BC’s photo finish: translating votes to seats

British Columbia will be fascinating to watch on election night. As advance polls open, there has been a struggle between the Liberals and Conservatives to emerge as a clear leader, while the NDP appear to be on the move post-debate.  The Greens maintain a strong presence on the Island that could be converted into a bushel of seats.

When you see these poll numbers bouncing around, how do they convert to seats?  I thought it would be ‘fun’ to play with numbers today.

Screen Shot 2019-10-11 at 5.11.30 PM.png

Four parties (and an independent) in the hunt for seats in BC. It’s that close, it seems.

In ‘BC Battleground’, I wrote about the key regions.  In particular, the Lower Mainland outer suburbs and Vancouver Island are very volatile.

A political sniffle can lead to an electoral coma for parties mired in three and four way battles.

When we forecast results, they are based mainly on the result of the last election, adjusted to potential 2019 scenarios.  When it’s all said and done, the seats normally follow a similar pattern.  The ranking of seats, party by party, doesn’t usually shift that much from election to election (a party’s best and worst seats tend to be consistent, such as the NDP in East Van, CPC in Peace River, or Liberals in Quadra). Over time, yes, coalitions shift and parties evolve, winning in places that are new, and losing in places that used to be strongholds.  That pattern usually takes a few cycles.

Assuming patterns are fairly consistent to 2015, we can look at how seat totals might play out based on popular vote.  This does not take into account special local factors.

Reminder that in 2015, the seat totals in BC were:

  • 17 Liberal
  • 14 NDP
  • 10 CPC
  • 1 Green

Scenario 1: Three-way tie, with Greens trailing in fourth

CPC Lib NDP Green
Vote% 26.5% 26.5% 26.5% 16.0%
Seats 12 13 16 1

Despite the three-way tie in popular vote, the NDP has an efficiency advantage, mainly based on winning, like they did in 2015, six of seven seats on the Island with about one-third of the vote.

Scenario 2: Top 2 CPC and Liberals, NDP third, with Greens trailing in fourth

In 2015, the Liberals won popular vote in BC by 5.5%.  This scenario has the CPC tying the Liberals, with NDP trailing by about same amount as 2015.

CPC Lib NDP Green
Vote% 28% 28% 23% 16.0%
Seats 14 14 12 2

Both Conservatives and Liberals vote breaks evenly into seats with NDP punching above its weight due to the Island.

Scenario 3: CPC lead over Liberals, NDP third, Greens trailing in fourth

If the Conservatives take a 4-point lead over the Liberals, the math starts to move.

CPC Lib NDP Green
Vote% 30.0% 26.0% 23% 16.0%
Seats 17 11 12 2

Seat pick ups increase in the outer suburbs of Vancouver for the Conservatives, levelling that region which the Liberals dominated in 2015.  The Liberals would hold most of their Vancouver-urban core seats.

Scenario 4: Liberals lead Conservatives, NDP third, Greens fourth

Scenario 3 is flipped to a Liberal 4-point lead, holding the NDP and Greens constant.

CPC Lib NDP Green
Vote% 26.0% 30.0% 23.0% 16.0%
Seats 10 17 13 2

Scenario 5: NDP falters, Greens rise

The previous four scenarios have the Green constant at 16%.  This scenario moves them to 20% and the NDP to 22%.

CPC Lib NDP Green
Vote% 27.0% 27.0% 22.0% 20.0%
Seats 14 14 10 4

The Island is very dynamic in terms of vote splits.  If the Greens rise over there (with 20% province-wide indicating a popular vote on the Island of over 35%), then NDP seats fall to the Greens, at least on the Lower Island.

Scenario 6:  One party blowout

It would take a 10%+ lead in the popular vote for any one party to grab 50% of the seats (21 seats).

Blue crush

CPC Lib NDP Green
Vote% 35.0% 24.0% 22.0% 15.0%
Seats 22 9 9 2

Big red machine

CPC Lib NDP Green
Vote% 24.0% 35.0% 22.0% 15.0%
Seats 5 23 12 2

Jagmentum

CPC Lib NDP Green
Vote% 24.0% 24.0% 33.0% 15.0%
Seats 9 11 21 2

Green armageddon

CPC Lib NDP Green
Vote% 15% 15% 15% 50%
Seats 0 0 0 42

I mean, isn’t Green armageddon just inevitable?  Who doesn’t want unicorns and rainbows?

Local factors

The seat modelling ignores that Paul Manly won the Nanaimo-Ladysmith by-election for the Greens, that the Conservatives fired their Burnaby-North Vancouver candidate, that the Liberals fired candidates in Victoria and Cowichan last election, thus lowering their base for this model.  It also does not account for a candidate by the name of Jody Wilson-Raybould.  So, yes, local factors can confound the model, but the model overall speaks truth.  Due to our system, the votes have to land somewhere. When you see fortunes rise and fall in the polls, the seats will follow.

It seem that close.  We’ll see which scenario prevails.

The BC Battleground

British Columbia has 42 of Canada’s 338 seats. When the votes are being counted on the evening of October 21st, British Columbians may push one of the contending parties into a plurality, or even a majority.

In 2015, the Liberals won the most seats in British Columbia for the first time since 1968. Heading into BC on election night, the Liberals were three seats short of a majority. A record 17 Liberal seats west of the Rockies gave them a majority, and a comfortable one at that.

Table 1: 2015 BC results and current standings

Party Vote Seats At dissolution Incumbents seeking re-election
Liberals

35%

17

17 (1 gain, 1 loss) 16
CPC

30%

10

8 (1 loss, 1 vacant) 8
NDP

26%

14

13 (1 loss) 10
Greens

8%

1

2 (1 gain) 2
Independent JWR 1

Between 1968 and 2015, the leading conservative/right wing party – whether that was Progressive Conservatives, Reform Party, Canadian Alliance, or Conservative Party – had the plurality of seats in BC 11 out of 13 times.  Through most elections, the blue team has been at the top while the NDP and Liberals flipped positions.  In the 1970s and 1980s, the Liberals were mainly in decline due to a strong sense of western alienation and atrophy of the party’s base in BC.  In the 1990s, when the NDP were in power provincially (and unpopular mostly), federal NDP vote plummeted while the populist Reform and Alliance campaigns surged – a populist crossover – demonstrating that BC voting is not strictly a left-right continuum.  The Liberals also gained during this time, but plateaued between 1993 and 2006.  As the NDP regained strength post-2001 (now out of power provincially), the Liberals slipped again, this time reflecting the party’s woes nationally. It all changed in 2015 when Justin Trudeau brought it full circle back to 1968.

Chart 1:  Popular vote and seats in BC from 1968 to 2015

Screen Shot 2019-10-06 at 9.26.43 PM.png

Liberal (red); NDP (orange); leading conservative party (blue): PC (1968-88); Reform (1993-97): Canadian Alliance (2000); Conservative (2004-15)

2019 context

The Conservatives will be looking to restore the historic pattern and win a plurality of seats, as they have consistently done over the years.  The Liberals hope to make the 2015 election a new, sustained pattern.

The NDP will be looking to BC for survival. With its gains in Quebec evaporating, the NDP is desperate to hold its remaining 28 seats in English Canada – half of which are in BC. 

The Greens have an opportunity to grow their caucus from two to five or more on Vancouver Island. Just like the Nanaimo byelection, it requires traditional NDP voters – and Liberals – to move over to the Greens.

BC’s regional picture

While BC has 42 seats overall, the federal election will play out in four regions that have unique battlegrounds.

The Lower Mainland has a majority of seats and is multiculturally diverse. Within the Lower Mainland, there are key differences, similar to core Toronto seats and the 905.  The urban core (Vancouver and adjacent communities) have different characteristics than the outer suburbs and Fraser Valley – different housing density, immigration patterns, and transportation habits, for example.

While both regions are more rural and less multicultural than the Lower Mainland, they have very different voting patterns. Vancouver Island leans granola and the Interior/North leans hardhat.

Vancouver Island

The Island’s seven seats may elect representatives from four separate parties. The NDP managed to win 6 of 7 Island seats with only 33% of the vote, a very efficient result, but one that puts them on the edge of major losses if they fall back in public support. The Greens proved this point in the Nanaimo-Ladysmith byelection, catapulting over the NDP to win their second seat.

Table 2:    Vancouver Island 

2015 Vote%

2015 Seats At dissolution

Incumbents seeking re-election

NDP

33%

6 5

4

Greens

24%

1 2

2

Liberals

21%

0 0

0

Conservative

21%

0 0

0

Elizabeth May is the safest MP on the Island.

Jagmeet Singh is not well known on Vancouver Island and is under significant pressure to hold the NDP’s remaining five seats. The NDP held off a strong Green charge in Victoria in 2015 due to the strength and popularity of MP Murray Rankin. He’s not running again and his successor lacks his personal standing. Of the NDP’s four remaining ridings, the NDP won two of them with 35% of the vote and the other two with 38% to 40%. They are all vulnerable to a Green surge that could either overtake them or split the vote and elect a Conservative, or even a Liberal.

The Liberals are keying on Victoria, a seat that Liberal David Anderson held between 1993 and 2006, and look longingly at Esquimalt-Saanich-Sooke, which erstwhile Reform/Alliance MP Keith Martin won for the Grits in 2006. Anderson and Martin had strong personal brands so it remains to be seen if the Liberals can win with lesser-known candidates.

The Conservatives are likely pinning their hopes on Courtenay-Alberni and North Island-Powell River. These ridings are more resource dependent and less urban, and overlap with areas where the provincial BC Liberals are strongest. The Conservatives will be in the conversation in Nanaimo-Ladysmith, Cowichan-Malahat-Langford, and Esquimalt-Saanich-Sooke, where vote splits could deliver a Conservative win with 28%-30% of the vote.

Upshot:
A Green ‘breakthrough’ would be a minimum of 3 seats.

A ‘successful’ NDP salvage mission would be maintaining a minimum of 3 seats. Holding 5 seats would be a remarkable accomplishment considering the low expectations.

The Conservatives need a minimum of two gains to contribute to a winning plurality nationally.

The Liberals will be happy with one seat. The action is elsewhere for them.

Vancouver Core

Thirteen seats in the western portion of the Lower Mainland, around Vancouver’s urban core including the North Shore, Burnaby, and Richmond, strongly favoured the Liberals and punished the Conservatives in 2015.

Table 3:    Vancouver Core  

2015 Vote

2015 Seats At dissolution

Incumbents seeking re-election

Liberal

44%

8 7

6

CPC

26%

1 1 1
NDP

24%

4 4 4

Green

5%

0

0

0

The NDP won four seats in this area due to a concentration of vote in historically strong seats. The Greens are not a contender in any seats on BC’s mainland.  If they get close anywhere, it would probably be West Vancouver-Sea to Sky-Sunshine Coast where they have some history of strong showings and the absence of an incumbent.

There is limited opportunity for the Conservatives to claw back seats in 2019 in this area, but Steveston-Richmond East will be highest on its list. It’s a rematch between the 2015 Liberal and Conservative candidates. Liberal MP Joe Peschisolido is a former Canadian Alliance MP and Reform Party candidate, a maverick, who has been an active campaigner in Richmond for almost twenty years.

The Conservative breakout opportunity would be winning Vancouver South and seats on the North Shore, but they have already punted their candidate from the winnable seat of Burnaby-North Vancouver, a costly loss where a smarter candidate strategy would have made a difference.  In the blue target riding of Vancouver South, the Conservatives are running former MP Wai Young (Young ran a distant fourth. Her breakaway civic party clearly cost the centre-right NPA a majority on Council and was decisive in enabling former Burnaby South NDP MP Kennedy Stewart to win the mayoralty with only 28.7% of the vote. Interesting footnote is that Young’s party released a poll from Hamish Marshall’s firm in dying days of campaign that showed Young only three points behind the NPA mayoralty candidate and Kennedy Stewart 14 points in the lead.  On election night, the NPA lost to Stewart by half a point while Young had less than 7% of the vote).

The Liberals are seeking to win Vancouver Kingsway from the NDP with well-known news anchor Tamara Taggart, but she needs national wind in her sails to knock off popular MP Don Davies.

NDP leader Jagmeet Singh hopes to retain his Burnaby South seat and would appear to be in good shape. Svend Robinson is campaigning hard in Burnaby-North Vancouver, however, with the demise of the Conservative candidate, it’s hard to see how he overcomes Terry Beech and the Liberals. There is no orange wave yet in Metro Vancouver to lift the boats of NDP candidates in Metro Vancouver.

Then there is Vancouver Granville. Independent Jody Wilson-Raybould hopes to make history by being the first indigenous women re-elected in BC and to pull off the rare feat of being elected as an independent and the first to do so in BC since Chuck Cadman in 2004. Last election JWR and the Liberals took 44% of the vote with the NDP and Conservatives taking 27% and 26% respectively. JWR will need to take many NDP (and Green votes), along with Liberals who stick with her. How many Liberals will stick by their brand? Can the Conservative make it to 30% and win on a split? At this point in the campaign, it looks like JWR may have the largest pool of potential votes.

Upshot:
Overall, this area looks fairly static.

There are not a lot of gains in this area for the Conservatives. To win a plurality of seats in Canada, they need to win seats like Steveston. To win a majority, they need to win seats like Vancouver South and the North Shore. Right now, it looks like two seats is a realistic goal.

The NDP hope to hold their four seats but do not have a very good opportunity to add others.

The Liberals should be in a position to hold at least 6 of the 8 they won in 2015.

Lower Mainland suburbs/Valley

Further from the Vancouver core, there are a baker’s dozen of suburban and Fraser Valley seats stretching east to the Fraser Canyon. There are a lot of commuters, an especially strong South Asian population, and traditional conservative farming areas. You could call it BC’s 905, to some degree.

The Liberals picked the Conservatives’ pocket in this region in 2015, winning unexpected seats in places like Langley, Abbotsford, and James Moore’s old seat in Coquitlam, while gaining a new dominance in Surrey.

Table 4:             Lower Mainland suburbs/Valley

2015 Vote

2015 Seats At dissolution

Incumbents seeking re-election

Liberal

40%

8 9

9

CPC

34%

4 2 2
NDP

21%

1 1 0

Green

4%

0

0

0

The Conservatives used to ‘own’ Surrey so must claw their way back, but it won’t be easy. The Liberals took four seats handily in 2015.  Sukh Dhaliwal’s Newton seat is a fortress, while Surrey-Centre, Fleetwood-Port Kells, and Cloverdale-Langley City were all won with healthy margins and over 45% of the vote. In 2015, Dianne Watts preserved South Surrey-White Rock for the Conservatives in the face of a red tide in Surrey, but in a 2017 byelection, the Liberals stole the riding, leaving the Conservatives with only one seat west of Langley. Now, the Liberals may hold South Surrey-White Rock because they have a candidate advantage, and withstand what should be a Conservative pick-up.

Of all the regions in BC, this is the one where the Conservatives need to make major gains. Liberal wins in Coquitlam-Port Coquitlam, Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge, and Mission-Matsqui-Fraser Canyon were won with 33% to 37% of the vote and are at high risk. The Conservatives will also key on Delta, but incumbent Liberal cabinet minister Carla Qualtrough is popular. The Conservatives can count on three Fraser Valley seats between Langley Township and Chilliwack.  Long-time MP Mark Warawa passed away recently leaving a vacancy, however, the Conservatives should have little difficulty winning the seat.

The NDP’s only MP in this region, Fin Donnelly, is retiring, opening up a three-way fight in Port Moody-Coquitlam. This will be a tough one for the NDP to hold. The Liberals and Conservatives both have an opportunity to win a new seat.

Upshot:
This will be the region to watch. It could go 7-6 or it could go 10-3 either way, and have a major impact on national seat totals. If Andrew Scheer becomes prime minister, he will have made major gains here.

The Liberals have very little history of winning seats in this region  Taking even half of the seats would represent a sustained shift in BC’s federal voting patterns.  Winning 4 or 5 out of 5 seats in Surrey would provide the Liberals with an ongoing power base that complements its traditional base in Vancouver.

