The event gave James yet another opportunity to display a firm grasp of economic issues and offer some innovative ideas.
She failed to do either, mostly repeating her party's opposition to the Campbell government's pay increases for senior bureaucrats, criticizing cost overruns at the Vancouver convention centre, and insisting the government reduce its advertising budget. And, again, there was a recitation of long-standing NDP promises: curtailment of raw log exports, expansion of grants for post-secondary students, and increased funding for public transit.
The current economic downturn has been delivered to the NDP on a silver platter. In the event that James and her New Democrats fail to win the May 12 general election, they'll have no one to blame but themselves.
Related Tyee stories:
- Why the NDP Has a Shot
BC Liberals hold more safe seats, but 'green suburban swingers' could lift New Dems into power. - Horrors, says Hansen, imagine NDP's James presiding over Olympics
- Bill Bennett Reconsidered
Reviewed: Bill Bennett: A Mandarin's View
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
Frank
14-04-2009
The last line is wrong Will
"In March, the number of unemployed British Columbians jumped up to 173,000, the highest number in six years. The unemployment rate, as low as 4.2 per cent in the spring of 2008, has exploded to 7.4 per cent. The number of British Columbians receiving Employment Insurance benefits in January was 56,100 -- up 47.7 per cent from a year earlier."
So if I understand this correctly, James is "weak" on the economy and Campbell, in spite of the above numbers, is "strong"?
That's like saying Campbell is "strong" on homelessness and child poverty.
If the Liberals win re-election the people of BC have no one to blame but themselves.
realisticman
14-04-2009
Perspective
British Columbia is actually doing better than many places. Something must be going right. Looking around at our neighbours and elsewhere it's quite easy to see that BC is a bit better than, Average.
" 7.9 per cent European Union average "
4/14/2009
Source ::: FINANCIAL TIMES
http://tiny.cc/IhKHh
"Alberta employment figures fall further and faster than other provinces.
When it comes to employment, new figures from Statistics Canada show that Alberta has fallen further and faster over the past six months than any other province."
http://tiny.cc/yEFT9
"Washington state reports its March jobs data on Tuesday. It had an unemployment rate of 8.4 percent in February."
http://tiny.cc/YcIs3
"Oregon’s unemployment rate jumps from 10.7% to 12.1% in only one month!"
http://www.examiner.com/x-6323-Portland-Top-News-Examiner~y2009m4d13-Oregons-unemployment-rate-jumps-from-107-to-121-in-only-one-month
"According to a press release this week from the Oregon State Employment Division, the Oregon unemployment rate rose almost 2% from February to March, at a steady incline since 9 months ago when June reported 5.9%. The United States as a whole has seen a dramatic increase as well, but is currently holding steady at 8.5%."
All the above examples quoted are from this week. Everywhere in the world is the same. Perhaps Frank can cite some examples of places that show no increased unemployment numbers and tell us why.
weasel
14-04-2009
I remember 1983
It's true that the Socreds won in 1983. However they won by ignoring Solidarity to their peril. What are the Liberals slash Socreds ignoring that will ultimately defeat them? And as for imagining Carole James as Premier, I remember a very effective ad from the Conservatives in the election before last that had a little kid repeating, "Prime Minister Stephen Harper". So, how about "Premier Carole James?" How about it?
realisticman
14-04-2009
The Good Old Days
Remember those good old days, when the Environment was a major issue and the NDP was there for the planet? Pollution was bad and CO2 emissions were to blame for Global Climate Change. We were told that gas was too cheap and we should drive less and in smaller vehicles. Heck, even if the tiny 2.4 cents a litre Liberal tax on gasoline were 50 times as much, adding $1.20 to each and every litre, we would only then be approaching what people pay for gas in Europe!
The environmentalists that have criticized the NDP on their promised canceling of the Campbell Liberals Carbon Tax should be praised for their integrity. Atr least they have principles. They knew that many NDP supporters would scream bloody murder at them for accepting the fact that Gordon Campbell and the Liberals have faced the reality and decided to do something about GHG emissions. The public wanted that from their government. That's what government is supposed to do; listen to what the people want and show leadership.
Many in the NDP must have lost some faith in the party now. The environment used be a top issue Opposing just to oppose is proving to be old-style politics that are not wanted.
http://tiny.cc/gK6rv
Frank
14-04-2009
realisticman
"Perhaps Frank can cite some examples of places that show no increased unemployment numbers and tell us why."
Sure old bean, all you have to do is ask politely and I grant you your wish.
