Source for blog post:
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics/story.html?id=a2d2efab-7cdc-40b4-9ffd-166ae1ef2b16&k=4761
A new poll out by Ipsos-Reid shows the McGuinty Liberals 4 points ahead of the Tories – 41% to 37%. The pollster and/or media were spinning this result as bad news for the Liberals. But this spinning ignores the fact that the Liberals are actually up 3 points from the previous Ipsos-Reid poll. It puts the Tories up 4 points. But more good news that the spinning fails to mention is that both the NDP and Green Party are down from the previous Ipsos-Reid poll. This is obviously good news for the Liberals. What’s more, in my opinion I think this poll is actually good news for the Liberals. For the last several months, the Ontario government has been under constant Opposition attack over the Ontario Lottery Corporation and over grants to immigrant service groups. Even after all the negative publicity that occurred due to these Opposition attacks, the Liberals are still ahead by 4 points. I think that that is significant. If it weren’t for those attacks, no doubt the Liberals would be ahead by a greater margin. I applied the poll results to the UBC election forecaster. It predicted a narrow Liberal majority government based on the results I entered. In the article I sourced it says that a minority government is a distinct possibility. While that is true that a minority government is very possible, a 41-37 spread in favour of the Liberals could just as easily produce a majority government depending on how the votes in each riding are actually cast, and the UBC election forecaster confirms a majority government is possible with a 41-37 spread in favour of the Liberals.
On a slightly related note, I think pollsters should start polling support for voting yes in the upcoming Ontario referendum on electoral reform. For the record, I plan to vote no in the referendum. Sometime soon I will make a blog explaining why I am against the proposed electoral reform.
Meanwhile, us Ontario Liberals have to continue to fight to get re-elected with a majority in October, 2007.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Congratulations to the P.E.I Liberals!
The Prince Edward Island Liberals under leader Robert Ghiz won big last night. They achieved a mirror image of the 2003 election results (the seat breakdown is actually an exact mirror image of the 2003 results), sweeping the Pat Binns Tories out of office. The Liberals improved their raw vote across the province by about 10,000 votes, improved the popular vote percentage by over 10%, and increased their seats from 4 to 23. The Liberals received almost 53% of the vote, over 11 points above the Tories’ vote total. I am personally glad that the pro-Stephen Harper Pat Binns (who following the departure of Bernard Lord was the most pro-Harper Premier in Atlantic Canada) has been soundly defeated. The only bit of bad news from this election result is that it could cause Pat Binns to enter federal politics. I did some calculations and found that the provincial Tories won the federal riding of Cardigan by about 4 points or by about 48% to 44%. This was the only place of residual popularity for Binns anywhere across the province. The Liberals easily won the 3 other federal ridings. Binns provincial riding (which he was re-elected in) is located in the federal Cardigan riding and Binns himself represented Cardigan in the federal House of Commons from 1984 to 1988 before being swept out along with all other Island federal Tories in the 1988 federal election due to the Island’s opposition to Brian Mulroney’s Free Trade Agreement. Binns himself was swept out by about 8 points by the now-current MP Lawrence MacAulay. But this was before he was Premier and Binns has gained plenty of stature since that 1988 loss. My concern is that with Binns no longer Premier, he will quit provincial politics and run in the federal Cardigan riding against Liberal MP Lawrence MacAulay. If Binns were to do that he would have a significant chance of winning due to his residual popularity in Cardigan and the fact that he won his own riding within Cardigan by a wide margin. This is my concern about what could happen but for now I will rejoice in the election of a new Liberal majority government in P.E.I. and the ousting of a Harper-friendly Tory. Congratulations to the P.E.I. Liberals!
Majority governments and fixed election dates
In majority governments, maintaining the confidence of the legislature is ridiculously easy. In minority governments, maintaining the confidence of the legislature is often quite hard by contrast. Newly elected governments have the constitutionally given right to govern for 5 years with no new election so long as the government can maintain the confidence of the legislature. The problem with this is that governments that become extremely unpopular who happen to be majority governments are able to keep governing long past their prime. No matter how unpopular a government is, it can continue governing for 5 years. Even if the government drops down to a 10% approval rating after its first 3 months in office and stays at that level for the next 4 years and 9 months, the incredibly unpopular government gets to continue governing for the remaining 4 years and 9 months no matter how much the population absolutely despises the government. That is why Bob Rae was able to be Premier of Ontario for such a very long time. Ontario’s population absolutely despised Rae’s government, but Rae had a majority government and therefore was able to continue governing regardless of how much everyone in Ontario despised his government. The Rae government hit rock bottom in terms of popularity once it’s 1991 budget was released and remained at that rock bottom for the remaining 4 years of their term. Following the 1991 Ontario budget, the Ontario public absolutely despised the Rae government but there was nothing that could be done to remove the Rae government from power for the next 4 years.