As for the NDP, they have historically won seats in Surrey and northeast suburbs, but have been eclipsed by the Liberals.  They have not yet demonstrated they have the formula to flip the dynamic and may well be shut-out here on election night.

Interior and North

BC’s Interior and North holds nine of BC’s forty-two seats. This is an area where Conservatives should make their easiest gains, at the expense of the struggling NDP, and another potential pickup from the Liberals in Kelowna.

Table 5:  Interior/North

2015 Vote

2015 Seats At dissolution

Incumbents seeking re-election

CPC

37%

5 5

5

Liberal

30%

1 1 1
NDP

28%

3 3 2

Green

4%

0

0

0

Until they won in Kelowna in 2015, the Liberals had not held a seat in the Interior since 1979. BC’s Interior cities have gradually become more urbanized with stronger university presence over the years in Kelowna, Kamloops, and Prince George. A Liberal win in 2019 would make a turning point, and they hope to do the same in Kamloops with star candidate Terry Lake, a former BC health minister.

NDP seats in the South Okanagan and East Kootenay are very vulnerable. High profile NDP MP Nathan Cullen is retiring in Skeena-Bulkley Valley. However, this is a riding with different politics than the rest of the Interior and North – perhaps belonging with Vancouver Island region, and will likely stand as the lone NDP seat ‘beyond Hope’.

Upshot:

It should be a major disappointment for Conservatives if they do not take 8 of 9 seats in BC’s Interior. Given their struggles to make gains in urban Canada, they must clean up outside the major cities.

The Liberals hope to maintain its Interior beachhead in Kelowna. While they are making a spirited charge in Kamloops, a win there would be political gravy. The Interior is not a region that is critical to win in order for the Liberals to hold power.

NDP disaster would be losing Skeena-Bulkley Valley. A key part of holding that seat is the First Nations vote, where it is one of the highest in Canada (I’ll look at First Nations vote in more detail in another post). Holding its two southern Interior seats looks unlikely in the face of a Conservative challenge combined with a new leader that is struggling to make his impact in BC.

Provincial wrap-up

National momentum can make a big difference in BC where three and four-way fights may send an MP to Ottawa with 30% of the vote. Certainly, BC is a region where the Conservatives have a significant opportunity. If they are able to reach north of 35% of the vote and have more than a 5% lead over the Liberals, they could win a majority of BC’s seats.

It’s fair to say the Liberals have a candidate advantage this election.  Almost all of their incumbents are running and they are strongly contesting what they feel are winnable seats.  The Conservatives squandered Burnaby-North Vancouver and, overall, their BC team lacks recognizable figures.  Both parties can look back to 2004 when the Paul Martin Liberals, and BC master strategist Mark Marissen, put a lot of focus on gaining seats in BC, recruiting Ujjal Dosanjh and David Emerson, and issuing a ‘made in BC’ agenda. That extended to the 2006 election when the Conservatives won the federal election, but paradoxically lost some ground in BC.  It takes commitment and support from party leadership to recruit candidates and strengthen the ground game. 

As outlined in an earlier post, the Conservative pathway to power depends on winning in the neighbourhood of 75% of the seats in Western Canada. While Alberta and Saskatchewan are looking very good for Andrew Scheer, winning at least half of BC’s 42 seats will be a necessity.

As of today, the Conservatives are poised to make some gains, nibbling away at seats in the Interior and possibly on the Island.  The big question mark is whether the Conservatives can challenge the Liberals’ strong position in the Lower Mainland.

We can expect to see four parties, and quite possibly an independent, win on election night.  We can also expect to see BC play an important role in shaping the next government.

As of today, expect the parties to be in the following range:

Table 6:     Party ranges Island (7) Vancouver core (13) L.M. suburbs / Valley (13) Interior / North (9)
Liberal 0-2 6-10 3-10 0-2
CPC 0-4 0-5 3-10 5-9
NDP 0-6 3-5 0-3 0-3
Green 1-5 0 0 0
Independent 0-1

My general range estimates provide a universe of 24 seats of the Liberals, 28 for the Conservatives, 17 for the NDP, 5 for the Greens, and 1 for JWR.  Conversely, the floor for parties in BC looks to be 9 for the Liberals, 8 for the Conservatives, 3 for the NDP, and 1 for the Greens.  So, that’s a range of 21 (low) to 75 (high) seats across the party universes. Obviously, I’m hedging with two weeks to go, but in BC, it’s wise to hedge.  Given the nature of this campaign, a soft breeze one way or another may tilt three and four way races into the lap of our next prime minister, or into the lap of a leader – Mr. Singh or Ms. May – who will decide who is the next prime minister.  They both represent BC ridings – if BC doesn’t ‘elect’ a majority government at the polls, a BC leader will likely help ‘elect’ a new government at Rideau Hall or in the House of Commons.

50 years ago: Sweet triumph and dashed hopes on the campaign trail in B.C.

50 years ago this week, in the riding of Dewdney, an earnest 36-year old father of five stepped into a provincial election campaign, hopeful for a breakthrough for a new generation of politics. Instead, Premier W.A.C. Bennett outfoxed the opposition parties, earning an unprecedented seventh consecutive term.

It was W.A.C.’s greatest and sweetest electoral triumph, but it was also his last.

This is the story of that campaign, what led up to it, and how its outcome changed the course of BC politics. It’s also the story of Peter McDonald, Liberal, Dewdney riding.

My Dad.

PMM brochure.jpg

Front page of 4-page McDonald campaign brochure

Leading up to 1969

Politics were very lively in the 1960s. Federally, John Diefenbaker and Lester Pearson dueled three times between 1962 and 1965.

Unrest and tumult south of the border were in full view – civil rights, Vietnam, and, in 1968, the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy. Pierre Trudeau catapulted into the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada on a wave of “Trudeaumania.”

The times were a changin’, but not so much in British Columbia.

The Social Credit government was clocking in at 17 consecutive years. Impatient politicians like 36-year old BC NDP leader Tom Berger, an accomplished lawyer, and 42-year old BC Liberal leader Pat McGeer, a prominent academic, sought to surf generational undercurrents into office against the man who seemed from another time – W.A.C. Bennett.

The response from this 69-year old, teetotalling merchant from Kelowna? The Good Life– a grand narrative of progress under Social Credit rule combined with blunt attacks on the Opposition as Marxist radicals.

Like many long-serving governments, they were young when they started but now looking old.

In the previous four elections, W.A.C. had faced NDP (and CCF) leader Robert Strachan. Each time, same result – a Socred majority. In six mandates, the Socreds had disposed of three CCF/NDP leaders, not to mention chewing through Liberal and Conservatives leaders as well.

Screen Shot 2019-08-29 at 10.21.10 AM.png

B.C. popular vote: 1952-1966

Though Strachan was 13 years younger than W.A.C., he was facing a challenge from a even younger generation within the NDP. In 1966, Tom Berger was elected MLA from Vancouver Burrard at age 32. He had already been a one-term Member of Parliament, president of the BC NDP, and built a reputation as a labour and aboriginal rights lawyer.

There was no doubt he was an up-and-comer.

Berger challenged Strachan in 1967. In a party convention, Strachan pushed Berger back and remained leader, but the damage was done – to Strachan, and ultimately to Berger too. The party was deeply divided. Strachan resigned as leader in 1969, setting up a leadership race between Berger, backed by Labour leaders, and Dave Barrett, first elected in 1960 and, like Berger, still in his 30s.

It was a hotly contested battle. Berger edged out Barrett, entrenching deep divisions. It was now Berger’s task to dethrone W.A.C., a man clearly of another era.

Meanwhile, the Liberals were also in the midst of a change. Outgoing leader Ray Perrault took on the leadership in 1959 and led the party through three elections. He restored credibility, electing a small but talented caucus – but the party was stuck on 20% of the popular vote. It wouldn’t budge.

Perrault opted to leave for federal politics and in 1968, pulled off one of the great upsets in BC federal political history, shockingly defeating national NDP leader Tommy Douglas.

A leadership was contested between two seatmates from Point Grey – Dr. Pat McGeer and Garde Gardom, with McGeer prevailing. The nephew of former Vancouver mayor/MLA/Senator/MP Gerry McGeer, he had a political pedigree and lengthy list of education credentials to match it. He entered the 1969 campaign, leading a strong slate of candidates,  sure it was their time for a breakthrough.

In the riding of Dewdney, stretching from the blueberry farms of Pitt Meadows to the corn fields of Agassiz, a young, small businessman was gearing up for his provincial run.

Peter McDonald engaged his passion for politics when he moved to Haney in 1959. He managed his brother’s federal Liberal campaign in 1965, was elected as Alderman in Maple Ridge, and was an active participant in Liberal conventions. He even had a chance encounter with Robert Kennedy during the 1968 primaries, further adding fuel to his political engine.

PMM launch.png

For years, he ran the Haney Liberal association, which had a strong and active membership. Now was the time to plant a Liberal flag in a riding that had swung in recent years between the NDP and the Socreds. Held by Socred cabinet minister Lyle Wicks in the 1950s, a social worker named Dave Barrett took a job at Haney Correctional Institute. He was encouraged to run by a visiting CCF MLA and then tracked down the local CCF stalwart (and renowned school teacher) Hank Tyson in a Haney parking lot to declare his interest. As Barrett became politically active, he was fired by the Social Credit government. It was front page news; Barrett went on to win the NDP nomination and ultimately dispatched Wicks in the 1960 election.

Barrett represented Dewdney until 1966 then moved to a newly-created seat after a boundaries change. That opened up Dewdney for George Mussallem, a local car dealer whose father, Sol, was a longtime reeve of Maple Ridge. Mussallem restored the seat to the Socreds in 1966 and was readying himself for re-election in 1969. The NDP nominated young lawyer Stu Leggatt.

For McDonald, winning would be a longshot, but the wave of Trudeaumania that propelled Liberals to their best-ever showing in B.C. was just a year old. They hoped a tired governing party would find that momentum irresistible.

IMG_6598.jpgIMG_6599.jpg

IMG_6600.jpg

Three images above are a one-fold, horizontal flip brochure for McDonald campaign (front, inside, back).  The candidate is clearly starting far into the future while the rest of the family is clearly delighted that the youngest child is asleep in his cradle. On inside flap, a copywriter’s line has double-meaning: “His wife, Helen, and their five children have provided Peter with justifiable reason to be concerned about problems facing Dewdney and B.C.” I’ll say!

The Good Life

W.A.C. headed into the 1969 campaign touting The Good Life. David Mitchell writes:

Screen Shot 2019-08-29 at 8.39.59 AMAfter seventeen years in power, Canada’s senior premier declared: “Today, British Columbia is the No. 1 haveprovince in the nation… No other government with only 2 million people can do what we are doing”. In the spring of 1969, in what was widely believed to be the kickoff for a provincial election, the premier embarked on a 10,000 mile grandstanding tour of the province showing audiences of all sizes a controversial government-commissioned film, a glossy review of the rise of British Columbia. Its title was – what else – “The Good Life”.

Underpinning TheGood Life were the benefits that flowed from natural resource development, industrial expansion, and fiscal restraint. While governments elsewhere ran deficits, W.A.C.’s governments ran surpluses. This message spoke to the Socred base of small businesses, farmers, and, generally, rural BC. In 1969, the outlying areas of the province had much more political clout than they do today.

The May 8, 1969, edition of the Vancouver Sun ran the transcript of The Good Lifein its entirety. It describes successes, industry by industry, from forestry to petroleum to tourism. W.A.C. describes new programs to assist young homeowners, and extolls the province’s health care and education system, and its parks and natural beauty. The 27-minute film closes with W.A.C.’s final exhortation:

“Through this great unity of purpose British Columbians have achieved the good life and we are on the way to become an affluent society. In this abundant life, God has given us a great trusteeship. He has given us an opportunity to serve our generation not only our generation but those yet to come. And for my part in that purpose I am truly grateful.”

W.A.C. took the film on the road, showing it to audiences across the province. Barely three years into his mandate, only he knew when the next election would take place. The other parties would be kept guessing while the Premier assessed the effectiveness of his publicity blitz.

A Prince George Progress editorial (June 4th, carried in the Hope Standard), sums up the skepticism toward the film and also its effectiveness.

“The Good Life” was shown at the Northern Interior Lumbermen’s Convention on Friday and in several occasions becomes obvious why it’s controversial… The film, which opens and closes with the Premier’s smiling countenance and expansive feelings about B.C. also tends to boggle the mind with facts and figures… All in all, however, the film does justice to the province and if there was ever a media capable of enticing immigrants from “those other provinces”, “The Good Life” is it.

 W.A.C.’s devotion to The Good Life message was impressive. Upon astronaut Neil Armstrong’s first footsteps on the moon, he remarked to the press gallery “he still thanks God for ‘the good earth’ and B.C. in particular – the province of the ‘the good life’”. In that same interview, he was asked about rumors of a potential fall election. W.A.C. said his mind “is only on that wonderful flight to the moon.”

He called the election the very next day.

The Electoral Standings

The parties entered the 1969 campaign much as they had in the previous four. The Socreds ranged from 39% to 46%; the CCF from 28% to 34%; and the Liberals were on a very small decline from 22% to 20%. For their part, the Progressive Conservatives had been vanquished.

The Campaign Kicks Off with Turbo-Polarization

“Bennett Lays His Good Life on the Line” is the above the fold headline on July 22nd.

The page one article quotes W.A.C. as saying Marxist socialism is masquerading under the name of the NDP and that he was staking his party on the “bread and butter issue” – the welfare of B.C. workers.

W.A.C. said, “This will be the election of the great switch. Liberals and Conservatives will be voting for us as they have never before… The issue is a clear-cut one between the NDP Marxian socialists and the free enterprise Social Credit.”

Berger retorted that the election announcement was a “hysterical outburst by a pathetic old man clinging desperately to office”.

McGeer was bullish: “I would certainly be satisfied with a minority government, although of course, everyone hopes to win a majority. There’s no region in which we’re weak. I know we’re going to astonish the press who have misread the situation entirely in terms of free enterprise and socialism.”

The Teams

 The Socreds had continuity at the top, but there was some churn in the team. Longtime Attorney-General Robert Bonner left politics in 1968. While a handful remained, many that started the Socred voyage in 1952 and been outlasted by their premier. Phil Gaglardi was back though. He had been bounced from cabinet for transgressions but hadn’t given up on politics.

The pirate mayor of Nanaimo Frank Ney had emerged to take on NDP MLA Dave Stupich. W.A.C. hoped to win Oak Bay with Dr. Scott Wallace and wrestle the seat from the Liberals. Former Vancouver mayor, and former Liberal candidate, Bill Rathie, was recruited to run against McGeer and Gardom. Football and broadcasting legend Annis Stukus contested North Vancouver-Seymour against Liberal MLA and broadcaster Barrie Clark.

Berger had only been leader since the spring. He had 17 seats, and would need another 11 for a majority. Two seats were for the taking in Vancouver-Centre, contested by Emery Barnes and lawyer William Deverell. The Party had won a byelection in Vancouver South and hoped for a second seat for Party linchpin John Laxton. Ridings with significant unionized workforces like Skeena, Alberni, and Rossland Trail were in Socred hands.

McGeer started with a base of six MLAs concentrated in  Point Grey and the North Shore, with one MLA in Oak Bay. Renowned UBC forest economist Peter Pearse ran in Vancouver-Little Mountain. David Zirnhelt, the high-profile head of the UBC AMS, ran in his home riding of the Cariboo. Mel Couvelier and Ian Stewart were regarded as strong candidates in Victoria. Rancher Mack Bryson was expected to make a strong showing in Kamloops, following in the footsteps of Len Marchand’s decisive federal win in 1968. Longtime Prince Rupert mayor Pete Lester signed on to McGeer’s team. Young candidates like Tex Enemark (Fort George) and Bob Plecas (Nanaimo) were recruited to fly the flag.

