B.C. hedges its bets
British Columbia could have clout in Canada’s post-election Parliament if the polls suggesting 11 weeks of campaigning have left the province’s voters split three ways hold fast in Monday’s vote.
British Columbia appears poised to hedge its bets and elect healthy contingents of Conservatives, Liberals and New Democrats. Observers say such a result in the province, which in the recent past was largely split between the NDP and Conservatives, could be key to determining the outcome.
Political scientist Paul Fairie, who has designed The Globe and Mail’s Election Forecast, said the campaign is ending with B.C. as the closest three-way race in Canada, with each of the three main parties near 30 per cent. “It’s genuinely hard to say who is going to come in first, second or third,” Mr. Fairie said.
Given that the leaders of the Liberals and the NDP have declared they would not prop up the Conservatives if they do not win another majority, the minority government that seems like a probable outcome of that declaration would include many B.C. MPs.
Mr. Fairie sees B.C. sending good-sized caucuses and cabinet prospects from all three main parties to Ottawa representing the province’s 42 seats – up six from 2011. The previous election gave the Conservatives 21 B.C. seats, the NDP 12, the Liberals two and the Green Party one.
An increase in the number of Liberals the province sends to Ottawa along with NDP members could make those MPs – who would have little influence if the Conservatives form the government – very important, some observers say.
“A minority government for B.C. could be a very favourable circumstance,” political scientist Michael Prince of the University of Victoria said in an interview.
“If it’s a Liberal or NDP [minority government], B.C. figures to be an important part of that story as to who comes first or second and gets to form the government,” he said. “Therefore, as part of the government caucus, whether NDP or Liberal, the B.C. contingent in that caucus will punch above its weight.”
Political scientist Max Cameron of the University of British Columbia, who has said that minority and coalition governments represent Canadians best, said a Liberal or NDP minority would likely mean new clout for some of the urban ridings that traditionally elect Liberals and New Democrats. In the past, the Conservatives have dominated rural and suburban areas.
“It would represent a shift of power within the province,” he said.
And an increased number of Liberal MPs would most likely be prompted at least partly by Conservative Leader Stephen Harper’s unpopularity in the province, said pollster Greg Lyle, the managing director of Innovative Research.
Pat Carney, a senior cabinet minister and B.C. MP under Progressive Conservative prime minister Brian Mulroney, this week said a “surprising number” of her friends from that earlier incarnation of the party are planning to vote Liberal “despite reservations” about leader Justin Trudeau. “In reality, they have no place left to go since the Conservative Party has long abandoned the progressive or Red Tories.”
The leaders of all three parties campaigned heavily in British Columbia. Mr. Harper was in the province 11 times, and Mr. Trudeau 13 times. Both largely focused on Vancouver and its suburbs with stops on Vancouver Island. NDP Leader Tom Mulcair’s 19 trips to the province covered more territory, with stops in five Vancouver Island communities, the Okanagan, Interior and Cranbrook in southeastern B.C.
All parties used political surrogates – Jean Chrétien for the Liberals and former B.C. premier Mike Harcourt for the NDP – but the practice was most formalized by the Conservatives, who sent ex-cabinet minister Stockwell Day and Industry Minister James Moore, who is not seeking re-election, on the road in Mr. Harper’s B.C.-based campaign bus.
Where the leaders were
A look at where the three major party leaders campaigned in B.C.(Some points indicate the city or town rather than a specific address)
The messages to B.C. voters included financial support for transit projects in Vancouver (an east-west subway) and Surrey (a light-rail system) and commitments to marine safety, but also promises on the economy and taxes in line with what was offered elsewhere.
“You can imagine bits of Coquitlam sharing very similar values to bits of Etobicoke and being treated similarly and Vancouver sharing similar values to downtown Toronto,” David Moscrop of the University of British Columbia said.
Nik Nanos, chairman of Nanos Research, said B.C. is not only going to help decide next week’s election, but continue to be a “priority region” for all three parties going ahead because, along with Quebec, it is one of the few regions where they can all compete.
“They will be looking at B.C. as the potential place to snatch seats in the next election,” Mr. Nanos said. “I would say in the next Parliament, there will be an increasing focus on British Columbia and Quebec.”
Prof. Prince sees another interesting twist ahead: a Liberal government would give B.C. its first notable claim to a prime minister since Kim Campbell, given the roots in this province that Mr. Trudeau and his Liberals have touted during the 11-week campaign. Among other things, the family of Mr. Trudeau’s mother is from B.C., and Mr. Trudeau taught at a Vancouver school.
