From its founding in 1961 until 2012, the Alberta NDP never received its due share of seats. And despite right-wing propaganda, the Social Credit and Conservative government did not always have the support of a majority of Alberta voters despite getting back-to-back majority governments in the Legislature.
Newspaper coverage of Alberta politics noted in 2015 that the NDP's victory changed a long pattern because "the New Democrats had never before won more than 16 ridings"
But that statement is based only on seat results.
in 1986 NDP was due proportionally 24 seats but only got 16.
in 1989 NDP was due proportionally 22 seats but only got 16.
The NDP was always under-represented - and sometimes shut out - in every election from its founding in 1961 to the present (except 2015 and 2019).
The most glaring examples of dis-proportional mis-representation
In 1967 the NDP was due ten seats but got zero seats.
In 1975 the NDP was due ten but got just one.
in 1982 the NDP was due 12 but got just two.
in 1993 the NDP was due 9 but got zero seats.
This is based on overall party stats. Actually the NDP got a much higher percentage of votes in Edmonton than shown here and still got less than three seats or none in that city just as it did overall. (Edmonton and Calgary each had eight or more seats each election so there was much room for the NDP to get many seats if its voters in the cities had been accorded their due share of seats.)
And the party in power - Social Credit, starting back in 1935 and right up to 1971, and the Progressive-Conservatives from 1971 to 2015 - sometimes got just a minority of the vote although through the magic of the First Past the Post system (starting in 1955), they got back-to- back majority governments during their respective times in power.
In 1967 the Social Credit party received just 45 percent of the vote. More voted for other parties than voted SC.
The Progressive-Conservatives, in power from 1971 to 2015, did not always have majority support of Alberta voters.
in five elections the PC took majority gov't with less than half the vote:
1971, 1989, 1993, 1997 and 2004.
More voted for other parties than voted PC.
Many reports repeat the mistake made by mainstream media - of just looking at superficial seat results and not looking at votes cast. Sometimes it is simple ignorance or shallow thinking; other times it is misplaced confidence in the system; other times it is conscious lying to put across the idea that the Right is the freely-chosen popular choice and "resistance is futile."
But the truth cannot be stifled.
Here's the stats that show the true way of things.
1963, 1967 65 seats
NDP Social Credit
vote seats seats vote seats seats
percentage due received percentage due received
1963 9 percent 6 0 55 percent 36 60
1967 16 percent 10 0 45 percent 29 55
1971 to 1982 75 seats
NDP Progressive-Conservatives
1971 11 percent 8 1 46 percent 35 49
1975 13 percent 10 1 63 percent 47 69
1979 16 percent 12 1 57 percent 43 74
1982 19 percent 14 2 62 percent 47 75
1986 to 2004 83 seats
NDP Progressive-Conservatives
1986 29.2 percent 24 16 51 percent 42 61
1989 26.3 percent 22 16 44 percent 37 59
1993 11 percent 9 0 45 percent 37 51
1997 9 percent 7 2 51 percent 42 63
2001 8 percent 7 2 62 percent 51 74
2004 10 percent 8 4 47 percent 39 62
2008 to 2019 87 seats
NDP Progressive-Conservatives
2008 9 percent 8 2 62 percent 53 72
2012 10 percent 9 4 44 percent 38 61
When the NDP began to get more than its fair share of seats
2015 41 percent 36 54 28 percent 24 10
(Wildrose: 24 percent 21 21)
2019 33 percent 29 24 UCP: 55 percent 48 63.
All in all, from 1961 to 2012, proportionally the NDP was due to see its candidates elected 154 times.
But only 51 times did one of its candidates get elected.
if we leave out 1986 and 1989 when 16 candidates were elected twice -- when it was due to see 46 candidates elected, the NDP saw 19 candidates elected when it was due to see 108 candidates elected.
From 1961 to 2012, the Alberta NDP was due to see elected as many as 14 members at any one time except for 1986 and 1989 when it was due to see 24 and 22 but only saw 16 elected.
BUT
From 1961 to 2012, it never elected more than 4 members at any one time except for 1986 and 1989.
Under PR the NDP would have won 154 seats at the various elections between 1962 and 2014, with a high of 24 in 1986.
But under FPTP it won just 51, 32 of them in 1986/1989, when 16 each time were elected.
Leaving aside 1986 and 1989, the NDP was due 108 seat/terms from 1961 to 2012 and got just 19 seat/terms. Tell me again how great FPTP is to the NDP...
In that time, 762 candidates were elected. Judging by how votes were cast historically, the NDP never would have had a great number of elected members at any one time but it would have had a voice - an audible voice in the Legislature - a visible presence there - at all times, when under FPTP there were whole terms when there was not one NDP member presenting the opinion of a large segment of the population. You can't tell me that fair representation would not have had an effect on how the province was governed over those five decades. You can't tell me it would not have produced better legislation and more fairness and balance.
First Past The Post often produced minority rule - a minority group ruled over the majority.
With PR, the Social Credit Party, the choice of less than half of the voters, would have been denied false majority government in 1967.
And under PR, the Conservative, the choice of less than half of the voters, would have been denied false majority governments in five elections.
In those six elections the NDP would not have won government (that is too much to expect as well as being unrepresentative of votes cast),
but PR would have meant that the SC or Conservatives, the choice of just a minority of voters, would not have been elected government.
It seems likely the enlightened atmosphere of a minority government plus increased representation of NDP would have created a whole new political climate from the 1960s to 2012.
PR would have denied the NDP its 2015 victory -- if votes were the same - But likely if the NDP had had 154 MLAs serving terms at different times in the Legislature between 1961 and 2012 instead of just 51 doing so, likely the whole political climate of the province would have shifted.
And almost certainly due to its continued under-representation, the NDP vote is dampened in districts where right wingers have been elected since the 1950s, sometimes by minority of district votes.
I fully expect that if Alberta had had PR from 1960 onwards, the NDP would not have had to wait until 2015 to take government. The party would have played a part in minority governments when they were elected and would have had spokesmen in prominent positions that would have served as wedges for onward progress to higher and higher levels of popular support, likely eventually taking a majority government many years before 2015.
So instead of hoping for accidental breakthrough under FPTP, under PR the NDP could have counted on gradually rising popularity as the word of its policies and proposals spread through its elected member elected in due proportion to its share of the vote.
And very possibly it would have found success earlier than 2015.
We can't do anything about the past, but next time the NDP has the chance to change the election system - to bring in PR - the next time it has power, it should avail itself of the opportunity.
There was a 30-year period when Alberta used PR in Edmonton and Calgary. PR only was used to cover about 15 percent of the province's MLAs, but it proved itself - the cities' representation was more balanced and proportional than the results in the rest of the province.
Social Credit Premier Ernest Manning had no moral right to abolish PR in 1956 and force Alberta to use FPTP a system, not used anywhere in the province for more than 30 years.
And any elected government, elected on a clear promise to do so, has the right to reverse Manning's decision and give Alberta voters fair representation and effective voting through STV-PR (or any other form of PR).
PR won't give NDP accidental success as FPTP does just every century or so, but it will give the party a stable strong base to launch from for later well-grounded popular victories.
The Alberta NDP need Proportional Representation --
and Alberta voters need Proportional Representation.
Let's promise to give it to them and then deliver, just as our predecessor party - the United Farmers of Alberta - did in 1921/1924.
(If outright Pro-rep is too much to expect, at least bring in some form of top-up where if a party takes more than half the seats in the Legislature but has not received more than half the votes, the other parties are given extra seats so that a party without the support of a majority of votes does not win majority control of the Legislature. And that is what we get under FPTP again and again.
================================
Comments