Screen Shot 2019-08-26 at 10.36.06 PM.png

Progressive Conservative leader John de Wolf was the only candidate for his party, running in  Point Grey.

 The Dewdney campaign

Looking back on the Liberal campaign in Dewdney, it was impressive. For a party that had not seen great results there for decades, Peter McDonald was all in.

McDonald pushed the issues with vigor. In a hand scrawled list, planned news releases included “School Taxation Cuts”, “North Shore Highway”, “Incentives for Secondary Industry”, “Blueprint for the Fraser Valley”, “Lougheed Highway”, and “B.C. Hydro”. Stories were targeted to newspapers in Haney, Mission, and Agassiz.

IMG_6462He championed water quality in the Alouette River, decrying it as unsafe for swimmers due to a pollution issue upstream from the provincial prison. Photos showed him collecting water samples that were sent to the lab, bolstering his claims.

IMG_6453News releases bombarded local media and he earned mentions in the Vancouver papers as well. Leader Pat McGeer came to the riding to make the rounds (“McGeer listens to Farmers’ Beefs”). Door knocking abounded. Lawn signs sprouted up.

McGeer HM PM

McGeer (centre) attending campaign event at McDonald home on River Road, Haney.  Helen McDonald (left), Peter McDonald (right)

Political campaigns always have an impact on the family of the candidate; it is very difficult for a candidate to run without his or her family’s full backing. McDonald had the unwavering support of his wife, Helen. Vertical strips from the Haney phone book were tacked to the wall by the phone. Each strip was a column of phone numbers that Helen would phone to seek support for Peter, while raising five kids 13 and under – including me, at 9 months old.

Screen-Shot-2019-08-26-at-8.56.46-PM.png

Shrine to the McDonald campaign on bedroom door

His oldest daughter, Sara, recalled the humiliation of riding in the Liberal parade car desperately trying to avoid being seen by slumping down low and avoiding eye contact with classmates.

McDonald was pulling out the stops – he just needed to wait for that Liberal wave.

NDP candidate Stu Legatt’s campaign ran newspaper ads with that old beauty of a slogan, “Time for a Change.”

IMG_6452

MLA George Mussallem rolled out the Socred messaging: “Socialism has no place here” and “The Good Life is for everybody. We have the system and the government… Our future will be assured.”

Mussallem.jpg

 The Campaign – prosecuting the Marxists

 W.A.C. made his case for the Good Life. However, to sustain his attacks on the new, ‘city slicker’ ‘Marxist’ labour lawyer, Tom Berger, he needed a hook.

Shortly after his bruising leadership campaign against Dave Barrett, Berger said he would nationalize BC Tel. It wasn’t planned, but the policy had been floated by NDP MLAs during the leadership race. It gave W.A.C. an opening. W.A.C. had formed state-run companies BC Ferries and BC Hydro – but in 1969, this was apparently a step too far.

Five days into the campaign, Berger was on page two of the Vancouver Sun explaining his BC Tel promise. That old saying comes to mind, “If you’re explaining, you’re losing.”

According to Pat McGeer’s book Politics in Paradise, Bennett blamed many circumstances on Berger. A wildcat transit strike in Vancouver: “Wasn’t that a terrible thing for Berger to call the bus strike?”

Berger’s own messaging played into Bennett’s strategy. Geoff Meggs and Rod Mickleburgh recount in their book The Art of the Impossible that NDP billboards and newspaper ads featured Berger in a suit carrying a briefcase, with the headline “Ready to Govern.” Berger had told the NDP convention, “The time has come to form government.” Bennett responded with, “Strike pay with Berger or take-home pay with Bennett”.

Having an NDP leader talking about governing was exactly what Bennett wanted. Combined with having Berger on the defensive over BC Tel, he was successfully polarizing the election ensuring that enough voters would reinforce the old premier rather than risk a ‘radical’ NDP government by voting NDP or vote-splitting by voting Liberal.

A key distinction between W.A.C. Bennett’s campaigns and those that followed to current day is the perception of whose side the parties are on. W.A.C. ran against the elites. He nationalized the ferries and the electricity company, and built major hydroelectric dams.

He may have been older, outdated, and not with the times – but he put himself on Main Street, B.C – not a natural place for the labour lawyer or  the Point Grey academic from Point Grey.

The Campaign Takes Shape

There was no leaders’ debate. Opinion polls were forbidden during the campaign. All parties had large rallies around the province where hundreds would attend, often punctuated by heckling.

There was a lot of print media coverage, but it was difficult for the opposition parties to lead the narrative. In a post-election article, Vancouver Sun columnist Allan Fotheringham tabulated that during the campaign, his paper devoted 537.5 inches of type to the Socreds on page one, compared to 273 inches for the NDP, and 159.5 inches to the Liberals. Columnists devoted three times as much ink to the Socreds as the NDP and very little to the Liberals.

Presumably, the Socreds had a much bigger war chest as well, not to mention the Good Life campaign that preceded the campaign.

Regardless, the media –as the media does – generated coverage that built the sense it was a hot race. From afar, the Regina Leader-Post said, “This will be no cut-and-dried contest.” The Toronto Globe & Mail opined that, “Many Canadians, in and out of British Columbia, would rejoice in Mr. Bennett’s defeat”, comparing him to Quebec separatist Réne Levesque. The recent election of Ed Schreyer’s NDP government in Manitoba fueled speculation.

In the first week of the campaign, the Socreds had an unexpected issue in Rossland-Trail. Robert Sommers, who had served as Minister of Forests (and also two years of a five-year jail term for bribery and conspiracy in the issuing of forest management licenses) attempted a political comeback by challenging the Socred incumbent. The drama played out over the first week of the campaign, but ended July 28thwhen Sommers protested the rules and withdrew from the race. A threat to run as an independent did not materialize.

The leaders criss-crossed the province, with a majority of seats outside the Lower Mainland. In fact, it was reported by Canadian Press on July 30ththat McGeer was shadowing Berger’s tour through itinerary a day later.

That same day, W.A.C. struck hard: “Mr. Berger has said himself he’s a Marxist socialist, though he’s trying to back away from it now. He’s scared everybody including himself.” Nine days in, W.A.C. was still on his core message. Ten days in, the Vancouver Sun’s lead editorial was “Mr. Berger and the telephone company…”

On August 7th, W.A.C. continued his focus on making the choice between “Bennett or Chaos; free enterprise or the heavy hand of state socialism”, he charged. That same day, the Province editorial page dedicated more time to Berger’s BC Tel “takeover.”

With 15 days to Election Day, reporter Bob McConnell wrote that, at that point of the campaign, W.A.C. had not toured. While he had traveled to a First Ministers’ conference, when he was in B.C., he was in his riding “sketching out the issue (free enterprise versus Marxian socialism)”.

He had made some promises such as second mortgages at lower interest rates, increased old-age pension supplements, and more spending. None of his cabinet ministers had made any major speeches or policy statements and the party seemed to be relying “mainly on a fat budget for radio, TV, and newspaper advertising.”

Once W.A.C. was on the road, he made waves. In a noisy Salmon Arm rally on August 13th, he said that an anti-Trudeau demonstration in Vancouver was organized by Berger. Amidst the noise of the hecklers, W.A.C. charged, “You can see it here tonight – that’s their tactics.” The Vancouver Sun devoted an article below to Berger’s denial. Berger said, “We have found no one listens to Bennett any more and no one believes him. These attacks make me angry… but I’m not going to reply in kind.”

With 9 days to Election Day, McConnell reported that NDP strategists were “flatly predicting victory,” stating they would hold their 17 seats and pick up another 11 in places like Rossland-Trail, Prince Rupert, Alberni, Dewdney, Nelson Creston, and Vancouver-Centre. The NDP sources claimed they had stronger volunteer support than previous campaigns. Socred strategists responded that they too had unprecedented volunteer support and while Berger and McGeer started touring early, the Socred’s “big guns are just starting to open up.”

At a rally of 800 supporters in Kamloops, W.A.C. promised that ‘Flyin’ Phil Gaglardi would return to cabinet full-time, a rare promise of cabinet-making on the campaign trail. For his part, Berger announced that former NDP leader Bob Strachan would serve his as a “senior cabinet minister” if elected.

On the streets of Vancouver-Centre, NDP candidates Emery Barnes and William Deverell were campaigning aggressively to unseat the two Social Credit incumbents. A post-campaign feature in MacLean’s profiled the duo.

 Liberal Hopes

As the campaign wore on, the Liberals were in desperate bid to stay relevant. They were not without their successes.

IMG_6541.jpg

IMG_6542-441x1024.jpg

 

A 700-car parade of Liberal supporters was held in Kamloops, which, by any metric, should be a sign of victory.

McGeer said the Liberals could win a minority government with 21 seats and that eight seats were “swing” seats, which could give him a majority. He even provided a list, which included Dewdney.

 

 

In Dewdney, news releases trumpeted a three-way race. “All our surveys indicate that at the present time the election is a toss-up in Dewdney”, announced the McDonald campaign. “People are dissatisfied with the high-handed, arrogant practices of the Social Credit government.”

IMG_6468

McDonald brought in legendary newspaper editor Ma Murray for a rally late in the campaign, garnering a strong turnout in Haney. Not only did Ma entertain the crowd, she held court at the McDonald household until the wee hours of the morning regaling supporters with her stories while enjoying her drinks.

Screen Shot 2019-08-29 at 8.38.27 AM.png

McDonald and legendary news editor Ma Murray (Haney, 1969)

Screen Shot 2019-08-26 at 8.58.08 PM.png

The after-party with Ma Murray, which lasted into the wee hours of the morning.  Ma with promotional posters distributed by campaign volunteers Julia & Sylvia McDonald

The Liberal pitch was that the Socreds couldn’t last forever and a Liberal alternative was needed to keep the NDP out of power. Said McDonald, “Mr. Bennett’s present campaign policy, if successful, would put an NDP government into office in the election after this one.” He was right. But in the meantime, the message wasn’t getting through.

One example of the Socred grip was a generous donation McDonald received from a small businessman. However, not long after, he saw the same man leaving the office of George Mussallem, where he had given an even larger donation. When challenged as to which campaign he was supporting, the small businessman remarked, in effect, “Pete, you’re a nice guy, but you’re not going to win.”

And the water pollution issue that McDonald was making as a centrepiece of the campaign? The Socreds had thwarted him before the campaign even started. The source of the pollution identified, dealt with, and proclaimed safe, with a helpful front page letter to the editor from the local MLA.

safe water.png

In the outback, Liberals were realistic. In his book, Bill Bennett: A Mandarin’s View, Bob Plecas wrote about his experience as a 24-year old Liberal candidate in Nanaimo. He said he was told by the local newspaper that no matter what he did, including “standing on his head to give answers at all-candidates meeting”, he would get no coverage.

In the final analysis, Plecas said he had more relatives than votes. One headline he did receive in the Nanaimo Daily Free Press was, “McGeer’s Election Tour to Bypass Nanaimo.” McGeer would make it to Nanaimo late in the campaign.

The Final Week

In the homestretch, W.A.C. was returning to his core theme: “NDP Menace to Liberty”. While campaigning on the Sunshine Coast, W.A.C. took on the labour bosses: “It will be a dark day when the workers of this province follow their bosses on political things… I appeal to the union wives. Do you want the good wages you’re getting now? Or strike pay with Berger? Because there will be chaos.”

 Berger was promising to develop a rapid transit system for Vancouver and the Lower Mainland over a new Burrard Inlet crossing. He wanted commuter trains running on existing rail tracks, and BC Hydro (which then ran the bus system) to begin planning a subway system. At an Island rally, Berger promised public auto insurance.

With four days to go, a Canadian Press story quoted W.A.C. as saying, “This is not a campaign. This is just the tour of the province; I’m just a tourist.” He said he was enjoying the campaign “more than any other I’ve ever been in”.

In a separate CP news item, Berger was, again, responding to W.A.C.’s attacks. This time, W.A.C. had said an NDP victory would be like the Russians invasion of Czechoslovakia. Berger called the attacks “absurd.”

Berger pressed on with more campaign planks. On August 25th, he promised a new housing fund to provide first mortgages for home buyers at lower than federal CMHC interest rates.

Berger spoked at a rally of 7,000 in New Westminster. He said, “We’re ready to form a government. I’m calling for unity. I’m calling for mandate. I’m calling for victory.” Manitoba Premier Ed Schreyer voiced his support for Berger and noted that Manitoba has had a publicly-owned telephone company since 1912.

Vancouver Centre candidates Herb Capozzi and Evan Wolfe joined 250 of their campaign volunteers to build a playground at a low-rent housing project in their riding, with donated material. An interesting tactic in a close race.

On the eve of Election Day, Canadian Press reported that election strategists for the three parties were reconciling themselves to a potential minority government. All parties publicly predicted majorities.

Election Night

It was a resounding win for W.A.C. and the Socreds and a crushing loss for the NDP. While not totally unexpected, the Liberals’ optimism was dashed.

Social Credit           46.8%           (+1.2%)        38 seats (+6)

NDP                           33.9%           (+0.3%)        12 seats (-5)

Liberal                     19.0%           (-1.2%)         5 seats (-1)

Riding by Riding results

The 69-year old premier not only secured a 7thmandate for the Socreds, he increased the popular vote and added six seats to assume a dominant position in the Legislature. He defied expectations. He said, “Our cup runneth over.”

While holding the popular vote, the seat count was a disaster for Berger, losing almost one-third of his Caucus, including his own seat. The Liberals were stymied and lost their only seat on Vancouver Island, Oak Bay.

In Dewdney, Socred George Mussallem cruised to an easy victory with 51% of the vote. NDP Stu Leggatt took 37% while Liberal Peter McDonald accounted for 12% of the votes.

Front page headlines:

Vancouver Sun: Socreds Flatten Opposition

The Province: Bennett tightens his grip

Victoria Daily Times: Landslide Win for Bennett

Another Vancouver Sun A1 piece was headlined 7 Straight for Old Master. Sun reporter Dave Ablett writes, “The old man has run out of ideas, they said. And his anti-socialist extremism seemed totally out of place in the sophisticated 60s.” However, according to W.A.C.’s son, Bill, “My father said two weeks ago that it was the easiest campaign he’d run.”

After the Campaign

thomas_r._berger.jpg

Tom Berger (UBC.ca)

At age 36, Tom Berger was done with party politics. Without a seat, he resigned he party
leadership and essentially turned it over to Dave Barrett. Three years later, Barrett would be the premier, decisively defeating W.A.C. Bennett. He ran a very different campaign than Berger, focusing on opposing not governing, and using humor to disarm. Berger continued in law, as lead counsel for the Nisga’a in the historic Calder case, went to the bench, and has enjoyed a celebrated legal career receiving many accolades.

Many NDP candidates who lost in 1969 would be successful in 1972, such as Dave Stupich, Emery Barnes, Bill King, Harold Steeves, and Norm Levi. NDP candidate William Deverell went on to become one of Canada’s best-known novelists.

Pat McGeer continued on as Liberal leader initially, but by 1972 he had stepped away, to be succeeded by David Anderson, then a first-term MP from Victoria. With Anderson, the Liberals regressed. Ultimately, McGeer, his seatmate Garde Gardom, and West Vancouver MLA Allan Williams would cross the floor to the Socreds and join W.A.C.’s son W.R. Bennett for the 1975 campaign, where the Barrett government was defeated. The troika of erstwhile Liberals played senior roles in the younger Bennett’s cabinet.  Gardom went on to be Lieutenant-Governor, McGeer continues, with his wife, as an esteemed medical researcher at UBC.

mcgeer-williams-bennett-and-gardom

W.R. Bennett (2nd from right) with his troika of Liberal MLAs (L to R): Allan Williams, Pat McGeer, and Garde Gardom (Vancouver Sun, 1974)

Liberal candidate Bob Plecas (Nanaimo) would enter the public service and play a major role in the senior ranks for decades. Victoria-area Liberal candidate Mel Couvelier would go on to serve as BC Liberal Party president and Mayor of Saanich, but would ultimately gravitate to the Socreds, running for the leadership in 1986 and served as Finance Minister. Cariboo David Zirnhelt would return to politics as an NDP candidate in the 1989 Cariboo byelection, scoring a major upset over the Socreds, a major event for the NDP on the way to victory in 1991.  He served as senior cabinet minister in the 1990s.