“We could say we have had a Western-based prime minister for the last 10 years,” he said, referring to Mr. Harper, who was born and raised in Toronto, but moved to Alberta as a young adult.
“Clearly, a lot of British Columbians would say [Mr. Harper] was largely an Alberta-centred Western prime minister, but if we get one elected out of, ironically, Montreal with the name Trudeau, we’ve got, maybe, more of a claim to him due to his connections.”
That could mean holding Mr. Trudeau to account for B.C. priorities, Prof. Prince said.
National campaign, local issues
MIDDLE CLASS
Two years ago, Dusty McKinnon gave up his Vancouver-based sustainable clothing company and moved to Calgary to work in the oil and gas industry. He and his partner, Rebekah Nathe, had wanted to enter the real estate market but Vancouver’s housing prices simply outpaced any savings the two could accumulate from a combined income of $90,000.
Like most Canadians, the couple self-identify as “middle class,” the
demographic most coveted – yet so vaguely defined – by Canada’s federal
parties. But a 2013 internal government document describes the concept more
clearly, saying that researchers in North America consider the middle-class to
be those whose after-tax family income adjusted for family size falls between
75 per cent and 150 per cent of the overall adjusted median income. Based on
2012 Statistics Canada numbers, this would make families earning between
$53,775 and $107,550 part of the “middle class.”
Mr. McKinnon, who splits his time between the two cities, says the couple’s
household income has grown to $140,000. He and Ms. Nathe, a nursing student,
now own two modest condos in Vancouver and rent in Calgary. They pay “huge
amounts of interest.”
These are among promises aimed at the middle class.
Conservatives: Lower the small-business tax rate to 8 per cent from
11 per cent; double federal grants for low- and middle-income families
contributing to Registered Education Savings Plans; raise the limit on RRSP
withdrawal to $35,000 from $25,000 for first-time home buyers.
Liberals: Increase taxes for the wealthiest Canadians to fund a tax
cut for those making between $44,701 and $89,401; run deficits over the next
three years to invest in infrastructure and stimulate economic growth.
NDP: Phase out interest on student loans; create one million
child-care spaces at no more than $15 a day; dedicate $500-million a year on
parental leave for a second parent; reduce age of eligibility for Old Age
Security from 67 to 65.
Greens: Create a universal-access child-care program; introduce a
carbon fee and dividend system, with dividends going to lower- and
middle-income Canadians.
Andrea Woo
ENERGY
Before Brandy Byhoffer moved to North Burnaby four years ago, the dual citizen born and raised in Southern California hadn’t thought much about pipelines.
That changed once she met her neighbours, most of whom are forcefully
against expanding Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline after a 2007 rupture
blanketed their street in Albertan crude. Now, the 25-year-old artist says
stopping the proposal to triple the pipeline’s capacity is the reason she will
vote for either the Green Party, which opposes the plan, or the NDP, which has
expressed misgivings about the project, but likely has a better chance of
winning her North Burnaby-Seymour riding.
No party will likely be able to influence the two biggest conditions that
Premier Christy Clark has set out for that project and Enbridge’s stalled
Northern Gateway pipeline proposal – First Nations approval and a “fair share”
of profits for her province, according to Kathryn Harrison, a political science
professor at the University of B.C. The pledge by the Liberals and NDP to beef
up the oft-maligned National Energy Board’s environmental review process will
likely add further delays to any future energy projects, including proposals to
export LNG, she added.
Conservatives:They support both B.C. pipeline proposals and have
lowered taxes on LNG terminals to spur final investment decisions in the
much-delayed sector.
Liberals: They would ban oil tankers on B.C.’s north coast, which
would kill Northern Gateway, and support strengthening an environmental
approval process, which was streamlined under the Conservatives. They maintain
Trans Mountain needs further consideration.
New Democrats: They opposed Northern Gateway over tanker-traffic
concerns but have taken no position on Trans Mountain. They are committed to a
stricter and more independent environmental review process and only increasing
oil sands production if it is “consistent” with emissions-reduction
targets.
Greens: Against all pipelines proposals to export unprocessed bitumen
from Alberta. The Greens want to cap the growth of the oil sands at current
levels and refine the product in Alberta.
Mike Hager
HOUSING
The parties raced to make big promises about transit. But housing, one of the hottest topics in Vancouver as residential real estate prices continue to soar? Not so much.
It’s not that there was a shortage of creative ideas.
University of B.C. economist Thomas Davidoff suggested during the campaign
that taxing capital gains in housing (along with raising property taxes for
foreign homeowners or buyers of luxury homes) and lowering income taxes would
help reduce house prices and give young renters more money to buy.
