How quickly the political landscape can be rearranged

Liberals’ rise federally likely to signal waning support for party provincially

Some day historians will write the story of the Liberal Restoration of 2015. They will explain how a party, having suffered the worst defeat in its history in 2011, returned from political exile to form a majority government.

That was Oct. 19, 2015. For a larger sense of context, though, historians will flag two other critical dates this year and last. Politically, these tell us where we were and where we are going.

The first date is Nov. 30, 2015, when Newfoundland and Labrador elected a Liberal government. It was decisive (the Liberals won 57 per cent of the vote and 31 of 40 seats) and predictable (the Conservatives had been disintegrating since Kathy Dunderdale resigned as premier in 2014, having led the party to a third consecutive majority in 2011).

For the first time since 1943, there was no federal or provincial government in Canada called “Conservative.” Conservatism, as we might loosely describe it, was in eclipse.

In defeating the Conservatives, Newfoundland’s Liberals not only returned to power in a province they had not governed since 2003. They became the fourth Liberal government to take office in Atlantic Canada in the last decade, following the election of the Liberals in New Brunswick in 2014, Nova Scotia in 2013 and Prince Edward Island beginning in 2007.

It made Newfoundland the seventh province to go Liberal. It joined Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia.

On Nov. 30, then, there was something strange yet familiar happening on Canada’s political map: It was going red. Call it a new Liberal Ascendancy.

It was going red — until now. The second critical date, historically, is likely to be April 19, 2016. If the polls are correct, the Conservatives will take power on this day in Manitoba.

That says two things. It means another defeat for the New Democrats, after their failure to break through federally as well as in British Columbia (after a stunning triumph in Alberta in 2015). It also means that the Liberals did not take power in a province they thought they could win. It snaps their string of victories.

So, if there is a Liberal Ascendancy in Ottawa, don’t count on it lasting in the provinces. The historical pattern suggests that the political party rising at one level of government is inevitably challenged by the political party (or parties) at another level.

The Americans have their system of checks and balances, in which the three branches of government can check the power of each other. In our decentralized federation, that has been largely the role of the provinces. With a big, decisive change in government in Ottawa, we soon see, over the years, a change of government in the provinces.

That’s what happened after the Conservatives under Stephen Harper took power in Ottawa in 2006, having been out since 1993. Provinces that had been Conservative, or leaning that way, began to change their allegiance. It explains why by the end of 2015, no Conservative governments were left in the provinces.

A similar trend began in 1984 after Brian Mulroney’s Conservatives devastated John Turner’s Liberals (in power since 1968, save nine months). In 1985, David Peterson came to office in Ontario, ousting the Conservatives after 42 years, while in Quebec, Robert Bourassa’s Liberals ended nine years of the Parti Québécois.

The country began to rebalance, politically. New Brunswick and Newfoundland elected new Liberal governments in the late 1980s. They led the opposition to the Meech Lake Accord.

Yes, there is little alignment between federal and provincial cousins in party politics, and party labels can be misleading. But count on this: the longer the Liberals are in office in Ottawa, the more likely the Conservatives will return in the provinces, continuing most notably with the next election in Ontario.

For historians, then, here is a third date to watch: June 14, 2018.