Another good example of this is the Mulroney government. The 1988-1993 Mulroney government became very unpopular by 1990 and stayed that way for Mulroney’s remaining 3 years in office. Yet because Mulroney had a majority government he was able to stay in power even though the public absolutely despised his government. This was true even after he lost several MPs to the newly formed Bloc Quebecois. Although Mulroney’s majority shrunk substantially throughout his second term in office, it never became a minority government and so there was no way to force an early election and vote the hated government out.
I support the concept of fixed election dates every 4 years because this prevents governments that are very unpopular from governing for 5 years just to cling to power as long as possible before facing the inevitable defeat. Fixing elections every 4 years allows for governments who are in the popularity lows of Rae and Mulroney to be voted out sooner than would be possible otherwise. The problem with fixed election dates in Canada now is that they are statutory in nature. So if an unpopular government were to inherit a fixed election date law from a previous government, and if said unpopular government was already at a 10% approval rating, and if said unpopular government wanted to cling to power as long as possible, it could simply repeal the fixed election date law and remain in power for the full 5 years before finally being wiped out of office.
The Rae government’s legislature was months away from expiring when Rae called the 1995 election. Rae could have remained Premier for a few more months and could have stayed in the Premier’s office until about November before being wiped out. But he must have seen a sliver of opportunity to call the election for June, as though such a time would prevent his party from being completely wiped out. If the election had been held in 1993, the NDP would likely have lost official party status it was so unpopular during the middle of Rae’s term. Instead, what small amount of support there was for the NDP had managed to recover by June 1995 and that’s probably why Rae called the election then. Rae probably saw that time as the best possible opportunity his party had of not being completely and totally wiped out. However, at no time following the 1991 Ontario budget could an election have been held with the NDP winning the election – that’s how unpopular the 1991 budget made the NDP and there was no turning back and from that point on. Rae never had a chance to win a second term in office.
Another good example of this is the Mulroney government. The 1988-1993 Mulroney government became very unpopular by 1990 and stayed that way for Mulroney’s remaining 3 years in office. Yet because Mulroney had a majority government he was able to stay in power even though the public absolutely despised his government. This was true even after he lost several MPs to the newly formed Bloc Quebecois. Although Mulroney’s majority shrunk substantially throughout his second term in office, it never became a minority government and so there was no way to force an early election and vote the hated government out.
I support the concept of fixed election dates every 4 years because this prevents governments that are very unpopular from governing for 5 years just to cling to power as long as possible before facing the inevitable defeat. Fixing elections every 4 years allows for governments who are in the popularity lows of Rae and Mulroney to be voted out sooner than would be possible otherwise. The problem with fixed election dates in Canada now is that they are statutory in nature. So if an unpopular government were to inherit a fixed election date law from a previous government, and if said unpopular government was already at a 10% approval rating, and if said unpopular government wanted to cling to power as long as possible, it could simply repeal the fixed election date law and remain in power for the full 5 years before finally being wiped out of office.
The Rae government’s legislature was months away from expiring when Rae called the 1995 election. Rae could have remained Premier for a few more months and could have stayed in the Premier’s office until about November before being wiped out. But he must have seen a sliver of opportunity to call the election for June, as though such a time would prevent his party from being completely wiped out. If the election had been held in 1993, the NDP would likely have lost official party status it was so unpopular during the middle of Rae’s term. Instead, what small amount of support there was for the NDP had managed to recover by June 1995 and that’s probably why Rae called the election then. Rae probably saw that time as the best possible opportunity his party had of not being completely and totally wiped out. However, at no time following the 1991 Ontario budget could an election have been held with the NDP winning the election – that’s how unpopular the 1991 budget made the NDP and there was no turning back and from that point on. Rae never had a chance to win a second term in office.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)