Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Canadian provincial premiers : a statistical analysis of 185 careers James, Peter Edward 1987

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1987_A8 J36.pdf [ 7.02MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0097098.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0097098-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0097098-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0097098-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0097098-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0097098-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0097098-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0097098-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0097098.ris

Full Text

CANADIAN PROVINCIAL PREMIERS: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF 185 CAREERS BY PETER EDWARD JAMES B.A., Royal Military College of Canada, 1986 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Political Science) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October 1987 ® Peter Edward James, 1987 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of P o l i t i c a l Science The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 14 October 1987 i i ABSTRACT The questions: "who becomes a provincial premier?", "what is a premier's career pattern?", and "does selection process make a difference in the type of person that becomes premier?" are answered in this study. A series of 22 political and socio-economic variables was collected for each of the 185 men who have been provincial premiers between July 1, 1867 and July 1, 1987. After the data set was created, analysis by province and party was then performed. The response to "who becomes a provincial premier" shows that premiers are not typical of the electorate that they represent. Provincial premiers, on average, are Protestant lawyers who come to office at age 48.6. These men usually have a post-secondary education, and are born in the province of which they become premier. Three distinct career patterns are found when one answers the question "what is a premier's career pattern?". The first, and most common path, is the replacement of one premier by another while the party is in government. The second path, and the least frequented, is the "comeback" route. This occurs when an individual is in government, goes into the opposition, becomes party leader, and comes back to government as premier. The third path to the premiership is via the post of leader of the opposition. An individual following this path is leader of the opposition party and wins an election to become premier. Each of the 185 premiers followed one of these distinct paths to office. Parliamentary and cabinet experience, years as party leader before becoming premier, duration as premier, and reason for leaving the premiership each vary, when analyzed by path to power. The response to the third question is that the selection process makes a difference in the type of person that becomes premier. Convention chosen i i i premiers, in contrast to caucus chosen premiers, are younger, have more diverse occupational backgrounds, and have less parliamentary and cabinet experience. Convention chosen leaders have a longer duration in office. Comparison of results with parallel studies of Australian state premiers, national party leaders, federal cabinet ministers, and provincial cabinet members, shows that Canadian provincial premiers are unique in their background and career progression. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ii LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF DIAGRAMS xi ABBREVIATIONS xii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT xiv CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW I Endnotes 5 CHAPTER II WHO BECOMES A PREMIER? 6 Age on Becoming Premier 10 Religion of the Premiers 11 Occupational Background of the Premiers 13 Educational Background of Premiers 16 Place of Birth of Premiers 18 Conclusion 21 Endnotes 22 / TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) CHAPTER III WHAT IS A PREMIER'S CAREER PATTERN? 26 Path-One to the Premiership 27 Path-Two to the Premiership 28 Path-Three to the Premiership 28 Career Variables of the Premiers 31 Age When First Elected to Parliament 31 Parliamentary and Cabinet Experience 34 Years as Leader Before Becoming Premier 39 Duration of Premierships 40 Departure of Premiers 42 Conclusions 44 Overall 46 Endnotes 48 CHAPTER IV DOES SELECTION PROCESS MAKE A DIFFERENCE? 50 A Historical Account of Provincial Leadership Selection 52 Background Variables Analyzed by Selection Process 57 Age on Becoming Party Leader 57 Previous Occupation of Premiers 58 Level of Education of Premiers 59 Place of Birth of Premiers 60 Career Variables Analyzed by Selection Process 62 Parliamentary and Cabinet Experience 62 Duration of Premierships 64 Departure of Premiers 65 Conclusion 66 Endnotes 68 vi TABLE OP CONTENTS (Continued) CHAPTER V GENERAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 70 Who Becomes a Premier? 70 What is a Premier's Career Pattern? 73 Does Selection Process Make a Difference? 