Tag Archives: toronto centre

Some quick thoughts on Toronto Centre by-election results

toronto, , , ,

Overall, Wells’s first rule — that “for any given situation, Canadian politics will tend toward the least exciting possible outcome” — held up. This is the result you might have predicted, and that most of us did predict. Folks in Toronto Centre are used to voting Liberal, and changing habits is hard.

Notwithstanding, each of the other three main parties had notable results, good and bad. At 36%, the NDP with Linda McQuaig achieved its highest percentage of the vote ever in this riding. The Greens, on the other hand, had their worst result since 1997 (2.95%) and the Conservatives, who used to hold the riding, hit an all-time low of 8.7%.

It’s impossible to say and risky to speculate specifically why the votes went that way, but I will speculate anyway, based almost entirely on my only-slightly-informed gut.

First, I think the Toronto Centre NDP has taken a positive national trend and backed it up with organizing on the ground. For the past five years, as the party has been increasingly seen as a viable, mainstream choice, the local organization has built momentum and capacity. For the last two elections the NDP haven’t just finished second in Toronto Centre, they have finished first in the south half of the riding. That wouldn’t matter, except that in 2015 the south half of the riding will be cleaved from the north to form a new “Toronto Centre” that will be the NDP’s to lose.

Expect a highly competitive NDP nomination race in the new Toronto Centre for 2015. Also expect McQuaig, if she runs again, to no longer run a campaign focused primarily on residency since, somewhat awkwardly, she lives in the wealthier, north half of the riding (to become part of “University-Rosedale”).

By all accounts Conservative Geoff Pollock was a good candidate who earned the support of prominent conservatives and the respect of his opponents. But this campaign was perfectly timed to coincide with the government’s most damaging scandal yet, and even Pollock has admitted that hurt him. The Pollock campaign has to take some of the blame for their disappointing results — perhaps their ground game wasn’t strong — but it isn’t hard to imagine the Conservative collapse here was mostly a message being sent to the national party. Either way, this does not look like a party poised to take University-Rosedale anytime soon.

The poor Green result, on the other hand, is likely more attributable to the local campaign than the national party. In by-elections just one year ago Chris Turner earned 25.65% in Calgary Centre and Donald Galloway got 34.30% in Victoria, and I don’t see any reason to believe they couldn’t do so again today. This time around in Toronto Centre, John Deverell was a disappointing candidate. During the campaign’s first televised debate he was widely mocked by pundits for answering every question on every topic with a non-sequitur about proportional representation (an issue important to me too, but not to this obsessive extreme). At the next televised debate, he claimed we don’t live in a democracy (like, at all) and referred to Stephen Harper multiple times as a literal “dictator.” In yet another debate at Jarvis Collegiate he lost votes when he said, Rob Ford-like, that people who can’t afford to live downtown should just move somewhere else, and that Toronto has too many people anyway.

Recent general and by-election results suggest that Green votes may therefore be disproportionately influenced by local candidates, compared to other parties where the rule of thumb is that the local candidate can only influence the party’s vote by 5% or so in either direction. That’s a challenge for Greens, since it’s hard to convince strong candidates to run in elections they’re likely to lose.

Finally, I’m a bit sad that this was the last Toronto Centre election with these boundaries. Many people believe that it doesn’t make sense for a region with such extreme disparity of wealth and housing type to be represented by one MP, and voters in all parts of the riding sometimes resented those in other parts for their perceived influence on election outcomes. But I really wanted it to work. I wanted Toronto Centre to be a microcosm for all of urban Canada, where we could prove that we have more in common than we realized, and where politicians fought to unite us rather than divide us. Now it will likely settle into being two comfortable seats for the NDP and the Liberals, with no electoral incentive for politicians to appeal to the city — or even just the downtown — as a whole.

After 2015, New Democrats in the new Toronto Centre will be relieved to finally have a voice in Ottawa, and Liberals in University-Rosedale won’t have to worry about encroaching socialism from the south (though maybe from the west, since they’ll be combined with some of the current Trinity-Spadina riding). Anyway, I don’t begrudge anyone having the representation they want, but I hope that when they celebrate what they’ve gained, they don’t also celebrate what they’ve lost.

New boundaries could turn a safe Liberal seat into one apiece for the NDP and Conservatives

liberal party, ,
Toronto Centre’s poll-by-poll results from the 41st General Election. The current riding leans right in the north, left in the south, and is surrounded by strong NDP ridings to the east and west.

