Calgary-Glenmore (Alberta) by-election 2009

As previewed in the last post, Calgary-Glenmore, a provincial constituency in southwestern Calgary (Alberta) held a by-election to replace outgoing Progressive Conservative (PC) MLA Ron Stevens, who was also Deputy Premier, yesterday, September 14. I talked about the potential of a close race for the PC candidate, given the unpopularity of the Stelmach government in the province but I kept in mind that this was a relatively safe (by local standards) affluent constituency in suburban Calgary, but what happened was quite a shocker.

Paul Hinman (Wildrose) 36.74% (+28.67%)
Avalon Roberts (Liberal) 34.24% (+1.07%)
Diane Colley-Urquhart (PC) 25.96% (-24.71%)
Eric Carpendale (NDP) 1.34% (-2.42%)
Len Skowronski (SoCred) 1.07%
Antoni Grochowski 0.64%
Wildrose Alliance gain from PC (Swing: 26.69% from PC to WRA)

The only real winners are the Wildrose guys, and, surprisingly, not the Liberals. That signals that the backlash to Stelmach seems to come from his right, and not his left. This seems new in recent Albertan politics, and it could signal interesting things to come. However, before we start preparing for the Wildrose landslide in 2012, better to remember that it’s a by-election but also that Stelmach lost a by-election in Calgary-Elbow (Ralph Klein’s old seat) in 2007. In addition, Stelmach has always been hated in Calgary and Colley-Urquhart, an Alderman, also represented an unpopular municipal administration. However, such a thumping is unseen and especially coming from the right of the Conservatives in Alberta, so it could signal some interesting things for Alberta.

Also noteworthy that this riding is a bit unusual since it elected the only Conservative in the 1959 Social Credit landslide, as well as one of the two Liberals in 1967 and one of the three Liberals in 1967.

Canadian provincial by-elections 2009

September is a busy month here in Canada for electoral politics, both at the provincial and federal levels. I’ll wait until the end of the week to see what is in store for us at the federal level, with the possibility of a snap federal election around the corner. However, there are a total of five provincial by-elections being held in September, in four different provinces. There has been no national media coverage of any of these elections, obviously, not even one here in Ontario. However, that doesn’t make them any less interesting.

Calgary-Glenmore (Alberta) votes tomorrow, September 14, to replace outgoing Progressive Conservative MLA Ron Stevens. Calgary-Glenmore is an affluent safe Conservative seat in southwest Calgary, which is represented federally by Stephen Harper. In 2008, Ron Stevens won 50.67% of the vote against Avalon Roberts, the Liberal candidate, who won 33.17%. The Wildrose Alliance, a right-wing provincial party (to the right of the PCs) won 8.07%. The Greens won 4.33% and the NDP won 3.76%. Avalon Roberts, renominated as the Liberal candidate, will face Alderman Diane Colley-Urquhart of the PC. Two party leaders are also candidates, Paul Hinman for the Wildrose Alliance and Len Skowronski for SoCred. There is a NDP candidate, but no Green candidate. Most analysts doubt that this seat will change hands, but the PC could be in for a cold shower due to rising discontent with the provincial government’s handling of the economic crisis. In addition, Paul Hinman, a businessman, is a good candidate for the Wildrose Alliance, which hopes to drop its rural redneck image for a more cosmopolitan profile. A good showing by Hinman on the back of PC voters could make this race an interesting race to watch, for once that Albertan elections are interesting.

St. Paul’s (Ontario) votes on September 17. St. Paul’s is a relatively white (by local standards) and affluent constituency in the northern area of downtown Toronto. While it used to be Conservative provincially except for the period between 1987 and 1995 (Liberal until 1990, NDP until 1995), the Liberals won it in 1999 and have held it with nice margins since. The Liberals win the heavily Italian areas to the west, but also the east of the riding, which is home to relatively affluent young professionals. The Conservative polls are mostly in the centre of the riding, in the uber-rich area of Forest Hills. If the Conservatives appealed to young professionals, they could definitely win this seat again. In 2007, the Liberal won 47.5% against 26.6% for the PC, while the NDP and Greens won 15.7% and 8.3% respectively. The Liberal candidate is a former federal Liberal candidate in Haldimand-Norfolk and a former CEO of War Child Canada. Sue-Ann Levy, a Jewish lesbian but strongly conservative, is the PC candidate. The NDP and Greens are also running candidates, in addition to a host of independents and joke party candidates, including John Turmel running for the 70th time (and his 69th actual election). The Liberals will win it handily.

