For most campaign trackers, four (or perhaps five) political parties register on their radar screens as contestants in this week's federal election: those already in Ottawa plus the Greens, if the equipment is sensitive enough. But in fact, there are no less than 15 registered parties vying for votes on January 23.
These 11 other parties are the often forgotten minor parties, or the so-called fringe parties. They range from the newly-formed First Peoples National Party of Canada, running only five candidates, to the veteran Christian Heritage Party (CHP), which has appeared on ballots since 1984, and has a slate of 44 candidates. The Green party, which could rake up as much as 6 percent of the vote this year, is running candidates in all of Canada's 308 ridings.
The frustration expressed by these parties is that most people, including media, candidate debate organizers, and voters, give them little thought and so they languish at the fringes of our political system struggling to gain a voice.
Some would argue that this is fitting. After all, how much space can you claim if your platform consists of a single issue like the Marijuana Party? Nonetheless, if Canada is truly committed multi-party politics then all official parties should have a way to be heard.
Thus, regardless of what you personally think of the separatist Western Block Party or the single-candidate Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party (AAEV), we should at least consider their plight as a measure of the health of our electoral democracy. In other words, does our system help or hinder these parties in being able to communicate their views to the public?
Money Talks
Cash flow is arguably the single biggest determinant of electoral success and an effective communications strategy.
For example, the full-time job of most parliamentary party candidates is to woo voters. But for minor party candidates, campaigning is something squeezed-in during off-work hours. As for support staff, advertising budgets and money for flashy campaign materials, these are luxuries most small parties can't afford.
Election rules, however, focus more on how to curb runaway spending than on parties stalled at the starting gate. Party spending caps are roughly $18.2 million for this election. In the last contest, the Grits and Tories spent close to that and the NDP about $12 million. On top of the party allotment, individual candidates can spend on average about $80,000 themselves, which with a full slate of 308 candidates, translates into another $24.5 million in permitted spending.
In contrast, it can be a struggle for a small party to even come up with the $1,000 per candidate entry deposit (reimbursed if post-election return properly submitted), especially when Elections Canada has usually required a minimum slate of 50 candidates to register as a party. That's an anti of $50,000 just to join the race. Prior to 1993, the fee was a more manageable $200 per candidate.
On the up side for minor parties, the Supreme Court recently ruled that the 50-riding threshold was unconstitutional, thus it was legislated away as of June 2004. Now, a single candidate plus all the proper paper work can get your party name on the ballot and the right to issue tax receipts.
On the down side, there's a two-year sunset clause on the legislation due to opposition party concerns that it created "the potential for money to be given to organizations that masquerade as parties," in the words of Conservative MP Scott Reid. So, if our new government doesn't like the fact that only two of the minor parties running this round could have met the old 50 candidate threshold, the open door will soon be shut.
Regardless, at the end of the day, this small change is not overly helpful for individual candidates who still have to mount a campaign on a shoestring.
"My biggest obstacle is funding. I'll be running my campaign on about $10,000-$11,000. I put a fair bit of that in myself. I do get some donations, but… some people are reluctant to donate because they think I don't have a chance," says Irma DeVries, Christian Heritage Party candidate in the Ontario riding of Perth-Wellington.
Ignored by Media and Debate Organisers
Judging by the fact that most readers probably don't know what the Canada Action Party (CAP) stands for or which anti-merger Tories formed the Progressive Canadian Party in 2004, the fringe candidates are right: it's difficult to get the message out.
"It can't really be called a democracy because not everybody's voice is heard. If people only hear the big parties, how can they make an informed decision and how can it be called a true democracy?" says Kevin Pielak, running for the CHP in Surrey North, BC.
But if we think of media coverage as a ratio of party size, then the newest federal party, the AAEV, is doing pretty well according to Liz White, the party's leader and sole candidate. She reported that she's had a 15-minute interview on a popular Vancouver talk show that's aired nationally, and a different party member appeared on Global TV. White also took advantage of her allotted few minutes of free airtime on both CBC television and CBC radio.
Parties are entitled to access some free and paid broadcasting time, but since it's commiserate with their performance in the last election, most small parties get but a few minutes. The Green Party qualified for the most free airtime, 23.5 minutes.
With respect to paid time, while broadcasters have to make primetime spots available by law, it doesn't mean every party can afford it. A single, 30-second TV spot costs in the neighbourhood of $800.
All-candidates debates are probably the most traditional way of reaching voters, but room isn't always made for the non-mainstream parties.
"The biggest barrier is getting our word out through any form of media. And the debates--they call them all-candidates debates, but not all the candidates are represented," says Victoria Marijuana Party candidate Fred Mallach. "That's a real problem. Another barrier is not being taken seriously by traditional groups."
Trevor William Grover, a CAP candidate running in Calgary Centre, shares Mallach's frustration.
"Last time around there was a gentleman running for us who wasn't allowed to speak at a Chamber of Commerce forum. When he protested they invited him, but only to tell him in person that they didn't feel he had anything of value to add to the forum," says Grover. Things have been looking up this time, however, as he was invited to four of the six debates in his riding.
The real thorn for a party like the Greens that could be on the verge of electoral success is that they are shut out of the highly-watched televised national leaders' debates.
"We're running more than four times as many candidates as the Bloc Quebecois, we're at six percent in [the January 17] Globe and Mail. And when you consider that in 1993, with 6.9 percent of the votes the NDP won nine seats, we're at the level that other parties have won seats at," said Jim Harris, Green Party leader.
Harris said that he'd like to see debates regulated by an independent administrative body, rather than a group of unaccountable broadcast executives.
Even the other small parties find the Green's predicament unfair.
"It seems unfair that the Bloc Quebecois – a party that represents only one province – would be included in the English and French debates across Canada whereas the Green Party, which is running a candidate in every riding across Canada, wasn't allowed to participate," commented Mallach of the Marijuana Party.
The Call for Electoral Reform
It used to be taboo in Canadian federal circles to talk about wholesale electoral reform. Back in 1990, Chair of the Royal Commission on Electoral Reform and Party Financing, Peter Lortie, was explicitly instructed not to consider replacing our 'first-past-the-post' voting system. Now British Columbia, Quebec, Ontario, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island are all seriously considering some sort of proportional representation, and New Democrat chief Jack Layton has made talk of this topic mainstream in Ottawa.
Most of the minor parties strongly endorse the idea too.
"Every day I hear people saying "I'd vote for you if I thought you had a chance." I must have heard that a thousand times if not more. And so proportional representation would give the parties more credibility and more of a vote share if it was implemented," said CHP candidate DeVries. Moving to proportional representation is a central platform of the Greens, who currently stand to gain the most from it. The Green Party made huge gains in the last election winning 4.3 percent of the popular vote, up from 0.81 percent in the previous election.
As soon as the Greens surpassed that magic two percent mark, they qualified for annual federal funding at $1.75 per vote, or more than $1 million. That can go a long way. It already allowed them to increase the number of paid staff from one to about 20 regular employees plus extras for the campaign period.
Even without electoral reform the Greens may be on the road to Ottawa. The Reform Party only received 2.09 percent of the vote the election before it sent members to Parliament. Though the steps may be small and slow – the Greens have been contesting elections since 1984 – it is possible within our current system to break through the silence and be heard. But it takes a credible platform, a national slate of candidates, more than a bare bones budget, and possibly the correct cosmic alignment.