1969: Changing the course of BC politics

The 1969 campaign had two significant impacts.

First, it changed the NDP. Berger’s divisive leadership campaign, which consumed most of the 1966-1969 period, was all for naught. The outcome put the party in Dave Barrett’s hands, who would lead the party in the next four elections – significantly, winning the first in 1972. Under Barrett, the NDP reached record levels of popular vote.

IMG_6457

Barrett’s 1969 brochure

Second, the ’69 campaign had a major impact on the Liberals too. The loss of a seat, and modest dip in popular support were big disappointments. The futility of trying to win as a free enterprise alternative was reinforced in 1972. Within five years of the 1969 election, three Liberal MLAs, including McGeer, dramatically crossed the floor to the Socreds.

In reality, the Liberal formula was flawed. They had not broadened their appeal beyond the “silk stocking” seats of Vancouver and Victoria and lacked a populist appeal. McGeer, an “egghead,” embodied the traditional Liberal base, which Liberals failed to break out of federally or provincially for a generation.

It wasn’t until Gordon Wilson channeled W.A.C. by running against the elites that the Liberals returned to prominence in British Columbia. Gordon Campbell reconstituted the coalition against the ‘Marxist socialists’ that had defined B.C. politics since 1941.

Then there are the little things. In the 1968 Oak Bay byelection, W.A.C. sought the election of a Socred in a seat held by the Liberals for many years. At a rally at Oak Bay High, W.A.C. pleaded, “How many years does a premier have to wait?” Socred Peter Pollen (future mayor of Victoria) was defeated by Oak Bay mayor and Liberal candidate Allan Cox. One year later, Socred candidate Dr. Scott Wallace defeated Cox in what Pat McGeer called “the biggest upset” of 1969. It was certainly upsetting to him.

However, it would soon upset W.A.C. One of only 38 MLAs, Wallace was a mere backbencher and his ideas for health care reform were shot down by the government. By 1971, he had crossed the floor to the Progressive Conservatives, giving them their first MLA in 15 years. Combined with a new, vigorous leader, the Progressive Conservatives would help destroy the Social Credit campaign in 1972. In the end, W.A.C. may have wished Oak Bay voters had waited a little longer.

Thus the stage was set coming out of 1969 for both a stronger NDP and reaction to a stronger NDP – a realigned and consolidated free enterprise movement. By 1975, Barrett had already been premier, and W.A.C.’s son, Bill Bennett, was about to begin, with the former leader of the Liberals at his side.

A candidate’s ending

Like many candidates, Peter McDonald gave it his best shot. “You can’t win if you don’t run” is an argument I have certainly used while recruiting candidates over the years – and his possibilities were much better than other longshot bets that did pay off (like the Liberals in 1991).

And like many candidates, he got it out of his system; he never ran again.

Disappointment at the result, sure, but there’s nothing he could have done. The Liberal opportunity to win in Dewdney would have seemed hopeless after the 1969 campaign – and it was for a generation.

It was the discovery of a box of election materials in the basement that sparked my interest in politics. I could not begin to understand the lists, brochures, and newspaper clippings. It was like another world, one that I would fully embrace once I began to comprehend.

It was a tremendous benefit to me as a young person starting out in politics to have had a father that ran for office, without much chance of winning, but running out of passion and purpose. Much like it was for my friend, Christy, whose dad, Jim Clark, also ran for the Liberals during that era.

As I reflect back on campaigns past, it’s also a reminder that candidates make contributions, even if they don’t have a chance of winning. They drive issues. They hold the leaders accountable. It’s a noble endeavor to run when you are likely not going to prevail.

A further example I took from this campaign was the collegiality. While I was only eight months old during the 1969 campaign, in later years I would often hear my Dad speak about George Mussallem and Stu Leggatt. They were friends. He had a deep respect for both. Despite the polarization and rhetoric at the leadership level, at the local level, there was mutual respect.

Late in the campaign, Dad was going down to defeat. On what I imagine was a sunny August day, he set out to knock on doors on Nicomen Island, a farming community east of Mission. He was greeted like a hero. It seemed like no one had ever bothered to visit farming families there before. He was welcomed into homes for tea and cookies, there were back slaps, and a feeling that support had been won.

On election night, as dismal results flooded in, McDonald leaned over to his brother Harold and said, “Just wait for Nicomen Island to come in.”

Well, the good people of Nicomen Island overwhelmingly voted Socred that day, saving only one vote for McDonald.

Nice guy, that Peter McDonald, but it seems those Nicomen Islanders were enjoying The Good Life and sure as hell didn’t want any Marxist Socialists.

At least, that’s the story I heard.

(Originally published in The Orca)

A local take on the Burnaby South by-election

Guest Shot – by Adam Pankratz.  2015 Liberal candidate in Burnaby South.

Burnaby South has been in the news a lot lately. Burnaby? In the news? Not something we used to read very often, but Burnaby residents have gotten used to the spotlight lately. Whether it’s Kinder Morgan in the north, or Jagmeet Singh in the south, Burnaby’s ridings have been the focal points of several major news stories for 2018 and 2019.

Political observers are talking about how Jagmeet Singh will fare in his bid to gain a seat and become an MP as he deals with turmoil within the NDP. Win or lose Mr. Singh will face serious headwinds…but lose and he’s finished. Will the voters of Burnaby give him his victory and a chance to lead the NDP into the next general election in October?

Kinder Morgan – it’s the issue everyone wanted to talk about 6 months ago, and Jagmeet Singh opened his candidacy by attacking the “leaky pipeline.” I said then that Mr Singh missed the mark with Kinder Morgan, which is a minor issue in Burnaby, and not one that would decide the by-election here. The current situation in Burnaby, despite all the attention heaped on it through the summer and fall, is that no candidate is focused on Kinder Morgan. Burnaby residents are ultimately practical and realistic on Kinder Morgan, as are most Canadians. Responsible resources extraction is necessary for the Canadian economy and the residents here recognize that. It is a very loud minority who made it the issue it was.

What the candidates have all zeroed in on is the major issue in Burnaby of housing. It is the issue which sank Derek Corrigan, the four-term mayor of Burnaby, who lost to current mayor Mike Hurley last October.  Once again, the issue is front and centre. Like all the Lower Mainland, Burnaby is expensive and residents here want to see more action taken at all levels of government.

These issues are in many ways similar to the ones I came across doorknocking and speaking with residents during my 2015 federal election campaign. During that election there was also serious concern about the Harper Government and their impact on Canada’s image and sense of ourselves as a compassionate society. Canadians want a government that listens to them and understands their concerns and Burnaby residents are no different. That is why I always thought, and still do, that Mr Singh’s major challenge this by-election is gaining local credibility with Burnaby voters.

IMG_1741

Pankratz campaign: won Election Day, but could not overcome strong NDP machine delivering support to the advance poll.

Mr Singh clearly thinks Burnaby is an NDP slam dunk or he wouldn’t be here. History is on his side, but will Burnaby voters deliver what Mr Singh expects? “All Burnaby” ridings (that is, ridings entirely within Burnaby, not split over city boundaries) have gone NDP for over 40 years. Mr. Singh and the NDP clearly are hoping for a repeat of the voting pattern in October.

There is, however danger in this. Burnaby is changing and the 2015 general election proved that. In that election Burnaby North Seymour went Liberal and in Burnaby South the incumbent Kennedy Stewart narrowly hung on to best me by 547 votes. But the larger gamble the NDP and Mr Singh are taking is assuming that Burnaby residents are the same as they were 40 years go (they aren’t) and thinking they will readily accept a candidate who parachuted in, with no community connections.

I believe Burnaby residents want an MP who knows the community and understand them. I remember distinctly that the most common response to our team in 2015, an election in which we doorknocked for over a year prior to Election Day, was “No one has knocked on my door since Svend was our MP.” “Svend” is, of course, Svend Robinson, who served Burnaby for 25 years as MP. Like him or hate him, Svend was someone who understood Burnaby, worked tirelessly to be present locally as an MP and develop personal relationships with his constituents. Svend’s rival at the time, Bill Cunningham (Liberal) and successor (Bill Siksay) also had deep, long standing relationships with Burnaby. Burnaby misses this. It is no doubt one of the key reasons our election campaign did so well in 2015, despite the entrenched NDP history. Local wins here. The fact that recent NDP representative Kennedy Stewart resigned as MP and immediately began touting that he was from Vancouver and always wanted the job of Vancouver Mayor has only deepened the desire of Burnaby residents for a long-term MP intent on local priorities and issues.

Screen Shot 2019-02-18 at 10.49.57 AM.png

Svend: Knocker of Doors, also now on Twitter (photo: CBC)

What can we expect of this by-election?  At the outset my opinion, bluntly put, was that Jagmeet Singh should have lost Burnaby South decisively. However, current events have conspired to make that loss seem unlikely.

Due to the close race in 2015, the story everyone (sensibly) made was that this would be a tight race between the Liberals and the NDP. However, the former Liberal candidate, Karen Wang, was forced to resign due to comments she made on WeChat regarding Mr Singh. This botched campaign start, followed by the scramble to replace her has hurt Liberal credibility locally. Now, the national Liberal scene is being shaken by the SNC-Lavalin affair. Does this mean the Liberals are cooked in Burnaby South? No, but they have made their lives significantly more difficult than it ought to have been.

One party not being talked about at all is the Conservatives in Burnaby. They have flown under the radar in this by-election despite strong results in 2011 (40%) and even 2015 (27%), given the circumstances. In my mind they were a dark horse contender until the People’s Party of Canada was founded. This long shot is now essentially non-existent.

The PPC is running an ostensibly strong candidate in former local school trustee candidate from 2018 Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson. Ms Thompson has been controversial for her anti-SOGI comments and stance on similar issues, yet still received over 15,000 votes in the 2018 municipal election. While campaign signs don’t mean anything at the ballot box, it’s hard not to notice the disproportionately high amount of PPC signs around Burnaby, given the party is supposed to almost be a fringe joke nationally. If Ms Thompson can rally her supporters from 2018, I would watch for the PPC to seriously surprise people and perhaps even see Burnaby South legitimize the PPC as a minor party.

Jagmeet Singh meanwhile continues to be at best an unknown, enigmatic figure for most Burnaby residents. He talks in bland platitudes, doesn’t have a clear stance on anything and equivocates when asked direct questions. At his first press conference he claimed to be “All in on Burnaby.” He isn’t. His strategy seems to be “Burnaby will vote NDP no matter what.” Past that, it’s hard to see any notable impact he has made on the community or its residents.

In the end, despite his lack of connection to the riding and lack of understanding as to what makes Burnaby tick, I foresee Mr Singh and the NDP pulling this one out on the basis of history. The Liberals did themselves no favours in the run up to or first half of the by-election and simply have too much ground to make up. The Conservatives will be split by the PPC and fade away.

So the surprise is that the Liberals and Conservatives do not look like they can take advantage of a weak NDP leader with no connection to Burnaby, while the upstart PPC might have a boost that puts fuel in its tank.  Politics is always interesting in BC.

By-election primer: a stroll through 150 years of Nanaimo politics

Premiers. Coal barons and coal disasters. Firebrands.  Death.  Champions of the working class.  Champions of Women’s Suffrage. Party leaders. Cabinet veterans. Speakers. Underdogs.  Coalition Makers.  Scandal.  Crushed Grapes. “The Greatest Canadian”. A pirate.  A less than sober coronation.  As we look toward Nanaimo’s January 30thbyelection, I graze through the history of one of BC’s most intriguing ridings.

How Victoria was Crowned by Nanaimo

When former Vancouver Province ace reporter and award-winning author Don Hauka steps out his front door in the Royal City and gazes south, he likely has trouble mustering kind thoughts about one of Nanaimo’s earliest representatives who influenced the course of history, while under the influence.

Hauka lives on 5thStreet in New Westminster.  The street is much wider than other streets because it was to be the boulevard leading up to the provincial legislature that was supposed to be built there when the colonies of Vancouver Island and British Columbia united in 1866.

Captain William Hales Franklyn, representative from Nanaimo, was a former ship’s captain who wound up in the Harbour City after having thrown one of his passengers into irons. He favoured New Westminster as the capital of the newly unified colony.  Victoria was regarded by Nanaimoites as its “cruel stepmother”.   According to

Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 10.20.05 PM.png

Franklyn: Quite a spectacle

famed BC historian Margaret Ormsby, he intended to make a strong statement in favour of the mainland capital, but on the day of the debate, he was a “little shaky” owing to some refreshments consumed. His seatmate, Victoria supporter William George Cox, seized on the opportunity.  The ship’s captain rose reading from his prepared text comparing New Westminster on the Fraser River to Calcutta on the Hoogley River, arguing that New Westminster would enjoy Calcutta’s prosperity.  However, as he finished the first page, Cox shuffled the papers to put page one back at the top, which Franklyn re-read, repeating his parallel to Calcutta.  This happened a third time and hilarity and mayhem ensued.  In the meantime, Franklyn had put his spectacles on the table whereupon Cox removed the lenses from their frame so that Franklyn “could not see the Hoogley or anything else”.  The House was in an uproar as the hapless Franklyn twisted in the wind.  Speaker John Helmcken, a firm supporter of Victoria’s bid, moved a recess then, when the House reassembled, he ruled that Franklyn could not make a second speech.  Victoria went on to win the vote 13-8 and the rest is history.  Franklyn was removed from his post not long after by a disappointed Governor Seymour who favoured New Westminster.  And 150 years later, Don Hauka is not prepared to forgive Franklyn’s bumbling nor Victoria’s treachery.

Sheesh, all that before Confederation.  What about the next 150 years?

With the Nanaimo byelection taking place January 30th, it caused me to reflect on Nanaimo’s history in provincial politics.  The following is a glimpse – a few stories and a little colour.  I am not pretending to be an expert when it comes to Nanaimo’s history, but I lived in the area for over 15 years and certainly find it interesting. I encourage comments to add insight and missing facts, especially where I have missed the mark.  There are few riding histories that I’m aware of that connect modern-day politics to BC’s beginnings as a province.  Nanaimo is a good place to start.  Political junkies, enjoy.

(A quick note on ridings. The names have bounced around over the years.  There has always been at least one core Nanaimo riding and sometimes two or three that represent the area. The name ‘Newcastle’ was used for many decades in riding names and is tied to Newcastle Island in Nanaimo, which in turn drew its name from the heart of coal mining in the UK.  For this post, I relied heavily on the Electoral History of British Columbia 1871-1986 and refer to other sources throughout the post)

A future Premier elected right off the bat

In the first election as a province, Nanaimo elected a premier.  He wasn’t the premier then and there, but John Robson would ultimately become premier of BC and have its highest peak and one of its most famous streets bear his name.

Robson was a lively force.  A newspaper editor, he was cited by contempt by Chief Justice Matthew Baillie Begbie, and was a burr under the saddle of Governor Douglas.  He moved his newspaper from New Westminster to Victoria and sold it to the rival Daily British Colonist (precursor of today’s Times-Colonist). He was a strong supporter of BC joining Confederation, and when BC joined in 1871, he ran and won in Nanaimo with 57 votes to his opponent’s 33.  He only served one-term representing Nanaimo but he went on to an important career in provincial politics representing other areas, ultimately assuming the premiership in 1889.  He died in office, in 1892, when he hurt his finger in the door of a carriage during a visit to London and succumbed to blood poisoning.

Robson was one of two premiers who represented Nanaimo during their career.