Rousseau (Quebec) votes on September 21. The riding of Rousseau is a largely rural riding on the north shore (of the St. Lawrence), with some parts in the Laurentides region and others in Lanaudière. The riding is strongly nationalist, voting with over 60% of the vote for independence in 1995, but, like most of the region, quite conservative. The incumbent MNA was the Pequiste (nationalist) François Legault, a Air Transat executive-turned-cabinet-minister who became known for his dislike of being in the opposition (despite being, imo, a fine representative) and his soft nationalism. After sweating a bit in 2007, when most of the surrounding ridings went from PQ cyan to ADQ navy blue, he was handily re-elected in 2008 with 56.77% against 22.33% for the Liberal candidate. The conservative ADQ won 16.41%, Quebec solidaire (QS, a nationalist and democratic socialist party) won 2.44% and the Greens 2.05%. The PQ candidate is Nicolas Marceau, an economist. The Liberals, ADQ and QS are running their 2008 candidates, while the Greens are running their leader, Guy Rainville. The ADQ seems to have put a bit of effort into the riding, though with the party declining ever so slowly into irrelevance, they’ll probably have a cold shower. The PQ should have little trouble winning this seat, despite a Liberal lead provincially.

Regina Douglas Park and Saskatoon Riversdale (Saskatchewan) also vote on September 21. Both seats were held by the opposition NDP, Saskatoon Riversdale being the seat of former NDP Premier Lorne Calvert. While Regina Douglas Park is a mid-income slightly artsy place, Saskatoon Riversdale covers a mostly low-income area of Saskatoon. In both seats, the NDP blew the conservative Saskatchewan Party and the irrelevant Liberals and Greenies out of the water in 2007 – and broke 60% in Saskatoon Riversdale. Despite SaskParty Premier Brad Wall’s popularity, the NDP should face little trouble in either by-election and will likely see its new leader, Dwain Lingenfelter win Regina Douglas Park in a landslide.

Gabon 2009

Gabon, an oil-rich African nation, held a ‘special’ presidential election on August 30 to elect the successor of long-time strongman (ruling for 42 years, the longest serving non-monarchical head of state) Omar Bongo, recently deceased. Bongo’s rule had been marked by the development of the oil market in Gabon, which made Gabon equal to Portugal in terms of GDP (although the oil wealth was distributed extremely unequally, making the Gabonese population quite poor in practice). Bongo was also extremely close to France and held important sway over the French government, and could practically dismiss, indirectly, any French cabinet minister he did not approve of.

Bongo’s party, the Gabonese Democratic Party (PDG), finally nominated Bongo’s own son and cabinet minister Ali Bongo. André Mba Obame, another Bongo cabinet minister, ran as an Independent while the strongest opposition candidate was Pierre Mamboundou, who also ran in 1999 and 2005 as the candidate of the opposition Union of the Gabonese People (UPG).

All major candidates claimed victory, and most claimed they had received a convincing mandate from the people. However, as was to be expected, I guess, in a way, the election became a traditional fake election and Bongo was proclaimed winner with 41.73%, far ahead of Obame (25.88%) and Mamboundou (25.22%). Only Zacharie Myboto, a former PDG member-turned-opposition-guy (3.94%) won more than 1% of the vote. Large protests and violent riots broke out in Port-Gentil, one of Gabon’s major industrial centre and an opposition stronghold. The mood of the riots were very anti-French (claiming that France had rigged the election, but there was also a lot of anger directed at the French oil interests, Total in particular). All candidates except for Bongo have united in a front denouncing the results as a fraud.

In terms of other fake elections, Hamid Karzai seems to have won the fake election held in Afghanistan the same day.