76 Conclusion 78 Endnotes 79 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 81 APPENDICES A List of Premiers 89 B List of Variables 100 C Data Set 106 v i i LIST OF TABLES Table Name Page 2-1 Political Affiliation of the 190 Prcmicrships 7 Since July 1,1867 2-2 Number and Average Length of Provincial 8 Administrations Since July 1, 1867 2-3 Mean Age on Becoming Premier Analyzed 10 by Political Party 2-4 Mean Age on Becoming Premier Analyzed 11 by Region 2-5 Religion of Premiers Analyzed by Political Party 12 2-6 Religion of Premiers Analyzed by Province 13 2-7 Previous Occupation Analyzed by Political Party 14 2-8 Previous Occupation Analyzed by Province 15 2-9 Educational Background Analyzed by Political Party 17 2-10 Educational Background Analyzed by Province 18 2-11 Place of Birth Analyzed by Political Party 19 2-12 Place of Birth Analyzed by Province 20 3-1 3-2 Paths to Office Analyzed by Political Party Paths to Office Analyzed by Region 30 31 vi i i Tabie Name Page 3-3 Age of Premiers (Years) When First Elected 32 Analyzed by Path 3-4 Age of Premiers (Years) When First Elected 33 Analyzed by Political Party 3-5 Age of Premiers When First Elected Analyzed 34 by Region 3-6 Years of Parliamentary Experience Analyzed 35 by Path 3-7 Years of Cabinet Experience Analyzed by Path 36 3-8 Years of Parliamentary Experience Analyzed by 36 Political Party 3-9 Years of Cabinet Experience Analyzed by 37 Political Party 3-10 Years of Parliamentary Experience Analyzed 37 by Region 3-11 Years of Cabinet Experience Analyzed by Region 38 3-12 Average Size of Legislatures Analyzed by Region 38 3-13 Years as Leader Before Becoming Premier 39 Analyzed by Path 3-14 Duration of Premierships Analyzed by Path 40 3-15 Duration of Premierships Analyzed by Political 41 Party 3-16 Duration of Premierships Analyzed by Region 41 3-17 Reason for Premiership Termination Analyzed 42 by Path Name Termination of Party Leadership Analyzed by Political Party Termination of Party Leadership Analyzed by Region Comparison of Career Variables Analyzed by Path, Party and Region The Selection Process of Premiers Analyzed by Province Provincial Premiers Analyzed by Party and Selection Process Number of Delegates at Leadership Conventions Analyzed by Region Number of Candidates on First Ballot at Leadership Conventions Analyzed by Region and Political Party Mean Age of National Liberal and Conservative Leaders Analyzed by Selection Process Mean Age of Provincial Premiers on Becoming Party Leader Analyzed by Selection Process Previous Occupation of Premiers Analyzed by Selection Process Level of Education of Premiers Analyzed by Selection Process Place of Birth of Premiers Analyzed by Selection Process Canadian Population Statistics - Foreign Born and Internal Migration Name Mean Parliamentary Experience of National Leaders at the Time of Their Selection (Years) Mean Parliamentary Experience of Provincial Leaders at the Time of Their Selection (Years) Duration of Premierships Analyzed by Selection Process Reason for Leaving Analyzed by Selection Process Comparison of Mean Age on Becoming Canadian Premier, National Party Leader, Federal Cabinet Minister,and Australian State Premier Percentage of Lasers as Canadian Premiers, National Party Leaders,and Federal Cabinet Ministers Comparison of Level of Education of Canadian Premiers, Federal Cabinet Ministers,and Provincial Cabinet Ministers Comparison of Careers of Canadian Provincial Premiers and Australian State Premiers Comparison of Reason for Leaving Party Leadership and Exit From Federal Cabinet (As % of Total) Comparison of Provincial and National Leadership Conventions LIST OP DIAGRAMS Table Name Page 3-1 Path-One to the Premiership 27 3-2 Path-Two to the Premiership 28 3-3 Path-Three to the Premiership 29 3-4 Career Path-One 44 3-5 Career Path-Two 45 3-6 Career Path-Three 45 4-1 Time Analysis of Selection Process 52 ABBREVIATIONS The following abbreviations are used in this thesis: admin. Administrator B.C. British Columbia bus. Business sector C.C.F. Cooperative Commonwealth Federation Cons. Conservative Party Exp. Experience jour. Journalist lab. /far. Labourer/Farmer Lib. Liberal Party Max. Maximum Mil. Military Min. Minimum Mn. Minister N Number of cases in set N.B. New Brunswick N.D.P. New Democratic Party Nfld. Newfoundland Ont. Ontario P.E.I. Prince Edward Island xi i i Prof. Professional Prot, Protestant P.O. Parti Quebecois Que. Quebec R.C. Roman Catholic S.D. Standard Deviation U.C.C. United Church of Canada U.F.A. United Farmers of Alberta U.F.M. United Farmers of Manitoba U.F.O. United Farmers of Ontario U.N. Union Nationale Unk. Unknown Yrs Years x i v ACKNOWLEDGEMENT While writing this thesis,I received generous help and assistance from many people. I would like to thank my supervisor, R.K. Carty, for his advice and direction throughout the research and writing stages of the thesis. I owe special thanks to my parents for their constant encouragement, support,and help in finding dangling participles. I am grateful to my brother, Andrew, for interpreting my handwriting and typing the rough draft. Finally, I wish to thank Gail Bussey and Barb Clerihue for without their assistance in typing and proofreading, this thesis never would have been completed. 