Democracy and the Dunsmuirs

Nanaimo before and after Confederation was a coal town. There are many good books and sources about Nanaimo’s coal history, especially by author Jan Peterson, who has written six local histories. In fact, I would defer completely to Peterson on any historical points.

An excerpt from a column in the Times-Colonist by Peterson describes the origins of coal in Nanaimo:

Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 10.23.21 PM.png

Coal Tyee: He brought coal to the attention of the HBC (BC Archives)

A chance encounter between Snuneymuxw Chief Che-wich-i-kan [or Ki-et-sa-kun] and a blacksmith in Victoria set the wheels of development in Nanaimo in place. Che-wich-i-kan, historically referred to as “Coal Tyee,” had gone to Victoria to have his gun repaired. He commented about black stones being plentiful in his area. This conversation was repeated to HBC authorities, who then invited the chief to bring some of his black stones to Victoria. In return, he would get a bottle of rum and have his gun repaired free. The date was December 1849. The following spring, Coal Tyee returned with a canoe laden with coal. A company clerk, Joseph William McKay, was quickly dispatched to Nanaimo.

The Snuneymuxw negotiated a treaty with the Crown in 1854.  According to the Snuneymuxw First Nation website, “In order to access the coal, the Colonial authorities knew that under British Common Law, and as a matter of practical reality, they had to conclude a Treaty with the Indigenous owners of the land, which in coal-rich Nanaimo were the Snuneymuxw. The goal of treaty-making was to achieve, through recognition and respect of Snuneymuxw, access to the coal deposits.” (A few years ago, Vancouver Island University created the Centre for Pre-Confederation Treaties and Reconciliation to further explore issues related to the 1854 treaty).

From there, Nanaimo became a coal town with the Hudson Bay Company benefiting, along with the companies that followed.  Today, underneath Nanaimo there are coal tunnels and shafts in every direction, remnants of the Age of Island Coal.

Another local book, When Coal was King, by VIU professor John Hinde, outlines the rise of the Dunsmuirs.  Robert Dunsmuir and his wife emigrated to Vancouver Island from Scotland in 1850 as an indentured miner for the HBC.  The voyage to the west coast Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 10.41.08 PM.pngtook months and numerous members of the crew deserted to take part in the California Gold Rush.  Thus, son James was born at Fort Vancouver on the Columbia in 1851.  Dunsmuir’s uncle worked for the HBC in Nanaimo and there he went.  When his uncle’s contract expired, he tried to convince Robert and his family to return to Scotland.  They decided against it and stuck it out in Nanaimo.

He laboured for almost twenty years, prosperous but not extravagant.  He discovered the Wellington seam in 1869 and formed his own venture, beginning production at new pits at Wellington in the Nanaimo area, in 1871. By the 1880s, Dunsmuir was dominating the coal industry on Vancouver Island at a time when coal was the world’s dominant fuel. On August 13, 1886, John A. MacDonald drove in the Last Spike of the E&N Railroad at Shawnigan Lake, built by Dunsmuir, which Hinde calls “the deal of the century”.   The railroad was the subject of considerable political controversy, which Dunsmuir shrewdly exploited.  Vancouver Island today in many ways remains the architecture of the Dunsmuirs.

Historian Jean Barman writes, “The Dunsmuirs’ total concern with profit extended to their treatment of employees.  The accommodation rented to workers was primitive, lacking even running water… Death and injury were commonplace because of company negligence”.  The Dunsmuirs’ approach of hiring cheaper labour and working conditions led to confrontation, which was dealt with ruthlessly.

Dunsmuir had a rags to riches story and his riches were astonishing for that time. Dunsmuir would move to Victoria and build Craigdarroch Castle as his residence.  Though his political base and wealth derived from the coal pits of Nanaimo, his influence went much further beyond.

Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 11.00.24 PM.png

Craigdarroch: What would Robert Dunsmuir have thought of spec taxes?

One of his key managers, and son-in-law, John Bryden was elected to succeed Robson in 1875. Bryden resigned due to business pressures the next year, but would return to elected office in 1894 and 1898.  He was a Dunsmuir man and strongly advocated for the coal industry.    A summation of his political career is found in the Dictionary of Canadian Biography:

His electioneering statements and legislative voting record indicate that he was in favour of economic development, an advocate of temperance, opposed to gambling, unwilling to extend the franchise to women, and above all a rigid supporter of the right of employers to hire Chinese labourers. Although he received public criticism for his support of capital in general and the Dunsmuir empire in particular, Bryden seems to have been well respected by his election opponents.

In his capacity as shareholder, he launched a successful constitutional court action that allowed the Dunsmuir empire to continue hiring Chinese labour, which were paid much lower wages.  This was one of many issues that sparked labour revolts.

Robert Dunsmuir himself was elected in 1882 along with William Raybould when the seat carried two members.   Dunsmuir immediately joined the Cabinet of Premier Alexander E.B. Davie.  There were no conflict-of-interest laws in those days.  Dunsmuir’s business interests continued unabated, as did his political power, though sons James and Alexander took on more responsibilities with the business and it thrived.

In the 1888 session, Dunsmuir was accused of favouring BC’s annexation to the United States.  MLA T.B. Humphreys (Lillooet) went as far as moving a motion of censure.  The matter was deflected to a select standing committee, which exonerated Dunsmuir.

Dunsmuir’s political success left Nanaimo mineworkers and labour activists “dejected”, writes Ormsby, which is understandable.  The polarization between the richest man in British Columbia, and his organization, versus mineworkers marching toward increasingly radical politics, was growing. It would manifest itself in terms of strikes, riots, and arrests for many years, but it would soon show itself at the ballot box.

However, Robert Dunsmuir would never taste defeat.  He died in 1889.  In fact, Raybould also died during the same term of office, probably the only time in BC history that both members (of a two-member riding) died.

It would be a short wait before Labour forces made their mark at the ballot box. And it wasn’t the end of the Dunsmuirs in politics either.

Nanaimo: the origins of BC’s Labour politics

Remembering that party politics were not formalized in BC until the election of 1903, there were basically three types of candidates – those who supported the Government, the Opposition, or Labour.

The first Labour MLAs elected to the BC Legislature were elected from Nanaimo in 1890.  Thomas Forster won Nanaimo in a tight three-way race 160-157-154.  Thomas Keith was acclaimed in the adjacent Nanaimo City riding.  The Electoral History of British Columbia (1871-1986) states:

Forster and Keith were both nominated by the Miners’ and Mine Labourers’ Protective Association (MMLPA) and campaigned on the “Workingmen’s Platform” of the Workingmen’s Campaign Committee (Nanaimo Free Press, 19, 28, and 31 May 1890).

In 1894, Labour candidates had a setback.  With three Nanaimo area ridings in the 33-seat Legislature – North Nanaimo, South Nanaimo, and Nanaimo City – all three Labour candidates were shut out. This election marked the return of Dunsmuir’s son-in-law John Bryden to elected office, and also saw the election of William Walkem, a physician who had narrowly lost in 1890.  Walkem’s brother, George, had served as BC premier from 1878-1882.

While Bryden was returned in 1898, Walkem was defeated handily in South Nanaimo by Ralph Smith, a Labour-Oppositionist candidate, which meant he had the backing of Labour and those that also opposed the government.  Smith had run in 1894 but had lost to Bryden.

The election of Bryden at the same time as the election of Labour MLAs demonstrates the support that each side of the management-labour divide had in the City overall – a divide that has ebbed and flowed over Nanaimo’s history.  Of course, when looking at early voting results, it’s important to be mindful that the electoral franchise was very limited during those days.  These early results are completely absent of female participation, among other restrictions.

Ralph Smith’s story is an interesting one. He was a coal miner from Newcastle who

Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 11.42.29 PM.png

Mary Ellen Smith: her family’s political career started in Nanaimo

emigrated to Nanaimo in 1891.  His victory in 1898 in Nanaimo was followed by a massive win in 1900. Shortly after that election, he decided to seek federal office in 1901
and would ultimately serve as a Liberal MP. He returned to provincial politics in 1916, from a Vancouver riding, and served as Minister of Finance under Premier Harlan Brewster, but he died in office.  Prior to his death, a provincial referendum resulted in 65% (of men) voting to extend the vote to women.

His wife, Mary Ellen Smith, ran in his vacant seat and became BC’s first MLA and first female cabinet minister in the British Commonwealth.

But back in Nanaimo in 1901, Smith’s departure opened the door for one of the most significant politicians in British Columbia – James J. Hawthornthwaite.  Elected as one of the first Labour-backed MLAs in BC history, he would co-found the Socialist Party of British Columbia.

He came to BC in the late 1880s and found his way to Nanaimo to work as a real estate agent for the New Vancouver Coal Mining and Land Co. Ltd.  Its owner, Samuel Robins, was a bitter rival of the Dunsmuirs.  Hawthornthwaite was influenced by Ralph Smith, who was then secretary of the Miners’ and Mine Laborers Protective Association, and would marry the daughter of Mark Bate, Nanaimo’s first mayor who served 16 terms between 1875 and 1900.  Bate is the focus of one Jan Peterson’s local histories.

Hawthornthwaite was elected as a Socialist, along with neighbouring MLA Parker Williams. The two of them enjoyed electoral success between 1903 and 1912.

Hawthornthwaite was the “socialist intellectual”, says historian Allen Seager. His politics would diverge with his former ally Ralph Smith but “his approach did not alienate him from the mining population; his speeches earned him great applause at public meetings”, writes Hinde.  Williams, on the other hand, was a Welsh miner and trade unionist.  He made his way west finally settling in Cedar.  While Hawthornthwaite focused on Socialist theory, Williams “concentrated on wages, safety, and the right to organize”. Hinde writes that William was “unpolished and crumpled”; one local writer declared, “No amount of grooming and combing would transform Parker Williams into Beau Brummell”.

Screen Shot 2019-01-17 at 10.21.39 AM.png

An interesting source on BC’s radical roots

In the 1903 election, the first that political parties contested in British Columbia, the Socialists were centre stage.  The Conservatives led by the youthful Richard McBride held 22 of the 42 seats, the Liberals 17.  The two Nanaimo Socialists held two seats, along with other independent Labour allies in the Legislature, which gave them an important role with a government that had a thin majority.

Author John Hinde describes Hawthornthwaite and Williams as “evolutionary” rather than “revolutionary” Socialists.  Hinde continues, “The main weapon in the Socialists arsenal was the ballot, the ‘Gatling gun of political power’”.

Hawthornthwaite’s bio in the Dictionary of Canadian Biography supports this view of evolutionary change:

Hawthornthwaite’s contributions were far more constructive than revolutionary and had included rudimentary farm security legislation in 1901 and a workmen’s compensation act in 1902. When Conservative premier Richard McBride* took office in June 1903, he had only a small majority so he turned to Hawthornthwaite for support. Thus, Hawthornthwaite was able to push for additional legislation, including improved safety standards and labour reforms in the mining industry. The premier used members of the socialist caucus to sound out the opinion of the popular class on a narrow range of issues. In return, Hawthornthwaite and his associates eschewed detailed criticism of McBride’s policies of development. There were limits to such arrangements. For example, McBride allowed members of the socialist caucus to lead the fight for women’s suffrage, but applied no party discipline to bring it about, though he personally supported enfranchisement of women as part of his “white B.C.” policy. In addition, administration of labour legislation sometimes made a mockery of the reforms enacted during McBride’s premiership. Hawthornthwaite’s correspondence shows that the enforcement by government officials of different parts of the Coal Mines Regulation Act depended on his persistent efforts and those of other elected officials. Nevertheless, and although accumulated grievances in the Vancouver Island coalfield would later boil over into violent confrontation, for a time the socialist alternative of a “strike at the ballot box,” the slogan of the socialist Western Clarion(Vancouver), had unexampled success.

In 1907, McBride won 26 seats, a stronger majority, though the Socialists ran 20 candidates and elected three, including the two Nanaimo MLAs.  Hawthornthwaite would resign his seat in 1908 to contest the federal election in opposition to Ralph Smith, who was running with Wilfred Laurier’s Liberals.  Smith won, but Hawthornthwaite won back his provincial seat in the subsequent byelection.

In 1909, McBride dominated with 38 of 42 seats.  But yet again, Hawthornthwaite and Williams prevailed, holding between them as many seats as the decimated Liberals.

Then in 1912, McBride did it again.  He won 39 of 42 seats.  The Socialists held two seats in Nanaimo, Parker Williams, but this time, it was John Place not Hawthornthwaite that was Williams’ seatmate.  As a sidenote, the Nanaimo MLAs split from the Socialist Party of Canada at this time, and moved to a different banner – the Social Democratic Party.  Hawthornthwaite moved on to other business interests, which drew criticism from some Socialists, and he also had a close friendship with McBride.

Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 11.53.23 PM.png

Parker Williams (Vancouver Sun)

Williams had a different style than Hawthornthwaite.  A Vancouver Sun profile in 2017 included some vignettes from his political career:

Following a bitter coal miners’ strike on the Island between 1912 and 1914, he not only went after the Conservative premier, Richard McBride, and Attorney General William Bowser, he went after their parliamentary colleagues for toeing the government line. “What do you expect from 40 spineless shrimps of the 5-, 10- and 15-cent politicians who sit in the House and do the bidding of McBride and Bowser?” thundered Williams. “They care not what happens to the people so long as the party machine works well.”

One of his finest moments came in January 1914, when he shamed the government over the death of a young man who had been sentenced to a year in prison over a protest during the coal strike. Badly treated in prison, the boy fell ill, but his parents weren’t notified until after he died. “I ask for the stunned mother and father no sympathy from this House,” said Williams, his voice choking with emotion. “They will carry their agony to their grave. But this I shall say: that the root of all this sorrow and this suffering will be found in the incompetency, inadequacy, callous and domineering methods of the government in handling this situation from the beginning.”

World War I intervened and the politics of British Columbia would change. In the 1916 election, William Sloan of the Liberals gained a Nanaimo seat while Williams was re-elected in Newcastle.  The miners vote was beginning to be diluted by demographic change. Williams would resign a year later to take a provincial appointment and who ran to replace him?  Hawthornthwaite stepped back in.  This would be his last term.  It was said that he had been stirred politically by the Bolsheviks and may have met Lenin in his travels.

In Politicians of a Pioneering Province, former Vancouver Province reporter Russell Walker described Hawthornthwaite:

At times we had the pleasure of reporting genuine orators. One such was James H. Hawthornthwaite, Socialist, Cowichan-Newcastle… When [he] rose to speak there was invariably marked attention on all sides.  He spoke almost with a bite to his words, sometimes with a harsh, choppy delivery, no doubt for emphasis. But smooth sentences flowed like lube oil under pressure, and if the Socialist member for Cowichan-Newcastle had been enunciating Liberal party policies, Premier Oliver could have called a general election any time and been sure of a majority.

Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 11.33.02 PM.png

In 1920, in the riding of Cowichan-Newcastle, Hawthornthwaite would be defeated by Federated Labour Party candidate Sam Guthrie, thus ending his political career.

Sam Guthrie was just getting started.  The Scottish miner was a union leader during the Great Strike of 1913 in Ladysmith.  Ladysmith was a coal mining town, directly linked to the mines at Extension, near Nanaimo.  While there was no loss of life during the strike, there were assaults, lootings, and property damage.  Fifty men were sentenced to prison, including Guthrie who received a two-year ticket to Oakalla, but was feted as a labour martyr upon his return.  Guthrie’s true labour credentials bested Hawthornthwaite in 1920, but Guthrie lost in 1924 to a Conservative.  He returned to the Legislature as a CCF MLA from 1937-1949.  The local NDP club in the Ladysmith area was called the Sam Guthrie Club for many years.  (A news clipping from 1974 outlined the Club’s activities, but in a related item, apropos of nothing, the Ladysmith Chronicle reports on Leonard Krog having his new hubcaps stolen and replaced with old hub caps.  Some might claim the parallel to missing his cabinet post in 2017 and having it replaced with caucus chair. )

The rise of Labour politics in Nanaimo is discussed extensively in this article by Allan Seager.