Election Preview: Norway 2009

Norway goes to the polls to elect its 169-seat unicameral legislature, the Storting, last elected in September 2005. Norway is a very interesting country politically, and is known in the world for it’s high standard of living, it’s Nordic-style welfare state system, and also it’s relationship with the European Union. It also has a reputation for being a stronghold of socialist or social democratic politics, and this tradition is not a myth: the Labour Party has governed Norway for an important part of the recent post-war era, and probably has governed the country the longest amount of time since Norway gained independence from Sweden in 1905.

The Norwegian party system is a mix of stability, meaning old parties, but also newer parties that can often replace the older parties and even throw these parties into irrelevance. The Norwegian Labour Party (DNA – an interesting abbreviation since the D stands for det or ‘the’, something which is extremely rarely used in abbreviations) was founded in 1887 and gained parliamentary representation as a fringe Marxist party in 1903. DNA was a founding member of the Communist Internationale, which led to a short split in the party between the Marxist DNA and the social democratic or moderate wing. The party, however, did not long endure the democratic centralism and the interference of Moscow, and DNA left the Internationale in 1923 and the split ended soon afterwards. A fringe Communist Party (NKP) was founded by the hardliners in the party, but remained minor (despite a rather active role in the resistance during World War II) and shot themselves in the foot in the ’60’s by expelling a popular former leader (who was a resistance hero). The Labour Party became a major player in the 1930s by abandoning the revolutionary rhetoric for social democracy. Einar Gerhardsen was Prime Minister of Norway for nearly twenty-years after 1945, leading centre-left economic policies, a pro-Western foreign policy course, and laying the base of Norway’s advanced social programs. Today’s Labour Party, led by Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, is supportive of the market economy and is strongly socially liberal (gay marriage became legal in 2009) and secular (the government passed a law decreeing separation of church and state, the Church of Norway maintains an important role in Norwegian society), but also favours Norway’s adhesion to the EU.

As much as DNA represents stability, the title of first non-socialist party or, more commonly, premiere opposition, has shown more instability. Since 2005, this title is held by the Progress Party. The Progress Party was founded in 1973 by Anders Lange as a tax protest party, to protest Norway’s very high taxes but also government intervention and foreign aid. Surprisingly, perhaps, the party is ambivalent on the issue of the EU, and has copped-out by pledging to stand with the ‘people’s decision’. Since 1973, despite a few falls, the Progress Party has been experiencing a continued rise in electoral results and polling numbers. This continues to this day, especially with the anti-immigration, conservative rhetoric of its young leader, Siv Jensen. Do note that Norway has been experiencing important Muslim immigration in recent years. The party can be described as a conservative or right-wing libertarian party.

The Conservative Party (Høyre, meaning ‘Right’) is one of the oldest Norwegian parties (1884), along with the Liberal Party, and dominated early Norwegian politics and remained, for most of the post-war era, the main non-socialist political party. The Conservative Party supports neoliberal economics, favouring tax cuts and little government intervention. However, conservatives from the United States are often appalled to learn that the Conservatives are social liberals, supporting gay marriage and adoption. The Conservatives also support Norway’s adhesion to the EU.

The Socialist Left Party (SV) is also a more recent party, founded in 1975 by hard-left movements who campaigned against Norway’s adhesion to the EEC in a 1972 referendum, which failed. The founding members of SV included left-wing parties, most of which split off from DNA in opposition to Labour’s pro-NATO and more centrist policies and also the Communist Party (however, the NKP later separated from SV and both parties are independent). SV is very socially liberal and eco-socialist, but is also markedly anti-Israel and anti-American. The SV also opposes joining the EU.

The Christian Democrats (KrF), founded in 1933 but important only since 1945 or so, is a old-style Christian democratic party which places more emphasis than modern Christian democrats in Europe do on social issues such as abortion, euthanasia and gay marriage. They are, to my knowledge, the only officially pro-life party. On economic matters, however, they are more centrist and they also oppose joining the EU.