No one took him up on that, just possibly because the two-thirds of the
nation that owns homes – a group that is far more likely to vote – would riot
at the suggestion.
Instead, the parties focused more on traditional moves.
Conservatives: Like the Liberals, they promised more flexibility in
using RRSPs for down payments, but also larger withdrawals. The Conservatives
made the smallest commitments to housing, with about $350-million a year over
five years.
Liberals: They pledged $125-million a year in early years, then
$500-million in later years, for mechanisms to encourage rental construction,
as well as $500-million a year on GST reductions for new rental construction.
The Liberals would spend $20-billion over 10 years on social infrastructure,
with affordable housing among that.
NDP: The party made the biggest promises, to a total of
$2.925-billion a year for housing, according to the Federation of Canadian
Municipalities. Included in that: $2.15-billion for social housing; $40-million
more for homelessness-reduction initiatives; $500-million for incentives to
developers to build rental housing; $40-million for homeless shelters;
$200-million for home and apartment energy retrofits.
Greens: They pledged $6-billion a year for all municipal
infrastructure, including “community housing.”
Frances Bula
MARIJUANA
B.C.’s hazy state of pot politics is unlikely to change much in the short term, regardless of whether the pro-prohibition Conservatives win or the next government is formed by the Liberals or NDP, which are both inclined to legalize the drug.
When they last formed government, the Liberals had two decriminalization
bills die before the Conservatives came to power and made it clear that they
would not support the medical or recreational use of the drug.
Yet, spurred on by losses in the Supreme Court, the Conservatives created a
national medical marijuana mail-order system at the beginning of last year.
Now, commercial producers licensed under this new regime are competing with
patients fighting in court for their right to keep growing their own medicine
and a retail dispensary sector that has exploded across Vancouver and
Victoria.
In recent years, national opinion polls have consistently shown most
Canadians support legalization of the drug. In the final weeks of the campaign
the Conservatives have repeatedly tried to make cannabis an issue of major
importance to voters, which is “very much out of step with the public mood and
with the evidence,” according to Neil Boyd, head of Simon Fraser University's
criminology school.
Prof. Boyd, an expert on illegal drugs, said the illegal dispensaries that
have thrived under the watch of the Tories could become part of any regulated
system ultimately implemented if another party wins. Many questions remain as
to what legal weed would look like in Canada, but public health concerns, not
commercial interests, must drive the formation of any laws if it is to be
successful, he said.
Conservatives: They would keep pot illegal crack down on illegal
growers and prioritize government-funded research on the link between substance
abuse and mental health.
Liberals: They would legalize, regulate and tax recreational sales of
marijuana.
NDP: They would decriminalize pot “overnight.” After that, they would
study, and eventually implement, legalization.
Greens: The party would legalize cannabis and tax storefront sales of
the drug like tobacco, while regulating the safe production of pot by
small-scale independent growers. The party would also start a national
discussion on decriminalizing all illicit drugs.
Mike Hager
TRANSIT
A little more than a week before the election, radio ads in the Lower Mainland were filled with the sound of Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau’s voice.
He promised, over and over, that his government would bring in a Broadway
line, light rail in Surrey, and SeaBuses.
That targeted advertising spoke directly to one of the major issues in the
region: transit.
It’s one that is top of mind for many residents, as the region flounders in
the aftermath of a plebiscite on a new sales tax to fund transit improvements
that failed resoundingly.
All of the parties made promises about transit nationally, since it’s also an issue in Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal.
The Conservatives had earlier, in budget announcements, promised $1-billion a year, which set a benchmark that other parties then tried to beat.
“There was essentially a race to the top,” said the president of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and Vancouver Councillor Raymond Louie.
Conservatives: Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper planned to travel to Surrey to promise the federal one-third portion -- $700-million – for the light-rail project there, but was held up in Ottawa dealing with the Syrian-refugee crisis.
Liberals: The party will commit $20-billion to transit nationally over the next 10 years. In Surrey, the Liberals have promised the full $2.1-billion for Surrey light rail, which would be unusual if it came true. (Transit projects are typically cost-shared one third each by federal, provincial and municipal governments.)
NDP: Leader Thomas Mulcair, who didn’t make any transit-related announcements in the area, said the party would commit $1.3-billion a year to transit projects for 20 years.
Greens: The Green Party’s platform is even less specific, promising $6-billion a year (one percentage point of the GST) for municipal infrastructure needs. That money would be put into, not just transit, but water treatment, brownfield remediation, community housing, sports, recreation and cultural facilities, and cycling and pedestrian improvements