Back to the Dunsmuirs

With all this talk of Socialists, we must take a moment to return to the election of the second Premier of BC who represented Nanaimo, James Dunsmuir, son of Robert Dunsmuir and heir.  Unlike Robson, he was premier while representing Nanaimo. He would also serve as the Province’s Lieutenant-Governor.

Wikipedia summarizes it well enough:

Dunsmuir entered provincial politics in 1898, winning a seat in the provincial legislature, and he became the 14th Premier in 1900. His government attempted to resist popular pressure to curtail Asian labour and immigration, not for humanitarian reasons, but to ensure a cheap labour pool for business. It also promoted railway construction and accomplished a redistribution of seats to better represent population distribution in the province.

Dunsmuir visited England and the United States in 1902,  but disliked politics after his return and resigned as Premier in November 1902. In 1906, he became the province’s eighth Lieutenant Governor. He retired in 1909 and lived out his remaining years at the baronial mansion that he had constructed at Hatley Park.

In fact, Dunsmuir’s first win was in Comox in 1898, another coal producing area.  He contested South Nanaimo riding in 1900 and won by a mere 24 votes (249-225) over the Labour candidate, reflecting the divide in the community. It also represented the fact that the Dunsmuirs did have support to counter opposition from mine workers and rival mining interests.  He went from there to the Premier’s chair in the final term of the BC Legislature before party politics took hold in 1903.

Says Dr. S.W. Jackman in Portraits of Premiers, James Dunsmuir became Premier “more or less by default”.  Premier ‘Fighting’ Joe Martin had the largest faction following the 1900 election, but could not command a majority.  The Opposition leader, Charles Semlin, had lost his seat.  Jackman writes, “Dunsmuir had gone into politics somewhat

IMG_4349.JPG

James Dunsmuir: the reluctant, but very rich, Premier from Nanaimo

reluctantly, was one of the few candidates who might possibly become Premier with any sense of real honour and dignity… He was certainly no politician – in public his manner was somewhat cold, and rather reserved.”  He took office on June 16, 1900. His administration was not especially noteworthy and he did not particularly enjoy his duties.  His secretary, R. Edward Gosnell observed, “The fates threw him into prominence which, by choice, he would have avoided.  He had neither a liking nor an adaptability for public life…”.  Jackman opines that Dunsmuir “ought never to have been a Premier at all; he did not like the job for he was totally out of his element, he hid not understand politicians and he never properly grasped the methodology of legislative government.  In a way, he was a typical example of … the rich tycoon”.  He resigned in 1902 following a triumphant trip to King Edward VIII’s coronation where he and his wealth were embraced in high circles. He would be appointed Lieutenant-Governor in 1906 and serve to 1909.

Hatley 2.png

Hatley Castle (Royal Roads): The house that James Dunsmuir built

I should note, given that I lived in the area for 15 years, that James Dunsmuir founded and named Ladysmith.  The town was laid out in grid format to be a bedroom community for miners, who would commute to the nearby Extension mines by rail.  The coal was shipped out via Transfer Beach in Ladysmith Harbour. During the time that the town was being built, the British won a key battle in the Boer War – the Battle of Ladysmith.  In a fit of patriotism, Dunsmuir declared, “I shall call this place Ladysmith!” (I’m imagining that part).  In any event, the streets of Ladysmith bear the names of Boer War generals like Baden-Powell, Methuen, and Roberts, for a battle taking place in faraway South Africa. It hearkens back to a time of unquestioning support of the Crown and Mother England.

 The era of the Liberals in Nanaimo: 1916-1952

Nanaimo has always been a left-wing, workers’ paradise!

There’s a hiccup in that narrative.  While we have extensively covered the coal-dusted ground upon which Socialist-Labour pioneers like Hawthornthwaite, Williams, Place, and others trod, there was an extensive period where the Liberals triumphed.

Two MLAs dominated Nanaimo politics during that time: William Sloan and George Pearson. Sloan had been a Liberal MP in Comox-Atlin (Comox-Atlin, what a riding!) from 1904-1909, stepping aside to make way for another candidate.  He resurfaced politically in the 1916 election in Nanaimo.  He was a minister of mines, fisheries, and provincial secretary for Liberal governments that served during the entirety of his provincial career.  He died in 1928.  His son, Gordon Sloan, would serve as the province’s Attorney-General under Premier Duff Pattullo and lead Royal Commissions on forestry in later years.

Succeeding Sloan was George Pearson, who represented Nanaimo from 1928 to 1952. Pearson won six consecutive times.  The first win was in an election where his Liberals were hammered. After 12 years in power, it was time for a change, and Simon Fraser Tolmie’s Conservatives took the reins.  Pearson and the Liberals would return to power in 1933.  The George Pearson Hospital in Vancouver was named for him as was the Pearson Bridge in Nanaimo.  He served as Minister of Labour and was particularly adamant in his support for the internment of the Japanese population following the attacks on Pearl Harbour.

According to Margaret Ormsby, George Pearson played a key role ending the Liberal government of Duff Pattullo, and the formation of the Coalition government that ruled from 1941 to 1952.  The day after the 1941 election, which was a minority Liberal government (21 Liberal, 14 CCF, 12 Conservative, 1 Independent), Pearson “argued that the Premier no longer controlled a majority of members in the House”.  Shortly thereafter, the leader of the Conservatives, Pat Maitland, called for a coalition government, which he said should include the CCF.  CCF leader Harold Winch, now Opposition Leader, rejected the idea.

Pattullo called a cabinet meeting with his post-election cabinet, but Pearson refused his offer to make him Minister of Education and Provincial Secretary, indicating that he felt there should be “an arrangement” with the opposition parties to form a stable government.  Then Finance Minister John Hart said he favoured a coalition.  As events unfolded, the Liberals announced a convention. A resolution hit the floor proposing the creation of a coalition government, which was carried decisively. Pattullo rose and left the hall. Pearson “worked his way to the front of the room” and nominated John Hart.  Pattullo resigned as premier and Hart formed a coalition government, with Nanaimo’s Pearson at the centre of the action.

While Sloan and Pearson were triumphing during this 36 year stretch in the Nanaimo riding, the Cowichan-Newcastle riding to the south had a different tradition. As mentioned, Sam Guthrie represented the riding from 1920-1924 then as a CCF MLA from 1937-1949.  Guthrie lost to Conservatives in 1924 and 1928, and in 1933, lost to an Independent Conservative, Hugh Savage.  This is a footnote of history as Savage was backed by an organization called the OGM or Oxford Group Movement, noted in BC’s Electoral History 1871-1986.   Guthrie’s final campaign was also in 1949, losing not by a whisker, but to Andrew Whisker, a Coalition candidate.  By my count, Guthrie made it to the ballot 8 times, winning half the time.

During this time of Liberal wins in Nanaimo, it seems strange that the fledgling CCF did not gain a foothold in the city that spawned Socialist MLAs during the Conservative floodwaters of the McBride era.  The CCF’s first contested election was 1933 and it served as BC’s Official Opposition between 1933-1937, and from 1941-1952 during the Coalition years.  Yet, the CCF could not win in Nanaimo.  Even a young accountant named Dave Stupich could not pull it off in 1949, losing to George Pearson.  It turns out the ‘NDP town’ was never a ‘CCF town’.  Not at all.

We wuz robbed !

Given the ProRep referendum, you can wonder why anyone from the NDP would support electoral reform when you look at the sad tale of 1952.

Quick history lesson: Coalition government rigs the rules thinking that by giving voters a second and third choice, this will be good for Liberals and Conservatives, who were back to contesting elections under their own labels in 1952.  You see, they wanted to gang up and stop Harold Winch’s CCF at any cost.  Then, along came the Socreds.

When the first preference votes were counted in the 1952 election, Winch’s CCF led in 21 seats to the Social Credit’s 14, in the 48 seats Legislature.  A clear win.  The Social Credit had never fully contested a BC election before.  The Liberals and Conservatives were eclipsed by populist alternatives. However, this time, the election wasn’t over at the first count.  In Nanaimo and the Islands, as it was then called, Stupich held a 369 vote lead over Progressive Conservative Dr. Larry Giovando.  However, when the Liberal was dropped from the ballot, Stupich’s lead melted away and Giovando won by a margin of 5,144 to 4,581.

Not only did this delay Stupich’s political career, it had an enormous impact on BC. This was one of three seats that slipped away from the CCF while the Social Credit gained five seats through successive counts.  The final count was 19 Social Credit, 18 CCF, with the rest split between the Liberals, Conservatives, and an Independent Labour MLA (who was not partial to joining with the CCF).  Paddy Sherman’s Bennett describes the machinations that followed.  The Socreds did not even have a leader during the 1952 election.  W.A.C. Bennett was elected leader by a vote of the new caucus afterward.  Bennett then jousted with the Lieutenant-Governor and gained power, against the strenuous objections of CCF leader Harold Winch.   I wrote this all up in a previous blog post: “History tells us, be careful what you wish for”.

But for one seat, the CCF would have likely been invited to govern, especially when they had won the popular vote by a significant margin.

Then in 1953, it happened again to Stupich!

Stupich had a big lead on the first count, with Socred Earle Westwood second, and Giovando third.  Clearly the Liberal voters preferred Giovando to Stupich because he vaulted to second and then edged Stupich by 18 votes on the final count.  Robbed again!

The Socreds won a majority in the Legislature this time.  The Progressive Conservatives were reduced to one seat – Giovando.

You have to think Stupich was quite delighted to see W.A.C. Bennett scrap the preferential balloting system and go back to first-past-the-post.

Dr. Larry Giovando was a well-respected physician in Nanaimo.  In the Legislature, he doubtlessly had a lonely time as the sole Progressive Conservative.  He assailed W.A.C. over “fancy bookkeeping”, though Sherman notes that Giovando would leave the PC’s “in a huff”.

1952 also saw the election in Cowichan-Newcastle of Robert (Bob) Strachan. He held the seat, and variations of it, until 1975.   He was the longest serving Opposition leader in BC history (1956-1969).  He left politics in 1975 for an appointment as BC’s Agent-General in London.  Like many trade unionists, he had emigrated from Scotland and found his way to resource communities in BC, where he would rise to be a union leader.  He had a long tenure in Opposition, where he endured four straight general election defeats.  He was the basketball equivalent of the Washington Generals to W.A.C’s Harlem Globetrotters.  But Strachan hung in there for a term in government under Premier Dave Barrett, and was Minister responsible for the creation of ICBC.

Now that first-past-the-post was back in play, it should have been time for the CCF to prevail in Nanaimo.  After all, they were winning elsewhere on the Island.  It turns out that Nanaimo continued to be a free enterprise paradise.  Social Credit’s Earle Westwood, who lost in 1953, prevailed over Stupich in 1956 and 1960.  These marked Stupich’s fourth and fifth losses to start out his political career. In 1960, the CCF won 16 seats in BC but they could not crack Nanaimo.  In that campaign, Nanaimo lawyer Ted Strongitharm ran for the Progressive Conservatives.  His son, Bruce, was a longtime Chief of Staff to the BC Forests minister, and showed me the campaign brochure where his Dad promised to build a pedestrian bridge to Newcastle Island.  Now, there’s an idea!  Strongitharm would mentor a young lawyer at his law firm – Leonard Krog.

During the 1950s and the 1960s, the Liberals and the Progressive Conservatives tried to revive their fortunes.  How long could this Social Credit Party last, anyways, before people returned to the old brands?  The Progressive Conservative leader for three of those elections, Deane Finlayson, was from Nanaimo, though he didn’t contest seats there.  Finlayson was a 33-year old Nanaimo insurance agent, who had managed Giovando’s successful 1952 campaign, when he became leader prior to the 1953 election. The Party was desperate to dump outgoing leader Herbert Anscomb and after party heavyweights like George Pearkes declined, the youthful Finlayson stepped up.  He ran in Oak Bay in 1953, a by-election in Victoria in 1953, and in North Vancouver in 1956 and 1960, as leader.

Screen Shot 2019-01-18 at 11.54.18 AM.png

Deane Finlayson

The results were dismal, though the assessment of Finlayson has always been sterling.  He had a reputation for honest speech, was commended for his WWII service in the RCAF, and had a lifetime of community service.  In business, he developed the Island’s largest mall, Woodgrove, and built much of Hammond Bay, in the Nanaimo riding.  In the process of adding Finlayson to this post (which was a terrible oversight), I found a thesis outlining the demise of the Progressive Conservatives: From Rule to Ruin, for you political junkies out there).  Finlayson’s biography is here.

Like many Socreds of that age, Earle Westwood was a small businessman and local leader.  A funeral home operator, Mayor of Nanaimo, and School Board Chair.  He served in cabinet under W.A.C. in ministries such as Trade and Industry, Commercial Transport, and Recreation and Conservation.  He was from a pioneering Nanaimo family.

Finally, in 1963, under the banner of the NDP, Dave Stupich wins. Avenging his near losses, he edged Earle Westwood by 18 votes.

It wouldn’t get much easier for Stupich in the short-term.  Enter the Pirate.

Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 11.10.21 PM.png

The Pirate: Frank Ney

At the time of the 1966 election, Frank Ney was a Notary and co-owner of Nanaimo Realty. He had already been involved in countless community initiatives.  I’m not sure when it started, but he is renown for dressing up as a pirate.  (He would also chair the committee in 1967 that led to Nanaimo’s world famous bathtub races).  He replaced Westwood as the Social Credit standard bearer and took on Dave Stupich.  As often happens in politics, the luck evens out.  Stupich won another nail-biter, this time by 45 votes.

Now Mayor of Nanaimo, Ney returned for a rematch in 1969.  He defeated Stupich by 469
votes and went on to serve as both mayor and MLA concurrently.   The Liberal in the 1969 race netted 722 votes.  Did he play a role in defeating Dave Stupich?  I don’t know, you would have to ask him.  Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 10.19.07 PM.png

That young whippersnapper’s name is Bob Plecas.  50 years later and he’s still causing a ruckus in BC politics.

So, to recap the amazing political success of the lefties in the main Nanaimo riding, between World War I and 1970, lefties (ie. Dave Stupich alone) won two out of 16 elections.  They did much better in the southern Cowichan-Newcastle riding, winning almost all of the time, but in the main Nanaimo riding, it was hardly the Socialist stronghold that it had once been in the early 1900s.

At that point, the screen goes dark for free enterprisers.

The Barrett Years to the End of Stupich

Sporting a .250 batting average heading into the 1972 campaign, Stupich had Ney walk the plank, winning by 4000 votes, joining in the tide that swept in BC’s first NDP government.  The Pirate carried on as mayor, serving 21 years in total.

Stupich was chosen as the Minister of Agriculture with a mandate to protect farmland. In their biography of the Barrett government The Art of the Impossible, Geoff Meggs and Rod Mickleburgh write, “Stupich seemed like the ideal man to lead the change.  An accountant with a degree in agriculture, the Nanaimo MLA was a Barrett loyalist, a veteran of the legislature, and a former agriculture critic with a wealth of contacts around the province.”

IMG_4341.JPG

Interesting account of Stupich and the creation of ALR, and an overall good read.

Stupich was quick out of the gates and announced that legislation to protect farmland and compensate farmers would be ready for a fall session in 1972.  Says Meggs/Mickleburgh, “Stupich not only failed to seek a cost analysis of the compensation pledge – an astonishing oversight for an accountant – but began to execute a deliberate strategy of public statements designed to lock Barrett and the cabinet into a compensation plan before either had a chance to review the bill.”  It was a daring or reckless move by Stupich, depending on your view.

Stupich made an “extraordinary keynote” to farmers that fall stating, “My advice to developers right now is not to gamble by investing their money in farmland.” Stupich asserted that a freeze had been put on rezoning agricultural land (which was not true).   His comments triggered a province-wide rush to rezone. On December 21, with Barrett out of town, an “angry cabinet” was convinced by Stupich to freeze the sale of all agricultural land until further notice.   Continuing to borrow from Meggs and Mickleburgh’s account, NDP heavyweight Bob Williams later described the ordeal as a “tough, bitter battle” to rein in Stupich.  The internal debate revolved around compensation, while the external debate was plunging the new government into major controversy.  The end result was the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), an enduring legacy of the Barrett government.

Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 11.22.56 PM.png

Dave Stupich: 44 years running for office in Nanaimo

By 1975, the ALR had been implemented which Meggs/Mickleburgh say did much to restore Stupich’s reputation as a policy-maker.  1975 was a year of great change in BC politics.  The Social Credit Party was in a revival led by the younger Bill Bennett with Grace McCarthy barnstorming among the grassroots. Polarization intensified and ‘fear of the NDP’ drove moderates into the arms of the Socreds.  Three Liberal MLAs joined Bennett’s team along with one Progressive Conservative MLA, and, ultimately, one NDP MLA too.  The drumbeat became louder for a ‘snap election’ to catch the opposition off guard.  In fall 1975, Barrett readied his team and shuffled his cabinet.  Stupich was appointed Minister of Finance.  The snap election was called, but when the votes were counted in December, the Barrett government had been trounced. Stupich won with a reduced margin, defeating future Nanaimo mayor Graeme Roberts.

The loss was devastating for the NDP, but it cannot be said that they coasted during their term in government.  They had a very active and aggressive agenda, which was halted abruptly when they were defeated.  Dave Barrett lost his seat and plans were made to return him to the Legislature. Vancouver East MLA Bob Williams agreed to step aside, with Stupich playing a key role, arranging financing to cover off Barrett while he was out of a job, and to help compensate Bob Williams after he had resigned.  How? Through the Nanaimo Commonwealth Holdings Society (NCHS).

The NCHS was a Nanaimo institution that was built on bingo proceeds.  Stupich, an accountant, engineered it into a political fund that supported NDP.  It operated like a parallel political fund to the NDP itself.  Rod Mickleburgh described its purpose in a Globe & Mail article (2000)reporting on the testimony of Dave Barrett, where it was used for many purposes such as Williams’ compensation, funding political activity, Barrett’s federal leadership campaign, and Stupich’s leadership campaign.  The NCHS mess would not catch up with Stupich until much later.

Stupich consolidated his hold on the riding with smashing wins in 1979 (5,000 votes) and 1983 (4,000 votes).  It was a time of ever-increasing polarization as the third and fourth place parties (Liberals and PCs) melted away with voters essentially being forced to pick sides between the NDP and Socreds.  In Nanaimo, most chose the NDP.

What are the reasons for Nanaimo being a competitive playing field in the 1960s compared to being an NDP stronghold in 1970s and beyond?  Was it demographics? Riding boundary changes? Sophisticated organizing and party machinery?  Social Credit alienating labour? All of the above?

Maybe it was a bit of Tommy Douglas’s magic?  The former Saskatchewan Premier was the first leader of the NDP, though he lost his Saskatchewan seat.  A seat opened in Burnaby-Seymour and he carried on through the 1960s.  He lost that seat in 1968 to

IMG_4343.JPG

Dale Lovick edited this book of Tommy Douglas speeches

Liberal Ray Perrault. Around the time, Nanaimo’s NDP MP Colin Cameron died in office. Douglas won the byelection and served until 1979 when he retired.  He was voted “The Greatest Canadian” in a CBC competition and is often called the “Father of Medicare”.  Regardless of one’s views, he is a leader that was held in high regard by other parties, and revered in his own.  Some years later, when I was campaigning for Bob Rae’s bid to be Liberal leader, I asked former Nanaimo NDP MP Ted Miller if he would support Bob, who he served with in the House of Commons.  Though Ted’s wonderful wife Patti was a strong supporter of Bob’s, Ted told me, “I can’t do it to Tommy”.  Such was his respect for the man.

During Stupich’s fifth term of office, Dave Barrett resigned as NDP leader. He had lost his third successive rematch to Bill Bennett and it was time to go. A wide-open NDP leadership race broke out and Dave Stupich jumped in as a candidate. The party broker and backroom financier was 63 years old and representative of a bygone era in the NDP.  He was not the default ‘establishment candidate’ nor was he ‘change’. He placed fifth on the first ballot and fourth on the second, far behind the leaders.  He was eliminated on the third ballot, and watched the Party crown Port Alberni’s Bob Skelly, a compromise choice it would soon regret.

Stupich continued on as NDP candidate in the 1986 election.  Nanaimo had become a 2-member seat.  Malaspina College professor Dale Lovick joined the ticket and the two of them easily prevailed in an election that saw Socred Bill Vander Zalm romp to victory over Skelly.  This time, the NDP would acclaim Mike Harcourt as leader.  Not long after, during a time of great optimism for the NDP’s federal chances, Stupich resigned his seat and ran federally, winning handily. The opportunity for the NDP did not pan out, but they did well in BC.  A disappointed Broadbent resigned, with Stupich backing Dave Barrett’s federal leadership bid.  He lost and the party leadership went to the unsteady hand of Audrey McLaughlin.  The NDP would be reduced to a small rump group in 1993 and Stupich would lose his seat to the Reform Party’s Bob Ringma.  At age 72, he had been retired from elected office.

Stupich’s exit from provincial politics created a 1989 byelection to replace him. The NDP put forward Jan Pullinger, a relatively unknown candidate then.

Screen Shot 2019-01-17 at 11.47.48 AM.png

Tough Guy McNabb

The Socreds could not have landed a better candidate – Larry McNabb, a popular former coach of the Nanaimo Clippers, and a former pro hockey player in the Western Hockey League.  McNabb was tough as nails.  Don Cherry (“Grapes”) recalled fighting McNabb.  The Cow Palace in San Francisco had a banner stating, “Larry McNabb: Heavyweight Champion of the WHL”.  The two paired off and McNabb broke his hand on Cherry’s head.  Cherry recounts it here.  However, on the streets of Nanaimo, McNabb was no match for the NDP, especially when he was weighed down by Premier Bill Vander Zalm’s unpopularity.  Pullinger knocked out McNabb and served twelve years in office, including various posts in Cabinet.   She and Dale Lovick married during that time, and were a political power couple in the Nanaimo area.

It was during Stupich’s federal term of office, 1988-1993, that the NCHS scandal reared its head.  Mike Harcourt had led the NDP to power in BC in 1991 with a strong majority government. In 1992, a whistleblower by the name of Jacques Carpentier went to the Nanaimo RCMP with his concerns about the misuse of charitable money by the NCHS.  As the story unfolded, the scandal engulfed the NDP.  Stupich had been at the heart of the party for a long time, and it seemed that he had solved a lot of NDP problems with available cash.

A forensic audit was ordered which was a political disaster.  The Harcourt government flailed in the controversy, with Opposition Leader Gordon Campbell leading the charge along with a press gallery that was generating headlines.  In 1995, Harcourt, who had nothing really to do with the scandal, announced he would not run again.  He took the fall.  A leadership convention was called and Glen Clark was elected leader.  Bingogate was erased from the headlines as Clark launched a blitzkrieg on the BC Liberals who had enjoyed a hefty lead in the polls.  The political debate was reordered to traditional business-labour, class war themes, rather than scandal.

In Nanaimo, Dale Lovick sought his third term in office amidst the controversy. He was closely aligned with Stupich. Nanaimo Mayor Gary Korpan ran for the BC Liberals.  There was much optimism among the Liberals of storming the NDP bastion, but on election night, not only did Glen Clark win a majority government for the NDP, Nanaimo returned Lovick to the Legislature comfortably.

The NCHS scandal deepened.  Stupich was charged with 64 counts of theft, fraud, forgery, and breach of trust.  He eventually would plead guilty and serve two years less a day under electronic monitoring.

A 1999 CBC item, outlining one way how the NDP was embroiled in the scandal, demonstrates how far Stupich had fallen in the graces of the NDP. Then-party president Bruce Ralston said the party was misled by Stupich.  He said, “It’s painful… not a particularly proud moment for the NDP… but we have apologized, various premiers have apologized…”

Following his death in 2006, Lovick said, “When I think in terms of Dave and his career, I think in terms of great tragedy. Here was a guy who, until a series of events late in his political career, was universally admired and respected. How sad his career ended as it did. He did more good than bad, that’s for sure.”  Stupich’s former colleague Alex MacDonald, Attorney-General in the Barrett government, told the Bingogate Inquiry, “He put up a hotel and a senior citizens’ home, a tower with the bingo rooms. Nanaimo wasn’t hurt by the actions of Dave Stupich; it was helped.”

Such were the conflicted feelings that many in Nanaimo and throughout the NDP felt.  From the time a 28-year old Stupich sought office in 1949 until 1993, he was a central figure in Nanaimo politics.  He had friends across the spectrum.  He was a regional ‘boss’ like few others in the province.  During his time, Nanaimo became an ‘NDP town’.  It came crashing down on Stupich, but the NDP barely missed a beat.

1991 – 2018

Dale Lovick served until 2001.  He was regarded as one of the most talented NDP backbenchers.  NCHS probably held him back during the Harcourt years.  He became Speaker in 1996 then was appointed to Cabinet in 1998.  He was quick-witted in the House, a good debater, and never had to sweat during his three election wins.

In 1991, riding boundaries changed and a considerable chunk of North Nanaimo was included in the Parksville-Qualicum riding.   Nanaimo lawyer Leonard Krog ran for the NDP, sweeping to victory as part of the Harcourt win.  In reality, the opposition to the NDP was split in that riding between a disorganized BC Liberal campaign and the dying Socreds.  Krog served in the backbench, along with Lovick, and Pullinger.  The central Island did not make the cut in the Harcourt cabinet.

In 1996, five-term Parksville mayor Paul Reitsma won the BC Liberal nomination and edged Krog by 483 votes, winning the only seat for the Liberals north of Victoria on Vancouver Island.  Reitmsa scrapped with regional NDP politicians in local newspapers.  At some point, he had the not-so-bright idea to write phony letters to the editor under the pen name of “Warren Betanko”, a name that will live on forever.  When the Parksville newspaper broke the news that its MLA was forging letters, Reitsma was on the run.  The morning the story hit, I talked to his constituency assistant.  “Will probably blow over”, I said.  By noon, Reitsma was out of the Liberal Caucus.  Citizens across the spectrum rallied to form a recall campaign. Over 60 days, Reitsma felt the heat. Rather than be the first MLA in Canadian history to be recalled, he resigned.

The NDP probably saw this an opportunity to win back Krog’s seat, and he was convinced to run.  Krog had a reputation in his first term as being a bit more outspoken than your average backbench MLA.  He was their best shot.  However, the Glen Clark government was becoming very unpopular as the economy struggled and a litany of scandals and controversies plagued them.  Meanwhile, Gordon Campbell and the BC Liberals were getting their act together.  Just like 1975, the non-NDP public was starting to pull together behind one party. Seven candidates vied for the nomination and on a Saturday afternoon, close to 1000 people jammed Dover Bay Secondary to elect Judith Reid over a host of more experienced candidates.

Reid was a shellfish farmer from Deep Bay in the north end of the riding.  No elected experience, she was an unconventional choice.  She was an independent in BC Liberal clothing, which worked to her advantage. While Krog could demonstrate his superior knowledge on policies at that point, Reid won the community with her earnestness, and a deeply held view to not elect the NDP.  Reid trounced Krog 53% to 23%.  The result was a declarative statement on the true state of the NDP’s political fortunes.  Less than a year later, Glen Clark was out of office.

In 2001, BC voters spanked the NDP hard, with Campbell’s Liberals winning 77 of 79 seats, including all 13 on Vancouver Island.  Reid had a massive win in Parksville-Qualicum-North Nanaimo (57%), while political newcomer Mike Hunter, a fisheries executive who had recently moved to Nanaimo, defeated Krog in what was seen as a safe NDP seat.    Reid was made Minister of Transportation and served until 2004.  During her time, she oversaw the sale of BC Rail, which became a political firestorm. Though the controversy, and resulting investigations, did not touch Reid, she decided not to run again in 2005.  She was exited from Cabinet to make way for new blood that would be running for re-election.  Hunter served his term in the backbench and was seen as a strong constituency MLA.  But by 2005, the NDP had roared back to life. New leader Carole James put a new face on the troubled brand and gave Campbell a run for the money.  While the Campbell Liberals were re-elected, the Nanaimo riding returned to the NDP fold with Krog winning the rematch with Hunter 52% to 34%.  In the Parksville-North Nanaimo seat, Nanaimo Councillor Ron Cantelon succeeded Reid as BC Liberal MLA.

Cantelon and Krog were both easily re-elected in 2009. By this time, a chunk of south Nanaimo was added to the north end of the Cowichan Valley, becoming a strong NDP riding with Doug Routley as MLA.  Cantelon was instrumental in coordinating provincial funding for Nanaimo area projects like airport expansion, the creation of Vancouver Island University, and funding for the port and convention centre.  In the 2000s, North Nanaimo was becoming as much of a political base of the BC Liberals as South Nanaimo is for the NDP, thanks in no small part to their relentless organizer Jack Doan.

After serving a stint in cabinet as Minister of Agriculture, and as caucus chair, Cantelon retired in 2013 clearing the way for a prized recruit for Christy Clark – Michelle Stilwell.

Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 11.48.16 PM.png

North Nanaimo MLA, and Gold Medallist, Michelle Stilwell

A paralympian multiple gold medallist for Canada, Stilwell presented a young, energizing face for a party that needed to show a new look.  Stilwell became part of a narrative that helped propel Christy Clark to her 2013 election victory.  Starting off as caucus chair, Stilwell joined the cabinet as Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation, winning re-election in 2017 – the last remaining BC Liberal MLA on the Island.

Krog had a surprisingly tighter margin in 2013.  Then running the BC Liberal provincial campaign, I can attest to the fact that we simply could not find a candidate in Nanaimo to contest Krog, or the riding to the south.  They were the 84thand 85thout of 85 ridings to confirm candidates. Once he joined the race during the writ period, former Nanaimo Chamber of Commerce president Walter Anderson put forward a good showing narrowing the margin to nine points.  Pretty good despite few resources and no lead-up time.  Had we had our act together, we might have been able to win in 2013.  In 2017, Krog’s margin widened again in a campaign that saw the BC Liberals running against the tide.

Following the turnover in government in July 2017, Krog was left out of John Horgan’s cabinet.  At that time, Krog had 17 years of experience in the Legislature and had served as Attorney-General critic.  There were lots of other cabinet contenders on the Island and his gender worked against his chances too.  Some say his lack of enthusiasm for the leadership of Carole James, which had split the caucus years earlier, may have been a factor.  Whatever the reason, Krog was out.  The logical conclusion was that he would become Speaker in a very contentious situation. However, the unexpected elevation of Darryl Plecas to that role closed off that option.  Krog stayed on the backbench.  In 2018, as we all know now, Krog announced he would seek the mayor’s chair in Nanaimo.  My previous blog post on the Nanaimo byelection discussed Krog’s surprising decision.  Surprising because of the razor thin governing majority for the NDP and that it would be a Nanaimo MLA – of all things – that would put the government’s survival on the line by resigning.

Screen Shot 2019-01-16 at 11.07.48 PM.png

His Worship (photo: Nanaimo Bulletin)

He’s mayor now and the byelection is on.  Krog’s batting average as candidate for MLA is .625 – five wins, three losses.  Not too shabby.  The span of his provincial political career is up there with Stupich, Pearson, Strachan, Guthrie, Williams, and Hawthornthwaite.  Though his most important work may be ahead of him at Nanaimo City Hall, a task for which he was fully supported by his potential successor, BC Liberal byelection candidate Tony Harris.  Krog won big for mayor, over a strong candidate too.  Why has Krog been popular? I would argue that he has always stayed close to the community and approachable, with his integrity never in question.  Tough act to replace.

And… ?