1 CHAPTER I  INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW The premier of a Canadian province holds the most important single office in a provincial government. The importance of the office is reflected in a premier's mandate to "carry out the task of forming and leading a government".1 A provincial premier, with the support of a majority in the legislature, has the responsibility of heading the executive government as the principal "adviser" to the Lieutenant-Governor. A premier has the right to choose and dismiss his ministers. This puts him in a special position; as F.W.G. Benemy observes: No man can wield this power and be on terms of equality with the people whom he has invited to work with him and whom he can dismiss at his pleasure. They are bound to be in a position of inferiority to him.2 In addition to dominating cabinet, a premier has vast powers of patronage to appoint members to his private staff, the bureaucracy, regulatory agencies, and the judiciary. His power to call elections gives him a preeminent position in the legislature. Very little published work has examined who becomes a provincial premier and how it is done. This thesis will examine all the individuals who have served as Canadian premiers in the twelve decades from 1867 to 1987. Since confederation, 185 men have been premiers, yet we know surprisingly little about them as a group (see Appendix A). Each chapter draws upon existing literature and examines a specific aspect of provincial premiers. The second chapter of the thesis starts from the existing literature and asks the basic question "who becomes a premier"? Replicating the approach used by Courtney in his study of national party leader selection^ Matheson's study of 2 federal cabinet ministers,4 and Dunlop's study of provincial cabinet ministers,5 the chapter portrays the premiers in terms of a series of basic political and socio-economic variables. A statistical profile of a provincial premier will be developed from the data on age, religious affiliation, place of birth and previous occupation. Campbell Sharmans, Owen Hughes' and Kevin Tuffins work on Australian state premiers,6 and R.M. Punnett's on Canadian prime ministers,7 form the foundations of Chapter III. Analogous to Sharman et al.'s study of Australian state premiers, Chapter III explores how an individual acquires the post of premier. The chapter asks the questions: how does one become a premier, when is one first elected, how long does one serve in the back benches and cabinet, how long does one serve as premier, and why does one leave office? A career pattern of the average premier will be developed in responding to these questions. Chapter IV is an analysis of the selection process of premiers. Drawing from Courtney's work, the chapter asks "does selection process make a difference in the individual chosen as leader?". The chapter provides a brief historical account of the development of provincial leadership conventions and then examines the background characteristics discussed in Chapter II, and career variables of Chapter III, by selection process. This analysis will argue the hypothesis that the selection process makes a difference in the type of person chosen to be premier. To answer the questions "who becomes a premier?", "what is a premier's career pattern?" and "does selection process make a difference in the individual chosen as leader?" a series of 22 descriptive variables were collected for each premier (see Appendix B). To facilitate comparison, the same variables of Sharman, Courtney and Dunlop, have been used to describe each individual's background, career progression and selection process. The majority of the empirical data came from Canadian Parliamentary Guides. Information that was 3 not available though this source was obtained from provincial histories or newspapers of the day. The resulting data set has limitations. As explained in Chapter II and Appendix B, political parties with cross-provincial designations have been grouped together. The data set does not take into consideration political culture, but concentrates on a few characteristics to produce an overall picture. Though the variables used for analysis replicate similar studies, they are limiting. Analysis of marital status, social class, income, and many other factors has not been performed. Recognizing that some limitations are built into the data set, the approach used to create it has many strengths. One advantage of this approach is that it examines the position of premier as a structural office. Inasmuch, the approach provides an analysis of the individual who fulfills these structural requirements. Unique to other examinations of political elites, this thesis does not look at specifics or provide detailed description, but rather provides an overall picture of broad patterns. In analyzing the 185 men who have been premiers, some qualifying procedures were followed. Only 185 different men have been premier, yet there have been 190 premierships. If a premier left the leadership of his party, (i.e. was not premier, leader of the opposition or leader of the party in any capacity) returned to that position and was again premier, he has been treated as having two distinct premierships; one premiership when he was premier the first time, and the other when he was premier the second time. This has happened five times in Canadian political history: (1) G.E. King of New Brunswick in 1870 and 1872, (2) A.L. Macdonald of Nova Scotia in 1933 and 1945, and in Quebec (3) R. Bourassa in 1970 and 1983, (4) C.E.B. de Boucherville in 1874 and 1891, and (5) L.O. Taillon in 1887 and 1892. 