StatsCan :
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/subjects-sujets/labour-travail/lfs-epa/lfs-epa-eng.htm
Apparently BC is doing the worst of all 10 provinces. Oregon, as you may or may not be aware, isn't part of Canada however much they wish to be, whereas places like PEI, Newfoundland, Saskatchewan and Manitoba are. And in those provinces the declines were either negligible (Sask and Man) or there were no losses at all (PEI and Nfld).
I realize we've all heard about how terrible it is in Ontario and how this is the fault of overpaid auto workers but the fact is BC is doing worse.
Now why would BC be leading Canada in unemployment? Its a question BC'ers such as yourself should be asking themselves.
Frank
14-04-2009
BC is the worst performer in Canada
The following are notable quotes from the StatsCan article linked above :
"Employment fell in several provinces in March, with the largest declines in British Columbia (-23,000), Alberta (-15,000) and Ontario (-11,000).
Since October, these three provinces also had the fastest rate of employment decreases.British Columbia's employment fell by 23,000 in March.
British Columbia's employment fell by 23,000 in March. This brings total employment losses to 69,000 (-3.0%) since October 2008, largely driven by decreases in construction and manufacturing. Over the same period, British Columbia has seen its unemployment rate climb 2.2 percentage points to 7.4% in March.
Following a large decline in February, employment in Alberta fell a further 15,000 in March, pushing the unemployment rate up to 5.8%. Since October, employment losses have totalled 48,000 (-2.4%), mainly in the goods-producing sector.
Manitoba's employment also fell in March (-4,000), bringing the unemployment rate up 0.3 percentage points to 5.1%.
In March, employment in Saskatchewan declined by 3,000. Despite the loss in March, employment in this province is unchanged compared with October 2008. The unemployment rate, at 4.7% in March, has increased by 0.8 percentage points since October.
Despite increases in their unemployment rates, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta continue to have the lowest unemployment rates in the country.
Employment in Ontario edged down by 11,000 in March. Since October, declines have totalled 171,000 (-2.5%), mostly in full-time work. Although the unemployment rate remained unchanged at 8.7% in March, it has risen 2.0 percentage points since October, an increase similar to that of British Columbia and Alberta.
In Quebec, although employment was little changed in March, the unemployment rate increased 0.4 percentage points to 8.3%, as more people entered the labour market. Employment has decreased by 55,000 (-1.4%) since October, and the unemployment rate has increased by 1.1 percentage points.
The only other province with a notable employment decline in March was Nova Scotia, down 3,000.
Frank
14-04-2009
Enviros
"... for accepting the fact that Gordon Campbell and the Liberals have faced the reality and decided to do something about GHG emissions."
Lacking balance as always I see.
So how much have GHG emissions been reduced under Gordon "Green" Campbell's tenure?
And please provide a real source.
jimmy_laroux
14-04-2009
@ realisticman
BC has has the greatest increase in unemployment rate of any province over the last 4 months, according to Statistics Canada:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/090409/dq090409a-eng.htm
http://tiny.cc/E6VwU
daveallen
14-04-2009
MediaWatch Bias Scorecard LIB-1 NDP-2
This one is interesting but in my opinion shows a sight bias for the Liberals.
I have today made a commitment to follow The TYEE "BC election reporting" up until the election on May 12.
My bias scorecard will be clearly a simple record of the read articles and their bias in a LIB vs NDP format as per the subject of this message.
This scoring is based on my opinion and does not reflect the opinion of anyone in my family, my company or the organizations which I belong to.
If anyone wants or needs to comment to me directly I am
Spam accepted, although not preferred.
seth
14-04-2009
19 billion in IPP losses as of today
Go to bloomberg.com and look at spot energy trades - 2 cents a kwh.
Despite this BC Hydro has signed us up for approx 40 billion so far in Pirate power at 12 cents a kwh. No doubt if they are reelected that number inflates to 80 billion.
At BC hydro's long term borrowing rates the current 40 billion can be financed by a 20 billion bond ie BC's debt is understated by 20 billion.
Now BC Hydro has a bunch of contracts on hand that says it must buy about 10 gigawatt hours of power annual every springtime at 12 cents a kwh. With the current spot rate at 2 cents how much would BCHydro be able to sell those contracts for. Answer any stock analyst could give you would be about 1 billion dollars. If BCHydro tried to cash out its existing contracts today the market would hand BCHydro and us taxpayers almost a 100% loss.
If Carole James can't show Gordo and gang to be the most incompetent economic manager in any western democracy in history she needs to get a new job.
Name
14-04-2009
Depressing but true...
