top of page
Tom Monto

1927: Calgary Herald defended PR

Here is the Calgary Herald defending PR (STV) in 1927.

Calgary had been using STV in city elections since 1917 - and would continue to do so until 1961 and again in 1971

1927: The Calgary Herald spoke out against Edmonton and Saskatoon voting down STV-PR Two Cities Turn Against P.R. Saskatoon has abandoned P.R. The people of Edmonton were asked at their municipal elections this week to vote on the question of retaining or abolishing this system and they voted against it.

It is quite the business of any city to decide how it will vote and when The Herald expresses regret at the outcome of the Edmonton election it is not without appreciation to make its own decision.

A line has grown up in many municipalities that separate Labour from the remainder of the electors. Practically the only parties in civic elections as what corresponds to our Civic Government Association and Labour.

By the old system of voting, if the non-labour elements were organized to vote its full strength, its representatives could, in this city and probably in Edmonton, keep Labour from having any representation on the city council and school board.

In The Herald's opinion, this would be both unfair and unwise. Labour should be represented on the civic governing bodies. Labour forms a large and important part of the population. The values of labour's work in a community needs only to be mentioned to be recognized. As this paper said some days ago, Labour has to be constantly watchful for the protection of the legitimate rights of its members, and none is so well qualified to safeguard these interests as a man brought up and trained in Labour's ranks.

Labour may at times be critical of the attitude of the CGA thought in the city and the reverse may be true, but there is decidedly greater probability of good-will and understanding and fair play on both sides if each feels that it is represented according to its voting power on the governing bodies of the city.

It might be that Calgary would vote out PR if the question were submitted to the electors here, but this paper, as one interested in unity and fair treatment of all classes in the city, hopes that the question will not arise. Calgary will get along better by co-operation between the two parties based on PR than it would by having a powerful majority crushing down a minority. (The Calgary Herald, Dec. 15, 1927) One could add: Or visa versa - a powerful minority crushing down the majority. ========================================================= Also below is capture of an interesting article reporting that an U.S. PR expert was to get access to Alberta's old 1926 election ballots. our 1926 election was of international/U.S. interest because what Alberta did in 1926 had not been done in any other jurisdiction in North America -- all members were elected by a system other than plurality winner. in this case STV or IRV kind of cool still today only Alberta and Manitoba in all of North America have ever used STV or PR to elect legislators above the level of cities. (this statement perhaps should say except Illinois's use of Cumulative Voting to elect state legislators. CV is described as a semi-proportional system in such sources as Cumulative Voting – Illinois – Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ilsr.org) that state's info actually says use of CV "led to unusual combinations, such as Chicago Republicans and suburban Democrats, being elected." That's like expressing surprise that a Liberal would be elected in Alberta or Saskatchewan under PR - describing it as an unusual combination!

not really -- it is only unusual because in recent past, with some exceptions, the electoral system has been totally unbalanced in favour of Conservatives in those provinces, and un-reflective of votes cast in those provinces.)


Edmonton Bulletin August 1927

PR expert Hallett asked for permission to take Alberta's old ballots and study them

1 view

Recent Posts

See All

Early Labour culture

Clarissa Mackie "Elizabeth's Pride A Labor Day story"    Bellevue Times Dec. 5, 1913

Comments


bottom of page