4 Similarly, there have been 197 provincial administrations, though there have been only 185 premiers and 190 premierships. The number of administrations is equal to the number of premierships (190) plus the seven individuals who have been premier twice without leaving the party leadership. These seven individuals were premiers, who lost office, served as leader of the opposition, and were then returned to the premiership without leaving the party leadership. These seven individuals were: (1) J.G. Gardiner of Saskatchewan in 1926 and 1934, (2) M. Duplessis of Quebec in 1936 and 1944, (3) JD. Stewart of Prince Edward Island in 1923 and 1931, (4) M.A. Girard of Manitoba in 1871 and 1874, (5) G.A. Walkem of British Columbia in 1874 and 1878, (6) S.A. Godbout of Quebec in 1936 and 1939 and (7) W.M. Lea of Prince Edward Island in 1930 and 1935. Throughout the thesis, the terms premier, premiership and administration have been used as defined above. After the data set was completed, frequency tables and cross tabulations, based upon hypotheses from existing literature were produced. The next chapter of this thesis shows the results of the analysis which were produced to answer the question "who becomes a premier"? Chapter III answers the question "what is a premier's career pattern"? Chapter IV analyzes the selection process of premiers and examines whether this process appears to influence the type of individuals chosen. The final chapter provides some comparisons of results, a summary of key findings, and puts forward the conclusions of this thesis. 5 ENDNOTES 1. R.M. Punnett, The Prime Minister in Canadian Government and Politics (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1977). p.7. 2. F.W.G. Benemy, The Elected Monarch (Toronto: George G. Harrap and Co. Ltd., 1965). p. 62. 3. J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1973). 4. W.A. Matheson, The Prime Minister and the Cabinet (Toronto: Methuen Publications, 1976). 5. David R. Dunlop, "Cabinets: Social Composition," in The Provincial Political  Systems Comparative Essay, ed. Donald C. Rowat (Ottawa: Carleton University, 1974), pp. 159-92. 6. Campbell Sharman, Owen Hughes and Kevin Tuffin, "State Premiers," in Australian State Politics, ed. Brian Galligan (Melbourne: Longmen Chethine, 1986), pp. 229-43. 7. R.M. Punnett, The Prime Minister in Canadian Government and Politics (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1977). 6 CHAPTER II  WHO BECOMES A PREMIER? This chapter will provide a statistical analysis of the 185 men1 who, between July 1. 1867 and July 1, 1987, have served in the capacity of premier of a Canadian province. Basic political and socio-economic data have been collected for each individual. Questions asked include what political party did the premier lead, of what province was he premier, and at what age did he become premier? In addition to these general questions, the background variables of religion, place of birth, education, and previous occupation have been collected and analyzed in relation to the variables of province or region and political party. This analysis provides insight into regional and provincial traits of premiers and partisan differences between premiers. An analysis of these variables by time period is presented in Chapter IV. There have been 197 different administrations2 and eleven political parties that have governed at the provincial level.3 Throughout the analysis, the simplifying assumption that political parties with cross-provincial designations are the same, has been used. Geographical analysis was performed by province or region, depending upon the variable in question. Religion is analyzed by province, given the unique religious distributions of the provinces, but the mean age of premiers is analyzed by region as a result of similar regional demographics. The independent variables of political party and province will be presented before analyzing specific characteristics (Table 2-1). 7 TABLE 2-1 Political Affiliation of the 190 Provincial Premierships Since July 1. 1867 Party Liberal Conservative C.C.F./N.D.P. Social Credit Union Nationale U.F.A. Parti Quebecois Liberal-Progressives U.F.M. U.F.O. Confederationist None TOTAL Premierships X (N) 40.5 (77) 35.8 (68) 3.2 (6) 3.2(6) 2.6(5) 1.6 (3) 1.1 (2) 1.1.(2) .5(1) .5(1) .5(1) 9.5(18) 100.0 (190) Province All, except Manitoba All British Columbia, Manitoba Saskatchewan British Columbia, Alberta P.O. Alberta P.O. Manitoba Manitoba Ontario New Brunswick British Columbia, Manitoba Only the Conservative and Liberals have enjoyed continued existence since confederation, so it is not surprising that these two parties have produced three-quarters of the premierships. There have been more Liberal premiers (77 or 40.5 percent) than premiers from any other party. The Conservatives have formed provincial administrations 68 times (35.8 percent), and are the only party that can claim to have governed in every Canadian province.4 The mean duration of a provincial administration has been 52 years (Table 2-2). The longest continuous administration was Liberal G. Murray's 27 year rule in Nova Scotia from 1896 through 1923. The shortest administration was L.O. Taillon's two day Conservative administration in Quebec during January of 1887. 