Will is absolutely right. The NDP so far looks positively musty, it's so stale - definitely not yet ready for prime time. What is there to vote FOR?
Campbell has absolutely nothing on his side this time... and to watch the NDP blowing it so badly in the early going is really depressing. They're even giving him the green vote on a platter! The GREEN vote! It's insane!
Sadly, I think a lot of people will just sit this election out if this is the best they can offer. The only thing worse than another Campbell victory would be to elect a bumbling NDP for a disastrous single term and then turn BC into a single-party dictatorship for the next 3 decades.
f00bar
14-04-2009
The reality is...
... that the NDP has a mountain to climb to regain credibility on the economy after the Clark years.
No amount of complaining about how evil Gordo is is going to get past that. So far, the platform that the NDP has laid out is doing nothing to make the public feel confident that a return to NDP govt won't be a return to the 90's. Fair/unfair doesn't matter, that's the reality.
That's why the NDP platform is such a disappointment. It completely overlooks the issue of regaining credibility, and just returns to the same old tired rhetoric.
And then, to piss off the environmental lobby with their anti-carbon-tax policy is quite stupid. Again, it doesn't matter that quietly in the background there's a cap-and-trade thingy, what's front and centre in the campaign is that carbon tax is bad. What ordinary people will take from this is that the NDP is really serious about fighting climate change.
Really, if you can't even run a campaign competently, how can you run the govt? People in BC have a lot to fear in the next few years, because neither party inspires any confidence in their ability to manage the issues we face.
Frank
14-04-2009
foobar
Did you read that the NDP created more jobs in BC during their years than the Liberals have? The NDP has nothing to apologize for in the 1990s.
But in the end the people of BC will get the government they want, and if they're happy with Campbell's record on jobs, homelessness, poverty and the environment then they should happily vote for him.
Frank
14-04-2009
foobar
The NDP can't get its message out unfiltered except door to door and in tv commercials.
What you're saying is that somehow the NDP talking through a hostile media is going to convince people that everything that same media has already told them is wrong? There's no way of that happening.
As for the environmentally inclined, they weren't NDP supporters anyway, their only decision is Green or Liberal and always has been as polls show.
If the NDP want to lose the election all they need to do is tick off their own supporters by bowing to the demands of people on the Right (including enviros) who won't support them anyway.
Which they tried before and that's how you get reduced to 2 seats.
Luke Skywalker Redux
14-04-2009
A Logical Caveat...
A logical caveat undermines that argument... from the electorate's viewing lens.
Todays' Mustel poll, fer instance.
Top Issues of Concern
1. Economy: 39%
2. Crime: 12%
"Who Would Do the Best Job on Those Issues?"
1. Economy:
Lib: 63%
NDP: 23%
2. Crime:
Lib: 49%
NDP: 25%
Those are staggering spreads (40% and 24% respectively) and in politics public perception is reality. But public perception does not apparently equate to Tyee poster perception. ;)
Interestingly enough, on this date preceeding the 2005 election (April 14, 2005), Mustel showed the Libs with a 8% gap (actual election result was a 4% gap).
And health care was the Number 1 Issue of concern in 2005 - the issue, in which, the electorate believes that the NDP is better positioned.
That health care issue and Campbell's -13% disapproval rating (today it stands at +11%) assisted the NDP in narrowing the 2005 gap by 4% in 2005.
Otherwise, right up to election day in 2005 both Mustel and Ipsos had relatively stable party preference figures and Mustel was bang-on with its final projection with a 4.7% spread (actual was 4.3%).
And the horse race is on....
Fiat lux
14-04-2009
The BCLibs belong to the
The BCLibs belong to the same twisted ideological gang who caused the present worldwide economic collapse. Not a recession, but the collapse of a fraudulent theory that brought on the biggest crime wave in human history and will cause far more before being wiped off by a more enlightened human society.
Yet, it is most amazing how their brainwash departments could still sell the idea to the public that these incompetent losers are the best to cure the terrible mess and suffering they have caused.
At the same time, I fully agree that the downfall of the NDP has always been the total lack of communications skills.
Ed Deak.
DPL
14-04-2009
Gordo was on all the TV
Gordo was on all the TV stations here in Victoria today. says we must be careful not to let the NDP back and ruin all the good things he has done in the last eight years. Well buried in the local paper was a article about how unemployment in BC is getting worse. If he ramins in powere , who knows just how bad things can get. I enjoyed the poster above saying that anyone on the Tyee wouldn't vote Liberal so why do the Gordo apologists show up here to comment about how bad the NDP were in the 90's?