The voters of Toronto Centre have always felt divided. The federal riding includes some of the richest (Rosedale, Yorkville ) and poorest (St. James Town, Regent Park) neighbourhoods in the country. At an all candidates meeting in St. James Town during a recent election one audience member accusingly asked if any candidates lived “south of Bloor,” in other words, if they could identify with and represent him. Likewise, some Rosedale residents have lamented that they can never get the representative they really want because they’re out-voted by their less affluent and more left-leaning neighbours to the south.

As a result, centrist Liberals have comfortably held the riding since 1993. (Before that it was held by the most Progressive of Conservatives, namely David MacDonald, who later joined the NDP, and David Crombie. Before them, more Liberals.) The north half of the riding has always been a Liberal-Conservative contest and the south half a Liberal-NDP one. As the only party with significant support throughout the riding, Liberals take it every time.

Now, that could change. The Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission has proposed new boundaries that would split the riding in two. If adopted after a period of consultation, the south half of the riding will absorb some of Trinity-Spadina to the west and become the new Toronto Centre. The north half of the riding is to acquire the north-east portion of the current St. Pauls to become the new riding of Mount Pleasant. And the Liberals are in serious danger of losing both.

The new Toronto Centre

In fact, I think they might as well kiss the new southern riding of Toronto Centre goodbye. In 2011, that half of the riding favoured the NDP candidate over the Liberal by 3%. Add in the votes from the section of Trinity-Spadina that’s to move over and the NDP margin increases to 5%, or 1,700 votes.

That may not sound like an orange nail in the red coffin, but keep in mind the NDP earned that much support in the current Toronto Centre without any reasonable prospect of winning. With these improved odds will come a more high-profile candidate, more motivated voters and volunteers, and increased money. Liberals, on the other hand, will have moved their money, volunteers and best candidate north to the new riding of Mount Pleasant.

Mount Pleasant

Here Liberal prospects aren’t quite as bleak, but I still think the party has reason for concern. Looking at votes from the north half of Toronto Centre and the new area from St. Pauls, Liberals had a 10% lead over the Conservatives in 2011. So far so good; that’s not as comfortable as the 18% lead they had over the Conservatives in all of Toronto Centre, but not anything to panic about either.

But let’s take a closer look at the nature of that Conservative support. Right-leaning voters in the current Toronto Centre and St. Pauls ridings are extremely demoralized. In the face of Liberal giants Bob Rae and Carolyn Bennett, they’ve known their votes won’t make a difference and many have opted to stay home. Organizationally, the Toronto Centre Conservatives have burned through six different candidates in the past four elections (two of them never even made it to the ballot) and have a very thin volunteer base. Further, their 2011 candidate was not ideally suited to appeal to the north half of the riding, in part because he lived and was almost exclusively active in the south half.

Given all that, the fact that Conservatives would still have only been 10% from victory against such a strong Liberal campaign is impressive. Next time around, like the NDP to the south, Conservative donors, voters and volunteers will be reenergized, and, with the prospect of a victory, the party will be able to recruit a higher-profile candidate capable of taking on a Liberal heavyweight.

Anything could still happen

Some caveats apply, of course. These proposed changes wouldn’t come into force for three years, which is an eternity. And in reality, what happens to party support at the federal level will be the most significant factor in how these ridings get decided. Still, with opportunities for the NDP to pick up another downtown Toronto seat and for the Conservatives to establish a beachhead in central Toronto, these new riding boundaries could really shake up the electoral map.

Data for this post came from Elections Canada’s poll-by-poll results of the 41st General Election held in 2011. Individual polls from current ridings were then assigned to new ones using the maps on Pundits’ Guide. You can download the Excel file I used for my calculations here. The map at the top of this post is from Rabble user Krago. Also note, I was the federal candidate in Toronto Centre for the Green party in the 39th General Election in 2006 and again in a by-election in March 2011 2008.

Glen Murray’s move

liberal party, toronto, , , , ,
Glen Murray and me at the November 25th Ben Wicks event, with Ralph Benmergui complaining about something in the background. Photo: Shaun Merritt
Glen Murray and me at the November 25th Ben Wicks event, with Ralph Benmergui looking annoyed in the background. Photo: Shaun Merritt

As you have likely heard, Glen Murray, who had been planning a run for mayor of Toronto, has announced that he will seek the provincial Liberal nomination in Toronto Centre to run in the inevitable by-election to replace George Smitherman, who is running for mayor. Glen’s new goal has earned him the support of Smitherman, as well as Liberal activist Todd Ross, who dropped out of the nomination race not only to symbolically support Glen, but also to staff him yesterday as he moved between media interviews. Anything can happen in politics, but taking these factors into account I don’t see any way that he won’t become the Liberal candidate.

