Week 9: Political Parties Flashcards
(29 cards)
Political Parties:
organizations that seek to promote their shared goals and policies by nominating and electing candidates for public
Key party is in how they seek to influence government makes them distinct from interest groups
Role of parties
IGOSOA
Although we might disdain political parties, they serve some critical roles in democratic life
- Integrate citizens into the political system
- Generate policy
- Organize government
- Structure the vote
- Organize public opinion
- Aggregate societal interests
Party organization
Central committees tasked with getting candidates elected or electioneering
Central functions:
- Recruiting candidates
- Administering primary elections and running nominating conventions
- Fundraising
- Constructing policy platform
- Campaign assistance
Party in Office
All candidates at all levels of government who are elected to public office
Central functions:
- Set policy agenda
- Fill leadership positions and oversee the policy making process
- Executive policy agenda of the party
- Organize the day to day functions of the legislature
Party in the Electorate
All citizens who identify with, or have some attachment to the political party
Central function:
- Vote in leadership elections
- Volunteer for campaigns
- Donate to the party
The brokerage party model
For most of canada’s history scholars have argued that our major political parties follow a brokerage model
Parties strive to become the dominant party by incorporating and deemphasizing all important societal divisions
Stands in contrast to mass parties or niche parties common in other national contexts
Why no mass parties
No firm answer for why canadian parties developed so differently from other countries
- The importance of the national question
- Regional tensions, especially western alienation
- Weakness of organized labour
Characteristics of brokerage parties
- Under Institutionalized
- Loose connection to social cleavages in society
- Goal = national accommodation rather than the representation of interests
- Electoral pragmatism
- Leader dominant
- Unquestioned party allegiance seen as a virtue
- Antipathy to coalition politics
The franchise model
Most distinctive feature is the lack of development of central party bureaucracy
Principally defined by a struggle between the party in office and the party on the ground
Norm of mutual coexistence: party in office sets the policy and communications, while the party on the ground manages local affairs
A franchise style model
Central vs. local party
There has always been tension between the central and local parties
Particularly due to national encroachment on local party decision making
Flash points: local nominations, policy development
Iron law of oligarchy posits that party elite will come to dominate party decision making
First system (1867-1921)
The earliest party system was characterized by two loose coalitions (cadre parties) bound together by patronage
Conservatives were centralists and had support of religious and industrial interests
Liberals were decentralists, anti-clerical and pro-trade but distinctions were loose
Decline of the patronage system (1867-1917)
Civil service reform limited the ability of the parties to give out patronage
Conservatives and liberals became more cohesive and sharply distinguished by religion and language
Conservative party alienated french canadians
Splinter parties, like the progressives, shattered the two party system; now 2+1 system
The second party system (1921-1957)
The professionalization of the civil service led to the rise of the ottawa mandarins
Increasingly regionalized political conflict led to the rise of powerful ministers who had control over the extra-parliamentary party
Minimal policy differences between liberals and PC, who adopted post war Keynesian consensus
C.D Howe, who served under king and st.laurent
The third party system (1957-1993)
The liberal party governed with an increasingly centralist vision at odds with quebec nationalism and western alienation
Rising importance of party leaders and extra parliamentary parties, decline of cabinet
Liberals and PC remain brokerage parties
Liberals see decline towards the end of this period due to waning support in QC
The fourth party system (1993-2004)
Failure of meech lake and charlottetown accords broke the canadian party system
Rise of the reform party, which responded to western alienation, and the bloc
PC party shattered (down to 2 seats, 16%)
Split right-wing allowed liberals to win majorities by sweeping ontario in 1993, 1997 and 2000
Fifth party system? (2004-present)
Conservative party formed in 2004 after peter mckay won leadership of the PCs and Harper won leadership of the Alliance
Return to 2+1 party competition with a competitive conservative party
Blip in 2011 with temporary rise of the NDP and decline of the Bloc (short lived)
Wither brokerage?
Some indications that the major political parties in canada have polarized
Conservatives have moved right, while the liberals have moved left
Major parties no longer focused on national unity and accommodation
Is Canada’s unique brokerage model fading away?
Party Organization
Useful to understand the inner workers of political parties
- Leadership elections
- Through canadian history there have been three principal models of electing leaders
a. Party caucus
b. Convention
c. One member one vote (OMOV) - Candidate nominations
- Party membership
- Policy development
Caucus model
Elected MPs choose their party leader
Elected MPs have the ability to turf their leaders this is still the case in australia and U.K
Conservative party used this model until 1927, and the liberals until 1919
Benefits: empowers elected MPs relative to party leaders
Costs: not transparent, disempowers party activists and members
Convention model
Riding associations hold delegate selection meetings, and these elected delegates vote on a leader at a designated convention
Conservative party and PCs used this model between 1927 and 2004; liberals until 2013; and NDP until 2003
Benefits: empowers motivated party activists, and ensure selection is broadly acceptable
Costs: weakens link between leaders and their MPs; delegate selection process is very inside baseball
One member one vote model (OMOV)
All paid party members can vote for a party leader, usually via ranked ballot
Points procedure limits influence of areas with large party memberships
Benefits: most democratic, allows parties to build up lists of supporters and donors
Costs: breaks link between MPs and their leader (centralization); weakens party activists as well
Impact of leadership rules
Scholars have argued that OMOV elections strengthen party leaders at the expense of MPs
Leaders owe their position, not to MPs but to anonymous party members
Supporters argue that anything other than OMOV is inherently anti-democratic
Large leadership campaigns may provide a better test for the general election
Local nominations
Typically carried out with OMOV, but the implementation of democratic nominations is “very inconsistent”
Party leaders will often shield elected MPs from the need for re-nomination races
They may also parachute in and nominate star candidates into certain ridings
Central party often takes a subtler approach to manipulate nomination process
- Set conditions for opening nominations
- Set closing date for nominations
- Candidate vetting
Local party associations aren’t entirely powerless
- Set voting location
- Set nomination date
- The media
The tug of war over local nominations is a very frequent source of controversy
Party membership
Require very little for eligibility in OMOV elections
Open to all party members, 13-14 years and older
Membership fee: $10-25
Nomination contests treated as mobilization exercises
Membership valid if meets some cut off deadline ranging from 2-30 days
Loose eligibility rules relatively free from manipulation from the central or local parties
One major consequence: flood of temporary new members in advance of nomination periods (around 45% join specifically to help a candidate)
Dilutes voice of party activists
Risk of takeover of nominations by outsider candidates