Typical to Scandinavia, Norway has a Centre Party, or an agrarian party. Compared to Sweden’s Centre Party, which has become more ‘urbanized’ (socially liberal) and environmentalist, Norway’s Centre Party has remained more “pure”, if you want. It is hard to associate an ideology such as liberalism, conservatism, or socialism with the Centre Party, since they’re primarily a rural centrist party. They have supported both right-wing and left-wing (as they do now) governments. The Centre opposes EU membership.

The Liberal Party (Venstre, meaning ‘Left) is a pitiful shadow of its former self. Once the major opponent to the ‘Right’, the Liberals have declined into near irrelevancy since the rise of Labour, but also the division over the European issue in 1972-1973. The Liberals, in the past, were the party of social and constitutional reform and democratic institutions and the base of the very early labour movement in Norwegian politics. Today, the Liberals are strongly socially liberal, secular, and quite environmentalist. They could be called, in that sense, a green liberal party. On economic issues, the Liberals favour a guaranteed minimum income and the introduction of a flat tax. For those interested, the Liberals also advocate legal file-sharing. On European issues, the Liberals are closely divided between opponents and supporters of European Union membership, although its current line remains opposition to the EU.

The largest extra-parliamentary parties are Red (Rødt), a revolutionary socialist/Marxist party; and the Coastal Party, a fishermen’s party based in the northern Norwegian town of Karlsøy. The Coastal Party had representation in parliament until 2001.

Norway’s legislature is elected using proportional representations in 19 multi-member constituencies, which are also Norway’s administrative counties. The city of Oslo is also an independent constituency, as well as a county. The results of the 2005 election are shown below:

Following the election, a majority coalition was formed between Labour, the Socialist Left and the Centre. Since 2001, the government was centre-right coalition including the Conservatives, Christian Democrats (whose leader was Prime Minister) and the Liberals and receiving conditional Progress support.

Labour 32.7% (+8.4%) winning 61 seats (+18)
Progress 22.1% (+7.4%) winning 38 seats (+12)
Conservative 14.1% (-7.1%) winning 23 seats (-15)
Socialist Left 8.8% (-3.7%) winning 15 seats (-8)
Christian Democratic 6.8% (-5.6%) winning 11 seats (-11)
Centre 6.5% (+0.9%) winning 11 seats (+1)
Liberal 5.9% (+2.0%) winning 10 seats (+8)
Red Electoral Alliance 1.2% winning 0 seats
Coastal Party 0.8% winning 0 seats (-1)

The above map shows the winning ‘coalition’ – the then-government and the RedRedGreen current coalition. The centre-right is strong in Nynorsk-speaking south-western Norway, which is very clerical, conservative and rural. In addition, it is also strong in Oslo – the capital city (following a trend also observed in Stockholm and Helsinki, capital cities often vote right-wing in those countries. Copenhagen is different and weird). For reference, the Conservatives were the biggest right-wing party in Oslo, while Progress was the strongest right-wing party in all counties won by the right. Labour dominates northern Norway, where offshore oil, fishing and I think mining are important. It is also strong in central inland Norway, which is dominated by the timber industry. Maps and statistics for all parties can be found, in Norwegian, here.

Norway faces a close election. While Jens Stoltenberg remains quite popular, the populist and anti-immigration message of the Progress Party’s leader, Siv Jensen, is proving to be quite popular. Here is what the latest poll, TNS Gallup/TV2 on September 4 indicate:

Labour 33.9% winning 64 seats (+3)
Progress 23.7% winning 41 seats (+3)
Conservative 15.2% winning 24 seats (+1)
Socialist Left 7.3% winning 12 seats (-3)
Christian Democratic 5.6% winning 9 seats (-2)
Centre 5.6% winning 9 seats (-2)
Liberal 5.4% winning 9 seats (-1)
Red 2.1%

This indicates 85 seats for Red-Red-Green against 83 for Progress and the centre-right. Others polls have also been showing majorities for the opposition. It is, however, possible (in my opinion) that the Liberals could join the centre-left coalition and perhaps not a Progress-led coalition government.