A lot of people have asked me what I think of all this because just last week I hosted an event for Glen to help with his budding mayoral bid. In the event invitation I wrote that “I think it really matters that we elect the right mayor, and I’m excited about what Glen’s candidacy could bring.” Now, the questions I’m getting from a surprising number of sources generally fall into one of two categories: how I feel about this development, and do I have any inside information about it? So, here’s my reaction, with a warning: this post is even more self-indulgent than most.

The second question is easier to answer: no, I do not. I can tell you that he was 100% serious about running for mayor. He told the full group at Ben Wicks that he was very likely going to run, but in smaller groups told us that he was near certain. He has been talking to lots of people for at least a few months to lay the groundwork. More recently, however, he was obviously talking to provincial Liberals about this other possibility as well, and that’s the decision he ended up making.

How I know Glen Murray

Glen and I have known of each other for a few years, but have only become friends recently. I knew that he had voted for me (and displayed my sign in his window) in the March 2008 by-election, but we didn’t meet in person until this past May when we were on a panel together as part of the Architecture for Humanity lecture series at the Design Exchange here in Toronto. We got there an hour early and, along with Councillor Joe Mihevc, spent the extra time talking politics in the green room over sandwiches. After the panel Glen and I spoke briefly about each of our future political plans and agreed to meet for lunch or coffee to chat further.

We didn’t actually get around to meeting until October, when we sat in Lettieri at Church and Wellesley and talked for over an hour about municipal politics. It was then that I offered to help Glen with his pre-campaign (for lack of a better term) by hosting an event for him and inviting my contacts. At the event, he told people that he had voted for me (as he had also publicly announced during the panel in May) and that I had won his vote more quickly than any other politician.

He gave me a call yesterday shortly after making his official announcement. We had a brief conversation and agreed to talk more in the near future. He said he had intended to give me a head’s up before his decision became public but hadn’t been able to get in touch with me.

Glen’s decision

Here’s the interesting thing. I had almost no doubt about Glen’s ability to be a great mayor. In terms of ideas and policy he was overflowing with great stuff. From that perspective, Glen Murray may now have a claim to the “greatest mayor Toronto never had” title. However, I saw no evidence (and that doesn’t mean it didn’t exist, just that I didn’t see it) that he was assembling the organizational and fundraising capacity that he would have needed to win the mayoral race. In some ways, it seemed to me he was a platform without a campaign.

Enter George Smitherman, who at this early stage has been accused of being a campaign without a platform. In this way, the two men compliment each other: they each have what the other needs. Politically, therefore, I think this was a good move. The campaign for mayor was becoming pretty crowded and may have been a long-shot for Glen. On the other hand, his election to Queen’s Park now seems very likely.

Some people have commented that they don’t like the feeling that this is a “backroom deal.” I can empathize somewhat, but I don’t think there’s a lot to get worked up over (well, at least no more than usual). On Smitherman’s side, the mayoral race has barely begun. We will have many strong candidates to choose from and nothing resembling a fix is in. As for the Liberal nomination, sorry, but to a certain extent those things have always been determined in backrooms. That’s the way most parties work. (In fact, that’s one of the reasons I’m a Green. Heck, we take it so far in the other direction that we let people challenge our own leader’s nomination!) Then, in the by-election, voters will still have a choice between a large number of candidates and they can pass judgment on if Liberals deserve to hold on to the seat, or if it would be better to send a different message.

What imma do

I’ve let Glen know that I can’t follow him down this road in the same way I would have if he ran for mayor. I don’t think he was surprised, and told me he accepts and respects that decision. Unlike at the municipal level, provincial politics is definitively partisan, and I’m committed to helping elect Greens to Queen’s Park in 2011. That doesn’t mean we won’t continue to find common ground where we can cooperate and work together though, and don’t expect to hear me saying bad things about the guy either. If there’s one thing I’m sure I feel good about it’s that Glen Murray will continue to offer himself to public service. We need more politicians like him. (Don’t go putting that on a flyer though, ok buddy?)

As for the mayoral race, colour me undecided. As I’ve said, it’s early and I think there are some very strong candidates. Let’s see what each of them has to offer.