Canadian by-elections, 2015

[Hatman 🍁]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the BC Liberals more socially progressive, but more fiscally right wing than the SoCreds? i.e., a "true liberal" party?

[136or142]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the BC Liberals more socially progressive, but more fiscally right wing than the SoCreds? i.e., a "true liberal" party?

It depends during the time period.  From 2005-2009 Gordon Campbell governed as a liberal Liberal, no doubt partly because he had the money to do so.

Bill Bennett's restraint program during his final term (1983-1986) and most of Bill VanderZalm's term (1986-1991)  were more fiscally conservative than anything the Liberals have done except for maybe the Liberals from 2001-2005.

On social issues.  The Liberals are much more to the left.  This gets back to what I said about the Liberal coalition being much more urban and suburban than the heavily rurally based Social Credit.

[Citizen Hats]

On social issues.  The Liberals are much more to the left.  This gets back to what I said about the Liberal coalition being much more urban and suburban than the heavily rurally based Social Credit.

It's really difficult to make a meaningful statement about relative social policy over this time-scale, since everything and everyone had more socially conservative views than today. Vander Zalm was certainly a religious conservative, but social policy was never a priority during either Bennett Era.  This gets back to the broader British Columbia trend of politics being almost entirely about the getting and dolling out of money above all things. It has always been this way, and it always will be. 

I think Adam T is overstating the rural-urban cleavage.  While the WAC Bennett era party certainly had something of a more country flair, often depicted by the cartoonist Len Norris as uptight old fashioned preachers, Social Credit was really a party of small businessmen- of car dealers and hardware store owners - the petty bourgeoisie as the Marxists might call them, for whom the fundamental concern was that the government produce an environment conducive to business.  The geographic divides reflected much more about how people saw their place in this economy than it did urban-rural cultural attitudes.  Particularly after the consolidations of 1972,

While I haven't run the numbers, there were a number of urban seats which Social Credit rather consistently held, such as Vancouver South, Vancouver - Little Mountain,  Vancouver - Point Grey (post 1972, Liberal prior) Victoria, Vancouver Centre, and Vancouver Burrard usually returned Social Credit members prior to 1972 as well.  Vancouver during the Social Credit Era was mostly governed by their municipal allies the NPA, including rather avowedly pro-SoCred figures like Tom Campbell.  Studies prior to the 1980's Malapportionment cases indicated that the rural bias of seat distributions actually generally benefited the NDP

[136or142]

On social issues.  The Liberals are much more to the left.  This gets back to what I said about the Liberal coalition being much more urban and suburban than the heavily rurally based Social Credit.

It's really difficult to make a meaningful statement about relative social policy over this time-scale, since everything and everyone had more socially conservative views than today. Vander Zalm was certainly a religious conservative, but social policy was never a priority during either Bennett Era.  This gets back to the broader British Columbia trend of politics being almost entirely about the getting and dolling out of money above all things. It has always been this way, and it always will be. 

I think Adam T is overstating the rural-urban cleavage.  While the WAC Bennett era party certainly had something of a more country flair, often depicted by the cartoonist Len Norris as uptight old fashioned preachers, Social Credit was really a party of small businessmen- of car dealers and hardware store owners - the petty bourgeoisie as the Marxists might call them, for whom the fundamental concern was that the government produce an environment conducive to business.  The geographic divides reflected much more about how people saw their place in this economy than it did urban-rural cultural attitudes.  Particularly after the consolidations of 1972,

While I haven't run the numbers, there were a number of urban seats which Social Credit rather consistently held, such as Vancouver South, Vancouver - Little Mountain,  Vancouver - Point Grey (post 1972, Liberal prior) Victoria, Vancouver Centre, and Vancouver Burrard usually returned Social Credit members prior to 1972 as well.  Vancouver during the Social Credit Era was mostly governed by their municipal allies the NPA, including rather avowedly pro-SoCred figures like Tom Campbell.  Studies prior to the 1980's Malapportionment cases indicated that the rural bias of seat distributions actually generally benefited the NDP

1.I said most of the seats Social Credit held were in rural areas, not that all of them were. 

2.One of the most controversial things the NDP government from 1972-175 did was to eliminate 'the strap' in school.  Hardly an economic issue.

3.Bill VanderZalm's comment that people on welfare need to 'pick up a shovel' was hardly an economic issue (he was the Minister in charge at the time.)

4.I forget the years, but until the NDP ended it in 1991, hospital boards were elected and the only issue people voted on was whether abortion would be allowed in the hospital or not.

5.The protests against the 'restraint legislation' Bill Bennett brought in after getting reelected in 1983 was less to do with economics (as Social Credit had got reelected over it) but had more to do with anti union components and, even more so, with components that would have eliminated the Human Rights tribunal and other human rights related legislation.  You can say the anti union legislation is economics related, but the human rights stuff isn't all that much so.

