Responsible government must mean more than a 4.5 percent ruling block. But under FPTP, as few as 4.5 percent of voters is all you need to win a majority in an assembly -- hardly responsible!

Different parts of Canada achieved responsible government at different times. But responsible to whom?

Usually it is said that responsible government is achieved when an elected assembly, not appointed officials, controls the budget.

it is implied that a mere majority of the members in the elected assembly may control the budget and dominate the government. And that is fine -- what more can we expect except for consensus.

But is having an elected assembly enough?

Just casting votes is not enough.

Just electing a most-popular member in separate FPTP contests is not enough if it means a minute portion of voters can elect the majority that wields power in the assembly.

By saying elected assembly, we assume that most votes will be used to elect assembly members, and that about half of those votes will have elected the majority members.

This happens when FPTP is used if only two candidates compete but as soon as you have three-corned contests, you can see perhaps as few as 5 percent of voters electing a group that can wield power.

I'll show you how this can happen --

100,000 voters (voters who actually vote)

say 25 districts with 4000 voters voting in each

Only two candidates in each -- winner has at least 50 percent plus 1 in each, so each winner elected with 2001 votes,

winners elected with at least 50,025 votes.

then a majority could be composed in the Assembly of just 13 members with a total of 25,013 votes (about a quarter of votes cast overall).

But if three-cornered contests occur in each district, the winner may have as few as 1/3rd of votes plus 1, or 1334 votes

bringing the winners' total to 33,350 votes overall.

then a majority could be composed in the Assembly of just 13 members with a total of 17,342 votes, about 1/6th of votes cast overall.

Where even more run, such as 7 to nine candidates in a single-winner contest, as in many of the wards used to elect the Edmonton city council in 12 separate single-member wards, the winner's share of votes may be as few as 30%.

and then (using the format as above) the winners' share could drop to just 1200 votes in each district, with total winners' share of 30,000,

with the 13-member majority block elected by as few as about 16,000 votes, less than 1/6th of the votes cast.

Plus you have un-competitive contests where it is pretty much known whom will be elected, voter turnout drops and drops till you have as few as less than a third voting, same as the Edmonton city election where only 30.41 percent of eligible voters voted.

With the lower turnout, and where only 1216 of the formatted 4000 voters in each ward actually vote, success in a ward could come with just 364 votes.

If that is done across the 25 districts, it would mean all winners a receive total of just about 9000 votes of the 100,000 eligible voters.

with a majority in the Assembly composed of members who received just 4500 votes, a mere 4.5 percent of the 100,000 eligible voters.

=========================================

Responsible government, or "responsible cabinet government", as it is phrased in Colonists and Canadians, p. 238, was not considered enough back in the 1850s.

In the 1850s Reformers known as the Clear Grits called for a move beyond the British system of responsible cabinet government to a written constitution on U.S. elective lines, with manhood suffrage, vote by ballot, and other measures then considered decidedly belonging to an advanced democracy. ...

These proposals were explained in the Grits' journal William McDougall's North American newspaper in essays particularly addressed to the "Farmers of Canada." (p. 238)

[This McDougall is Sir William McDougall 1822-1905 who was later blocked from performing his official duties by Metis from entering Manitoba in the first Riel Rebellion. Thus he was in some ways similar to Edmonton's Frank Oliver - a reform-minded Liberal whose support for small farmers made him a threat to Metis and First Nations people.

see Montopedia blog "Pantheon of Reformers -- William McDougall ..."]

Manhood suffrage was achieved by 1867 (I think), at least for men older than 20, and secret voting (vote by ballot), by 1874. However Canada still does not have an elected Senate and its constitution is only partially written (not that the U.S. Constitution written as it is is any great thing to copy!)

"By 1851 radicalism had created such a stir in politics that both Baldwin and Lafontaine retired in frustration., leaving the government to their chief lieutenants, Francis Hincks and A.N. Morin. (p. 238)

... George Brown was editor of the Toronto Globe ,which had launched in 1844 and had made into the strongest reform paper in Canada.

"Brown had vigorously opposed the Clear Grit movement chiefly because he believed in the superiority of the British parliamentary system over the U.S. political model."

But when government moved slowly in regard to voluntarism (no public support for the Church), he used the Globe to push the voluntaryist agenda and was soon elected to HofC to push for voluntarism there as an independent reformer.

"Brown and other Upper Canadian voluntaryists become strenuous opponents of Roman Catholic "aggression" in public affairs chiefly in regard to school legislation."

the U.C. moves against Roman Catholic education was countered by moves in Lower Canada in support of "Catholic zeal and incorporation of church bodies for teaching, charitable and hospital purposes." (p. 239-240)

About then too rep by pop. became a demand of Ontario. When Ontario had had fewer people than Quebec, it was happy with each section having the same number of seats but now Rep by Pop looked good for Upper Canadians. (By 1867, Rep. by Pop. was achieved with Confederation.)

by late 1850s, Brown's voluntaryists, Clear Grits and eastern rouges of Lower Canada had joined in finding common ground in opposing the "Conservative regime's alleged misuse of power especially in regard to its aiding the Grand Trunk Railway extravagance and immorality." (p. 241)