This historical stroll through Nanaimo’s political history has been surprising to me, a political nut who lived in the area for fifteen years.  My research, which was a full-scale mobilization of underappreciated works on my bookshelves, exposed my ignorance regarding vast parts of Nanaimo’s and our province’s history.  While excessively long, this blog post actually gives short shrift to major events that defined the city, such as the activism around the coal mines, and also the development of a strong small business community that paralleled the strength of the unions for much of Nanaimo’s history.  Happily, there are some great books and articles on these topics that deserve a lot of attention.

What can be said about Nanaimo is that it has been populated by some real originals from all parts of the spectrum. Nanaimo politicians have often spoken their minds over the years.  They’ve had their elbows up and they have strived to make their mark.  Is Nanaimo an NDP town?  Demographically, it shouldn’t be a slam dunk, but tradition over the past 50+ years has been powerful.  Stupich helped build the tradition, while Lovick and Krog consolidated the party’s hold.  Since the NDP was formed, it has won 13 of 15 times in the core Nanaimo seat.  It’s also a matter of boundaries – shift that riding to the north, and drop a little to the south, and the NDP loses its advantage. Nanaimo’s history plays out to this day on a north-south axis.

As much as Nanaimo grows and changes, the coal still lies beneath the surface. Nanaimo’s politics run deep.  The byelection gives voters a chance to consider Nanaimo’s identity.  Will they go with a candidate that speaks to a tradition of independence, or stay with a party that it has loyally backed?  The wildcard – the Green candidate, the Pirate’s daughter– presents an option to take the tradition in an entirely new direction.

Some advice.  Whoever does become the MLA, keep an eye on your spectacles.

Thanks for reading.

(Featured image: EJ Hughes, Steamer at the Old Wharf, Nanaimo)

Additional content:

Adding feedback from Bruce Strongitharm, who’s father Ted Strongitharm ran for the Progressive Conservatives in 1960.

I remember the election as if I was 13, oh wait I was 13. My dad’s big race was against the Liberal candidate Hugh Heath ( his wife later became a liberal senator) because everyone new either the Social Credit or CCF were going to win. Alas Heath won the mini race. I had fun though. My dad would take a van with a speaker on top and stop at a residential street corner and do his campaign speech followed by door knocking. Wasn’t always well received. The leader of the Conservatives then was my dad’s good friend Deane Finlayson (my younger brother is named after him) also lived in Nanaimo but ran in North Vancouver I think. He didn’t win either. The bridge is still a good idea. There major item on the brochure that Mike left out was “getting rid of the one man rule”.

The math of the Nanaimo by-election

What can we expect for turnout in the Nanaimo by-election?

I took a look at five competitive by-elections since 1989 – government-held seats where both the government and opposition had a good chance to win.

Screen Shot 2019-01-03 at 4.41.24 PM.png

In all of these cases, there should have been ample incentive for both government and opposition to win and, therefore, work hard to get their vote out.

By-election turnout as a percentage of the previous general election ranged from 40% to 89%.  None of these examples, nor any example of any by-election in recent memory, saw a higher turnout than a general election.  Therefore, it is pretty safe to say that fewer people will vote than the 2017 general election even though Press Gallery sage Keith Baldrey calls it “pivotal” and NDP candidate Sheila Malcolmson calls it, “The most important by-election in BC history.”

The NDP pulled off by-election upsets in 1989 and 2012 when they over-performed declining turnout.  In both cases, they had more votes than the previous general election.   Part of that was motivating their supporters and part of it was winning votes from non-traditional supporters.  In two other cases, the NDP still won by-elections from the BC Liberal government even though they had fewer votes compared to the previous election (in which they lost).

Poor old governments.  They have a tough time in by-elections.  In these five examples, the government of the day had between 30% and 75% of the votes from the previous election.  In Oak Bay in 1989, 75% should have been enough to elect Susan Brice.  Campaign manager Frank Leonard probably thought he had the votes.  But NDP candidate Elizabeth Cull really brought the vote out in an anti-Vander Zalm tide.  (It didn’t help the Socreds that Liberal Paul McKivett grabbed 9% either – a story for another day).

The 2011 Pt. Grey by-election is a good parallel for Nanaimo.  Here was a newly elected leader of the governing party, Christy Clark, seeking her way into the Legislature.  I can say, as her then-Chief of Staff, that I never seriously contemplated losing this by-election.  We were too darn busy at the time to think about losing.  Yet, with our campaign only garnering 68% of the votes from the previous election, and NDP David Eby garnering 78% of the previous campaign’s NDP votes, it became uncomfortably close.  If Eby had taken 90% of the votes of Mel Lehan’s 2009 effort in Pt. Grey, he would have won then, instead of 2013, and created a major problem for me.

In 2017, the Nanaimo riding results were as follows:

Screen Shot 2019-01-03 at 5.00.04 PM.png

So, you can expect there will be less than 27,399 that vote in this by-election.  According to recent history, we might reasonably expect a range of 69% (Pt. Grey) to 85% (Chilliwack-Hope) of the previous election, or a range of about 18,900 to 23,300 voters.  If 40% share of the popular vote is a win, because of a strong Green in the race, then 7,600 to 9,300 votes might be enough to win.  Maybe less if this emerges as a three-way race.

A more recent example is the ProRep referendum.

A total of 19,938 Nanaimo riding residents voted, with a majority (10,785) voting for First-Past-the-Post.  Perhaps that’s the floor for the by-election turnout.  I will leave it others to speculate what 10,785 First-Past-the-Voters might be thinking about BC politics right now.

Why does this matter?

Because when turnout declines, as it surely will, in this by-election, motivating supporters becomes more important.  The three main parties will work very hard to motivate their support base.

The NDP base may not be as strong as some assume.  First of all, Leonard Krog is not on the ballot.  How much of the vote was NDP and how much was Leonard Krog?  We’ll soon find out.

Secondly, Sheila Malcolmson’s support as NDP MP was not as strong as some assume.  She only received 33% of the vote in the past federal election.  I haven’t crunched the numbers, but I think she did better south of the current provincial riding than she did within.  That may have been more of a problem with Tom Mulcair’s flagging fortunes than anything, but the fact remains that Malcolmson did not have huge coattails of her own.

You might crunch the 2017 numbers and say, “The NDP still have a pretty big cushion”.  You would be right.  But go back to 2013 and look at those results.  It was a lot closer between the NDP and BC Liberals. How much of a difference will Andrew Wilkinson and Tony Harris make in favour of the BC Liberals, and how much difference did Leonard Krog make for the NDP?  We’ll see.

For a deeper dive on BC by-election turnout, see my 2016 posts: A Deeper Dive on By-election Turnout and Turnout goes Underground.

Hot Take on ProRep Referendum Results

Last week, I wrote that First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) would prevail by “a whisker, a few grey whiskers”.  It turned out that it was a full-on Santa’s beard of whiskers as it prevailed with 61% of the vote, far exceeding projections by public pollsters.

The Regional Story

What’s striking about the win for FPTP is its dominance in the Lower Mainland.  It took 63% of the vote in BC’s most populated area.  The Interior delivered a resounding 67% verdict, but it represented just over a quarter of the votes for FPTP.  The Lower Mainland did the heavy lifting.  The Island was a 50-50 split, a disappointment to ProRep supporters, especially the Greens.  However, as I wrote last week, there are a lot of ‘experienced’ voters (hint: old) on the Island and experienced voters don’t care much for ProRep.

Feast your eyes on this table then I will break it down for you…

Screen Shot 2018-12-20 at 8.23.52 PM.png

  1. The South Island (south of the Malahat) was the best area of the province for ProRep, delivering a 55% win across seven ridings in the Capital region.  Those efforts were cancelled out by the seven ridings north of the Malahat.  As was the case up north, rural, resource-producing areas are very skeptical of ProRep, which partially explains the difference on the Island between north and south.
  2. In the Lower Mainland, Vancouver-North Shore’s 15 ridings were close with FPTP edging ProRep 53% to 47%.  This stands in stark contrast to the rest of the Lower Mainland and should serve as a wake-up call to the NDP.  Richmond-Delta-Surrey voted 72% for FPTP and Burnaby to Mission went 70% FPTP.  This is exactly where Christy Clark’s government met its demise in 2017.  In these areas alone, eight BC Liberal seats flipped to the NDP.  In this referendum, they were clearly not buying what the GreenDP were selling.  The Fraser Valley went strongly for FPTP, as expected, even then, 75% is emphatic.
  3. In the Interior, the northernmost ridings, including the Cariboo, strongly backed the current system with 74% support.  I return to the previous point – it is surprising to me that the suburbs of the Lower Mainland matched the North.  Frankly, it’s shocking, to a guy like me, who obsesses over numbers and ridings.  The Okanagan and Kamloops region were in lockstep at 68-69%.  The Kootenays demonstrate, yet again, that they march to the beat of a different drummer – at least those in the West Kootenay.  Both NDP-held seats there voted ProRep, the only two of the 24 Interior seats to support the proposal.  The region overall was 55% for FPTP due to the East Kootenay BCL-held seats.

Results by Party 

The BC Liberals elected 43 seats on Election Day 2017 and those 43 seats voted 70% for FPTP, nine points above the 61% average province-wide.  The NDP’s 41 seats leaned toward FPTP with 54% compared to 46% for ProRep.  The Green held-seats slightly favoured FPTP, by a margin of 51% to 49%.

Screen Shot 2018-12-20 at 8.43.12 PM.png

Let’s look at the NDP seats.  ProRep was blown out in Surrey seats with Panorama leading the way at 74.5% for FPTP.  Newton 73%.  Green Timbers 73%.  Fleetwood 72%.  Delta North 70%.  Hop over to Maple Ridge where it was 68-69% for FPTP.

I don’t want to overstate the importance of this referendum to the next election but it’s not great when your initiative, which sucked up a lot of political oxygen, is thumped.

In the Interior, the four NDP held seats did OK, relative to the overall result.  Stikine was 60% for FPTP which is better than Surrey, I guess.  North Coast was close (53% FPTP) while, as mentioned above, the NDP seats in the West Kootenay backed ProRep.  Is there anywhere to grow for the NDP?  When you see 25% for ProRep in the Cariboo, where the NDP had seats not long ago, and 26% in Fraser-Nicola which was held up until 2013, it’s hard to see this referendum as an Interior growth strategy for the NDP.

Here are the 16 of 87 seats that voted ProRep:

  • Vancouver Mt. Pleasant (NDP)
  • Victoria-Beacon Hill (NDP)
  • Victoria-Swan Lake (NDP)
  • Vancouver-Hastings (NDP)
  • Vancouver-Fairview (NDP)
  • Vancouver-West End (NDP)
  • Nelson-Creston (NDP)
  • Powell River-Sunshine Coast (NDP)
  • Oak Bay-Gordon Head (GREEN)
  • Vancouver Pt. Grey (NDP)
  • Esquimalt-Metchosin (NDP)
  • Saanich North & the Islands (GREEN)
  • Vancouver-False Creek (BCL)
  • Kootenay West (NDP)
  • New Westminster (NDP)
  • Langford Juan de Fuca (NDP)

The top four on the list are probably the top four safest NDP seats in the province.  For the BC Liberals, it stands out that ProRep won in False Creek.  Sam Sullivan hung on by his fingernails last election and this riding is evolving.  The BC Liberals held Pt. Grey, Fairview, Saanich North, and Oak Bay up until 2013.  The BC Liberals, strong proponents of FPTP, continue to go against the grain of these type of ridings.

Another riding, which was very close between FPTP and ProRep was West Vancouver-Sea-to-Sky.  This is a riding that should be on the BC Liberals’ “watch list”.  It’s changing, as is North Vancouver-Seymour.  Ridings that used to be safe, aren’t as safe anymore.    The key is the suburbs. There are a lot of seats out there and, like Quebec in federal elections, they can go one way or the other, en masse.

In this referendum, ProRep did not have a broad enough coalition.  It did poorly in the suburbs and the regions, and in ridings with higher proportions of people who do not have English as a first language.  This pretty well sums up the Green Party actually.  While it won in Andrew Weaver’s riding (which hosts UVic) and in Saanich-North & the Islands, where it has two elected Green representatives (Adam Olsen and Elizabeth May),  it lost in Cowichan Valley.  It’s more rural, and it’s less typical of the Green base.  The Greens like PR because they haven’t been able to break through in FPTP because of their limited appeal.  The referendum reinforces the Greens’ weaknesses.

ProRep also lacked meaningful support from BC Liberals.  NDPer Bill Tieleman was extremely important to the FPTP campaign, along with other traditional FPTP supporters in the NDP.  Glen Clark’s support for FPTP was an important signal to an element of the NDP base.  Former Premier Ujjal Dosanjh also made interventions into the campaign in favour of FPTP. There was no signalling from iconic BC Liberal / Socreds-of-old to the free enterprise base that ProRep was ok.

The process

At the end of the day, this was a process that was nakedly designed to support the partisan interests of the Green Party, and to a lesser extent, the NDP (who were more interested in keeping the Greens happy).  There was no secret about it.  The consultation had all the appearances of a sham, especially when compared to the much-admired Citizens’ Assembly process prior to 2005.  Here was a Premier, Gordon Campbell, who had 77 of 79 seats.  He put the power of recommending a new system in the hands of two citizens per riding.  They spent months learning and deliberating.  I didn’t like their recommendation but I admired their efforts and their example.  It was democratic jury duty.  That process also had a much better result for electoral reform than what just transpired.  Is this a lesson learned for David Eby? Too clever by half?

Another sign of a flawed process is that 40% of the voters did not even vote on Question 2. There were 1.391 million voters overall, but only 832,000 chose one of the three PR options, while 559,000 skipped the question. Of the options, MMP had the most with 343,000. That would not have been a resounding mandate and such a gap in responses between Q1 and Q2 would have undermined a positive ProRep outcome.

The players

FPTP supporters, like Bob Plecas, Suzanne Anton, and Bill Tieleman, got started early.  They branched out to bring in other voices in multicultural communities. They had the experience to focus their resources and messaging effectively.  They worked on persuading likely voters and punched through with clear arguments.  The ProRep campaign appeared to focus a lot of effort on getting non-voters to vote.  That is harder to do.  As with many campaigns, followers can get fooled by their echo chamber.  If your social media galaxy is made up of people just like you, then you can be led to believe there is more support than really exists.  Clearly, the ProRep campaign was spanked once it left the cozy confines of Victoria and Vancouver.  It did not have a ground game or a regional game.  This was a similar challenge in the Transit Referendum.  The suburbs rose up and defeated the initiative (though there wasn’t a great deal of support in Vancouver either).  What’s the answer?  Show up, listen, engage.  Get out of your comfort zone if you want to grow your cause.

This is why the system works

As the results indicate, there is dynamism in the system.  I can see in these results how the electoral landscape continues to shift.  It’s not a given how the province will vote next time.  Big-tent parties have to get their arms around the largest swath of voters possible in order to govern.  That requires overarching vision, compromise, and brokering, but all within a unified structure that brings forward a coherent program that that party is accountable for if they win.  Moreover, it is highly competitive.  Elections between two or more big-tent parties bring clarity and a clear choice for the electorate.  Smaller parties play an important role too.  They push issues on to the agenda that big-tent parties must respond to.  If they don’t, big tent parties can disappear and smaller parties can emerge to take their place.  As a Teenage Vote Splitter, that was my story – that of the BC Liberals supplanting the Socreds after 1991 and the Reform Party overtaking the Progressive Conservatives in 1993.  It happens all the time.  We have a highly competitive, dynamic electoral system.  It’s not perfect, but it’s not static either.

The best argument I heard during this debate was that FPTP is the most effective system for throwing out a bad government.  It’s decisive.    In most cases, these parties are the better for it.  Out goes the old and in comes a new generation of leaders that rebuild. ProRep would allow power structures to linger like last year’s salad dressing.  So, I’m obviously happy with the outcome.  Our system largely works.  There are a few changes that could be made that would help, not requiring a referendum, but that is a post for another day.

Now that this is over, next stop for BC politics: Nanaimo.