I'd have to look up what other social legislation Social Credit brought in (they brought in legislation between 1969-1972) that allowed high school students smoking in school that was controversial at the time (The NDP government repealed it.), but would be seen as common sense now, but I think you are understating the amount of social conservative legislation they brought in, just as you are overstating the amount of Social Credit MLAs who were 'car dealers or hardware store owners.'

There were obviously socially conservative members of Social Credit like the woman MLA who proposed replacing the word 'sex' with 'BOLT' (biology of Living Today) but she got laughed at by everybody in the legislature for that.

[Lotuslander]

5.The protests against the 'restraint legislation' Bill Bennett brought in after getting reelected in 1983 was less to do with economics (as Social Credit had got reelected over it) but had more to do with anti union components and, even more so, with components that would have eliminated the Human Rights tribunal and other human rights related legislation.  You can say the anti union legislation is economics related, but the human rights stuff isn't all that much so.

Firstly, this thread is about CA by-elections. This thread drift tangent is irrelevant to same. Post a new thread if ya wanna discuss BC political history.

But your foregoing statement is completely incorrect fer chrise sakes and needs to be corrected. And, in that vein, some political history for ya. Just to back-track:

May, 1981 - BC economy humming along with an all-time low unemployment rate and high growth rate. One of best in Canada back in the day - albeit on then shaky ground for a plethora of reasons;

October, 1981 - BC economy falls off a cliff - Canadian prime rate approaches 20%, mortgage rates approach same (mortgage renewals brutal), forest industry collapses, bank foreclosures surge, etc., etc.  BC unemployment rate moving toward mid-teen range - major layoffs in private sector and major wage reductions; Basically a mini-depression - worst since the 1930`s in BC;

Back then, both public sector and private sector union contracts also contained a COLA (Cost of Living Allowance) clause to buffer the then high inflation rate (into teens) from the 1970`s into the 1980`s;

Then Socred premier Bennett legislated a `6% and 5%` wage restraint program for public sector workers. IOW, next public sector contractual wage increases would be limited to same. Even then, BC was facing major budget deficits.

Fast forward to the May 5, 1983 BC provincial election. At the beginning, the Socreds were doomed - with major previous `Dirty Tricks`scandals as well as the economic collapse. Then what happened?

BC NDP opposition leader Dave Barrett appeared on a Cranbrook radio talk show, during the 1983 BC election campaign, and a caller asked for his response on the Socreds `6% and 5%` wage restraint legislation. For the first time, Barrett acknowledged that the BC NDP would nix same if they formed gov`t. Back then, BCTV had its first satellite truck and appeared on scene from Cranbrook, BC. In fact, then (and even current) BCTV reporter John Daily reported live at the top of the BCTV`s Newhousr 6 pm newscast on Barrett`s announcement. (for those not in the know, BCTV`s Newshour was then Canada`s  most highly watched 6 pm provincial newscast).

Back then, public opinion polls were illegal during BC election campaigns. The political sh**te hit the fan after that. Socred internal riding polling even showed them leading BC NDP stronghold of New Westminster one week before e-day. On e-day, the Socreds increased their majority while the BC NDP lost seats. Had the election been held one week earlier... the BC NDP would have witnessed even more dire political consequences.

That`s the background. Post-election 1983, with continued economic malaise, high unemployment, and continued record deficits, the Socreds announced further austerity measures - major layoffs in the public sector and other major legislative changes in order to curb the ballooning deficit - from the incumbent Socred`gov`ts perspective.

Resulted in another political shock in BC (not mentioned during 1983 campaign). Major protests as a result. Culminated in a 25,000+ strong protest at now long-gone Empire Stadium. Operation Solidarity and the Solidarity Coalition they called themselves. They both became hi-jacked by the loony left. And actually became an extra-parliamentary opposition calling for general strikes and ouster of newly elected incumbent Socred gov`t.

Strangely enough, then opposition leader Dave Barrett and the BC NDP were strangely quiet during this upheaval. Obviously they would not oppose Operation Solidarity or the Solidarity Coalition as they represented the BC NDP base. But neither could the BC NDP oppose some of the Socred`s austerity measures for fear of alienating centrist voters.

By the early fall of 1983, a major public opinion poll (CATI back in those days with a roughly 80% response rate) on the matter appeared on the front page of the Vancouver Sun. The findings? Operation Solidarity and the Solidarity Coalition had just 19% public support. More tellingly, the Socreds were well ahead of the BC NDP in terms of public opinion.

Apparently, Socred premier Bennett was ready to pull the plug and call another immediate election with the ballot box question `Who runs BC? The elected gov`t or a militant extra-parliamentary opposition?

