The next Canadian legislative assembly to entertain thoughts of a coalition may well not be our Parliament in Ottawa but the Alberta Legislature in Edmonton.
What's more, a future Alberta coalition might not look at all like what you would imagine.
Never mind the Democratic Renewal Project, that hopeful little club of Alberta dreamers who fantasize about getting the Liberals and the NDP together for a happy progressive future out here in the New West. It just ain't gonna happen.
But what about a coalition of the Conservatives and the Liberals? Or even the Conservatives and the NDP? This may seem extremely unlikely at this precise moment, but these or stranger things could happen soon in Alberta!
Look at the Alberta political situation this way: Normally, when there's an election coming in this province, it's safe to bet on a massive Conservative monolith after the election that's just like the massive Conservative monolith before the writ was dropped. But by presenting a well-funded and strategically well-thought-out far-right alternative to the Progressive Conservative Party of Premier Ed Stelmach, the Wildrose Alliance under former journalist Danielle Smith has had a significantly destabilizing impact on what used to seem like the eternal verities of Alberta politics.
The most recent credible polling in Alberta -- which is growing extremely stale -- suggests that if an election were held any time soon, Stelmach's Conservatives would emerge with a very narrow majority in what will be a newly redistributed 87-seat Alberta Legislature. It could even, as we suggested recently, look like this:
Conservatives: 44
Wildrose Alliance: 23
Liberals: 16
NDP: 4
Advertising
Now, that's about as tight as a majority can get. But even if the Alberta Legislature held a few more Tories, it would not be a happy place for Stelmach, who surely needs at least 55 seats after the next election to survive as premier.
By comparison, the current 83-seat Legislature looks like this:
Conservatives: 68
Liberals: 8
Wildrose Alliance: 3
New Democrats: 2
Independent: 2
Things would get really interesting, however, if the Wildrose Alliance could add only 3 or 4 per cent to it support between now and voting day -- a task that is within the realm of possibility if the winds blow the right way.
With such an increase, especially if Wildrose support rose sufficiently in the Capital Region to split the right-wing vote and hand seats to Liberals and New Democrats, the results could look like this:
Conservatives: 37
Wildrose Alliance: 28
Liberals: 18
NDP: 4
Suddenly, we're Israel! Or Italy anyway! Moreover, it is within the realm of possibility that, if the planets were all in alignment, the breakdown could even turn out to be more like this:
Wildrose Alliance: 37
Conservatives: 34
Liberals: 12
NDP: 4
In the latter case, the electoral arithmetic that would propel the Conservatives to try for a saving coalition with another party would be compelling.
Remember, the dirty little secret of Alberta politics in 2010 -- one that no partisan of any party will admit even having thought about -- is that a coalition, post election, is a possibility.
Google this, and you won't find much mainstream commentary. But do you think if the Wildrose Alliance had enough votes to form a minority government, and the Conservatives could block them by cobbling together a coalition with the Liberals, some Liberals, or even the New Democrats, that they wouldn’t try? Or vice-versa?
With the Wildrose Alliance as the alternative, do you think the Liberals or NDP wouldn't be tempted to play ball?
Trust your blogger. Their lips may be sealed, but in the secret corners of their hearts, the strategists of all Alberta political parties are trying on the idea of a coalition, holding it up to the light and committing the cell phone numbers of their colleagues in other parties to virtual memory.
Impossible, you say? Just remember where you heard it first.
This post also appears on David Climenhaga's blog, Alberta Diary.
You say a coalition between the Alberta Liberals and the NDP "ain't gonna happen."
If that's true, I guess that only shows who the genuine dreamers truly are -- clearly, the Alberta NDP executive who continually and stubbornly refuse to open their minds to cooperation that many of their own members (and members who've left the party) want. Meanwhile, David Swann and the Liberals have publicly called for flexible cooperation, so it's clear who the real naysayers are here.
On one hand, you're conjecturing how the wily Conservatives will act when faced with losing the next election. You suggest, no doubt correctly, that they will immediately jump to the conclusion that they MUST COALESCE to save their ass (not even waiting 8 years like the Conservatives/Reform). I agree; they probably will.
Why? Because they aren't stupid, that's why. 40 years of non-stop rule have proven that, in matters of electoral strategy, at least, they have a level of sophisticated smarts, political killer-instinct, and acuity that outstrips the purblind, obtuse, and single-minded centre-left dreamer strategists every single election.
I hope you appreciate the delicious irony of your comments here.
Outwest is correct to state that the Alberta NDP leadership and executive alike are opposed to any level of co-operation with the Liberals, who in my view they see as a bigger threat than the Conservatives. And the writer is correct to surmise that is the principal reason I believe co-operation between those parties is extremely unlikely. That said, Outwest overstates the Liberal commitment to the idea. Dr. Swann is a sincere and honest person, and no doubt his olive branch to the NDP was sincerely proffered. However, as has been reported, there is considerable opposition to the idea within Liberal ranks. Indeed the Libs' party president (who co-signed the come-hither ad with Dr. Swann) appears to have quit over the issue. As for this writer's allegation of purblindness and obtuseness on the part of centre-left strategists, well, one suspects their minuscule budgets and exclusion from debate by the mainstream media played a more significant role. In this regard, the writer's understanding of the concept of irony is ... er ... ironic.
David,
I totally agree with you that "minuscule budgets and exclusion from debate in the mainstream" are by far the most frustrating roadblocks we have as progressives, ergo, the necessity of finding some bold new way to circumvent them. The old "let's put some elbow grease in" attitude of these opposition parties has failed miserably. The solution -- at least from the perspective of many of us who have supported centre-left parties and who have looked at this problem upside down and sideways for years -- is to rely on strength in numbers ("United we stand, divided we fall," etc.) -- a strategy, by the way, that many of us believe will work during this ONE-TIME Wildrose/Conservative split election only, so time is SHORT. (And, by the way, it is my opinion is that if the Conservatives coalesce with anyone, it will be with their sister party, the Wildrose, and/or Social Credit, not anyone else.)
The days of isolationist party politics in most Western countries are coming to a close, as they well should. Alberta progressives are simply eons behind in their acceptance of this fact. If they believe in PR as a principle they should practice it between themselves. They will get there, but time grinds slowly, and at the present they are merely in the stage of vehement objection.
Worrying about whether considerable Liberals like the idea or not is a red herring. The fact is, cooperation was passed by the majority as a policy in the last convention, and one can only take it for face value and go forth boldly with the leader's idea. Pointing to a few naysayers (prevalent in every party, by the way, ie. the federal NDP on gun-control) does NOT mean that what was passed by a not-overwhelming majority should be cancelled. Does the NDP president run the show? One should hope not when the majority has spoken.
Give cooperation a chance. If it fails, then, fine, dump the idea down the road. But without trying it at least once, and instead adhering to the business as usual track, therefore ensuring yet another right-wing victory, is sheer folly, political suicide, and yes, bull-headed stubbornness. Like many disgruntled members, I hold the NDP, my own party, responsible for the weak state of progressive politics in Alberta.