Saarland, Saxony, Thuringia 2009

As I had previously mentioned in an earlier post, three German states held state elections for their Landtags on August 30. Prior to the elections, the centre-right CDU, currently the senior governing party federally, was the senior governing party in all three and in two of them, Saarland and Thuringia, the CDU had an outright majority alone, meaning that it did not need to form a coalition with the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD) or the free-market liberal FDP, the CDU’s preferred partner.

Saarland

In Saarland, the CDU took a major thumping compared to it’s landslide in 2004, therefore returning to more usual election results for the CDU in Saarland. The Left did better than expected, far better than the party did in the June Euros and better than the party’s 18.5% showing in the 2005 federal election (and, of course, it’s 2.3% showing in the 2004 state elections). Do note that Saarland does not have single-member constituencies at the state level.

CDU 34.5% (-13.0%) winning 19 seats (-8)
SPD 24.5% (-6.3%) winning 13 seats (-5)
Left 21.5% (+19.2%) winning 11 seats (+11)
Greens 5.9% (+2.4) winning 3 seats (±0)
FDP 9.2% (+4.0%) winning 5 seats (+2)
NPD (Nazis) 1.5% (-2.5%) winning 0 seats (±0)

The two coalition options currently on the table is Red-Red-Green (meaning a coalition between the three left-wing parties, the SPD, Linke and Greenies) and Jamaica. Red-Red-Green, if it works out, would be the first such coalition in West Germany, though an earlier attempt at such a coalition in Hesse in 2008 resulted in several SPD members defecting and led to a snap early election and blablabla. The other option on the table is the Jamaica Coalition, an idea floated around in the 2005 federal election season, but dead since. It is a coalition between the CDU, FDP and Greens. In this case, the CDU would obviously retain the Minister-President position. Red-Red-Green remains the likeliest, but the Greens plan on taking their time to figure out where they stand.

Saxony

In Saxony, the CDU resisted better than in the two other states up that day. I would assume that part of the reason is that the incumbent government was a coalition between the CDU and SPD as opposed to a CDU-only coalition as in Saarland and Thuringia. While the Nazis lost votes compared to their spectacular 2004 showing, they, sadly, remain in Parliament.

CDU 40.2% (-0.9%) winning 58 seats (+3)
Left 20.6% (-3.0%) winning 29 seats (-2)
SPD 10.4% (+0.6%) winning 13 seats (+1)
FDP 10% (+4.1%) winning 14 seats (+7)
Greens 6.0% (+1.3%) winning 9 seats (+3)
NPD (Nazis) 5.6% (-3.6%) winning 8 seats (-4)

There is very little doubt that Minister-President Stanislaw Tillich (CDU) will form a coalition with the FDP, which is now possible.It’s not as if anybody wants to keep the Grand Coalition anyways.

Thuringia

In Thuringia, finally, the CDU took a major thumping after the party’s landslide win in 2004 (and prior to that).

CDU 31.2% (-11.8%) winning 30 seats (-15)
Left 27.4% (+1.3%) winning 27 seats (-1)
SPD 18.5% (+4.0%) winning 18 seats (+3)
FDP 7.6% (+4.0%) winning 7 seats (+7)
Greens 6.2% (+1.7%) winning 6 seats (+6)

There are two options on the table in Thuringia, each demanding some major choices from some party leaders. The preferred one is a Red-Red coalition in which the Social Democrats would get the spot of Minister-President, or atleast might get it for some time before giving it over to the Left. This scenario would likely require that the Left leader, Ramelow, not want the post of Minister-President. The other option would be a Grand Coalition, probably without current Minister-President and CDU leader Dieter Althaus. He is under mounting intra-party pressure to go, and if he does, that will likely mean a Grand Coalition, which, in my opinion, would be bad for the SPD here.

Local elections were also held in North Rhine-Westphalia. The CDU won 38.6%, 4.8% less than in 2004, while the SPD won 29.4%, 2.3% less than in 2004. The main winners were the Greenies (12%, +1.7%), the FDP (9.2%, +2.4%), and the Left (4.4%, +3.0%). The SPD did pick up Cologne and Essen, however. A map can be found here.