Then moderate BC NDP supporter and major private sector union leader Jack Munro (IWA - forestry) saw the writing on the wall (along with other moderates in the BC labour movement). Munro flew to Socred premier Bennett`s home in Kelowna and reached an agreement on various matters on behalf of other moderate BCers. To this day, the loony left within the BC NDP has never forgiven Munro. And the rest is history.

Just a synopsis.

How do I know about the foregoing? 10 - 15 years back, I took a 100-level BC politics elective course and wrote a major paper on same. Back in my UBC days.

In any event, it`s about time that we get back to regularly scheduled programming - CA by-elections.

[136or142]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

For supposedly making a major correction, we didn't disagree all that much.  I said the 1983 election was about the 'restraint' program and that Social Credit won on that, and you concurred.  I said Social Credit brought in additional restraint after the election and you just backed that up.

You are correct that I did not comment on the extent of the cuts made to social services post election and that that brought out a good deal of the protests, my bad.

However, it is also true that Social Credit passed a number of anti union bills that had little to do with 'restraint' which you did not mention.
"Inspired by conservative economist Milton Friedman, his government passed a series of laws, known as the "Restraint" program, which slashed social services and gutted labour laws in response to economic woes in 1983, provoking a general strike which further crippled the economy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Bennett

That is what got private sector organized labor to protest the restraint legislation, not the cuts to social services.

This was one of the schisms that Jack Munro had to deal with.  While the public sector unions wanted the cuts to social services and the public sector layoffs addressed, the private sector unions were mostly only concerned with the anti union legislation.

Finally, while some social activists, like the left leaning churches, got involved in the protest due to the cuts to social services, others got involved because of other things the Restraint Legislation brought in that had nothing to do with 'restraint' like eliminating the Human Rights Commission and the rent review office.  

It should also be noted that while you pointed out that Social Credit was extremely popular after the Restraint Program was introduced and after the protests, that with the continuing of the recession and the aftermath of the cuts and other changes brought in by the 'Restraint Program' that Bill Bennett retired in 1986 around 10-20% behind the NDP in the polls knowing that it was unlikely he could be reelected.  He just stuck around long enough to see most of Expo '86 through, just as Gordon Campbell waited until after the 2010 Olympics to resign.

One of the main reasons the NDP lost the subsequent 1986 election was because leader Bob Skelly and his team prepared their entire campaign to run against Bill Bennett and were caught completely flat footed when he resigned.   The initial popularity of Bill VanderZalm also was something they had difficulty adjusting  to.

I should know these things about the Restraint Program because I was living in B.C at the time.  100 level university courses frequently gloss over things that get picked up on in greater detail in higher level courses.  I can't explain why you didn't find out about these things in your research.

If I recall correctly, part of the negotiations between Bennett and Jack Munro brought back the Human Rights Commission and the Rent Review Office and it was speculated at the time that Social Credit just cut these things so that they could bring them back in case of a backlash to mollify the 'centrist' voters while allowing them to leave in place the anti union legislation and cuts to social services.

[Hash]

This thread will be locked if it isn't brought back on topic. Final warning.

[Holmes]

You guys should just open a new thread for the next BC election.

[Hatman 🍁]

Might as well close it; these by-elections wont be held this year.

[Pragmatic Conservative]

Might as well close it; these by-elections wont be held this year.

I made a forum where users can discuss Current  BC Political Events/History until the Election in 2017 gets under way. https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=223384.0


Anyways Here are my Ratings of the other BY Elections

Whitby-Oshawa Safe PC- PC have held this riding  since 2007
Coquitlam-Burke Mountain Toss UP- Has been relatively close the last three elections, as well the NDP have experienced a slight upswing in the polls. If the NDP want to form government in 2017  they probably have to win riding like  this.  
Vancouver-Mount Pleasant-Safe NDP- Has gone NDP every election since inception, even in the LIberal Landslide of 2001.  
Chicoutmi- Lean PQ -Has been close the last few elections.

[Hatman 🍁]

I wouldn't call Whitby a safe PC seat. Maybe 'likely'. It did just go Liberal in the federal election, after all.

[DC Al Fine]

Plus there are the Trudeau honeymoon and Flaherty/Elliot personal votes.

[Hatman 🍁]

Calgary-Greenway MLA Manmeet Bhullar (PC) died in a car accident.

[Njall]

Calgary-Greenway MLA Manmeet Bhullar (PC) died in a car accident.

Link.

It's a truly heartbreaking story.  In the words of many on social media: "he died doing what he loved: helping people."

[Boston Bread]

Calgary-Greenway MLA Manmeet Bhullar (PC) died in a car accident.

He's quite young, too. RIP.

[DL]

Calgary-Greenway MLA Manmeet Bhullar (PC) died in a car accident.

Very sad news - by all accounts he was quite a nice guy. He was also touted as a likely contender to lead the Alberta PCs when they pick a permanent leader...

[RogueBeaver]

Whitby-Oshawa: Tories have chosen their candidate. Guess Wynne will call it early next year...