Japan 2009

The first post of the new electoral season after the electoral respite over the summer concerns Japan, which I covered a few days ago in a preview post. As previously stated, all 480 seats of the powerful Japanese lower house, the House of Representatives, was at stake. 300 of the members were elected in single-member constituencies by FPTP (the local seats) while 180 were elected in electoral ‘blocs’ (regions comprising of several prefectures, each bloc having a varying amount of seats) via proportional representation. Much stuff has been said about these quite historic elections by all people, and for once the international media paid attention to a foreign election (that means it’s important).

DPJ 42.4% (+11.4%) winning 308 seats (+198)
LDP 26.7% (-11.5%) winning 119 seats (-177)
New Komeito 11.5% (-1.8%) winning 21 seats (-10)
Communist Party 7.0% (-0.3%) winning 9 seats (±0)
SDP 4.3% (-1.2%) winning 7 seats (±0)
Your Party 4.3% winning 5 seats
People’s New Party 1.7% (±0.0%) winning 3 seats (-1)
Independent and Other Factions 2.1% winning 8 seats (-10)
DPJ-SDP-PNP Alliance 48.4% (+10.2%) winning 318 seats (+194)

Out of the 300 local seats at stake, the DPJ won 221, the LDP won 64, Independents won 7, the SDP and PNP won 3 each and Your Party won 2. The New Komeito, which held 8 local seats in 2005, lost all of them, and the party’s leader was even defeated in his Tokyo constituency (12th district).

In the bloc seats, the DPJ won 87, the LDP won 55, the New Komeito won 21 (all of its caucus), the Communists won 9 (all of their caucus), the SDP won 4 and Your Party won 3. A final seat was won by an Independent.

The DPJ swept eight prefectures: Iwate, Fukushima, Yamanashi, Niigata, Nagano, Aichi, Shiga and Nagasaki. Aichi is a important prefecture, and is the base, if my memory serves me correctly, of major Japanese industries. The city of Nagoya, a DPJ stronghold, is also in Aichi Prefecture. No clean sweep, however, in Hokkaido, despite the LDP losing all its incumbents there – however the LDP gained a seat, the 7th district. Not sure what went on there. An almost clean sweep in Saitama, Osaka, Tokyo and Kanagawa – all very important centres of Japan. The DPJ was really destroyed in Tokyo and Kanagawa in 2005. This goes with the pattern of huge DPJ gains in urban areas and lesser gains in rural areas, where the LDP machine isn’t crippled yet.

Unlike in the Tokyo prefecture elections, the LDP’s rout also affected it’s close ally, the New Komeito, which lost 1o seats. The Communists and Social Democrats held their ground quite well, though the LDP rebel parties, either the old ones from 2005 or the new ‘Your Party’ outfit, did poorly. In the end, I see those things dying out, and most of its voters returning to the LDP fold.

Yukio Hatoyama, a centrist and original founder of the DPJ, becomes Prime Minister with a large majority which is almost the fabled two-thirds majority. The DPJ was elected on a slogan of ‘People’s Lives First’, so it has a large mission ahead of it. It is committed to large-scale political and government reform, decentralization, budgetary reform, but also a certain skepticism for neoliberal economics, and centre-left social policies. A DPJ government is also likely to move Japan away from its close relationship with the US in favour of expanding ties with the UN and Asian nations for security matters, while still keeping the US as a close ally. Skeptics say the DPJ will govern like the LDP and that the DPJ is nothing but LDP2, but that remains to be seen, and I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt. The DPJ, however, must move fast, as it will be accountable to voters in 2010 (Upper House elections).

The future of the LDP is uncertain, and the next leadership fight will probably pit reformists against conservatives. It remains to be seen whether the LDP will stay as one, or if these two currents will split into new parties. It remains to be seen if a party like the LDP can be good in opposition and out of power. It also remains to be seen if a party like the LDP based around special interests and various lobbies can actually be a viable real political party – one that is sometimes in governments, sometimes in opposition. Interesting days ahead for Japan, certainly.