8 TABLE 2-2 Number and Average Length of Provincial Administrations Since julv 1. 1867 Year of First Mean years/ Administration Number Administration British Columbia 1871 28 4.1 Alberta 1905 11 7.5 Saskatchewan 1905 12 7.5 Manitoba 1870 19 6.2 Ontario 1867 20 6.0 Quebec 1867 29 4.1 Newfoundland 1867 3 12.7 New Brunswick 1867 26 4.6 Prince Edward Island 1873 29 3.9 Nova Scotia 1867 20 6.0 All - 19.7 5.2 Prince Edward Island has had the shortest administrations, averaging only 3.9 years. In contrast, Newfoundland administrations have averaged 12.7 years. Given the small number of Newfoundland administrations (3), and the skewing caused by Joey Smallwood's 23 year rule, this statistic may be misleading. Alberta and Saskatchewan have had statistically significantly longer administrations, each averaging 7.5 years. These provinces share a common political culture which, to some extent, may be responsible for the longevity of political administrations. The political culture is a reflection of an electorate dominated by producers of primary goods. Inasmuch, life in these provinces revolves around the well-being of the farming community. C.B. MacPherson argues that having "developed as an area for the profitable investment of (Eastern) capital, as a market for manufactured goods, and as a source of merchandising and carrying profits", the prairies suffered from decisions 9 made in Central Canada.5 In many cases these decisions, made by traditional, centrally oriented Canadian political parties, did not benefit the prairie electorate. As a result, after World War I, the prairie electorate rebelled against the traditional Central Canadian parties and third parties such as the United Farmers, Progressives, C.C.F./N.D.P and Social Credit evolved to articulate regionally based interests. The prairie farmers were well represented by these third parties. The region no longer suffered under administrations with political ties to the parties of Central Canada. Once satisfied with these new political elites, the essentially "conservative"6 prairie electorate settled for long provincial administrations. In contrast, Prince Edward Island's electorate often changed its political leadership. With a population of 127.0007 and a 32 seat legislature8, Prince Edward Island has "one of the largest per capita governments in the world".9 This situation has caused the politicization of almost every facet of island life. This has created a political culture characterized by high political involvement but low political trust. As Rand Dyck explains: Islanders see politics as a source of entertainment or personal benefits, but do not have much expectation of overall positive results.10 Given such a volatile political culture, it is not surprising that the province has averaged only 3.9 years per administration. What kind of men get to be premiers of the provinces? Statistical data of provincial populations and other studies of political elites by John Porter,11 R.M. Punnett,12 W.A. Matheson.B John Courtney14 and D.R. Dunlop^ illustrate that ruling political elites are not always typical of the average Canadian. Certain background variables such as the place of birth, religion, and age of the premiers were expected to reflect provincial demographic norms. On the other hand, the 10 variables of education level and occupation prior to entering politics were not expected to be typical of the electorate. Each of the background variables will be analyzed by political party and province or region (whichever is most applicable) to determine whether or not significant differences emerge. AGE ON BECOMING PREMIER It is hypothesized that a premier is older than the average voting Canadian. To reach the "apex of power" in a province requires experience and training (Table 2-3). TABLE 2-3 Mean Age on Becoming Premier Analyzed by Political Party Mean S.D. Min. Max. (Ni Conservative 49.1 8.6 31 72 (68) Liberal 49.1 9.4 31 73 (77) Other16 47.3 6.9 34 61 (27) None17 46.8 8.7 33 65 (17) All 48.6 8.7 31 73 (189) The hypothesis is validated by the statistics. As Table 2-3 illustrates, the mean age of a provincial premier entering office is 48.6 years (N=189).18 This is in contrast to the mean age of the average voting Canadian which is under 35.19 The youngest premiers elected were L.H. Davies of Prince Edward Island in 1876, and G.E. King of New Brunswick in 1870, both 31 years of age. The oldest man to enter the office was J.H. Bell of Prince Edward Island who was 73 years old when he became premier in 1919. Analysis by political party shows that there has been little variation in the mean age of premiers when grouped by party (Table 2-3). No party has routinely opted for younger or older leaders. / 11 Quebec and Ontario, Canada's most populous provinces, have had, on the mean, older premiers (Table 2-4). In this region the electorate is older. The older age of premiers may be a reflection of this demographic statistic.20 TABLE 2-4 Mean Age on Becoming Premier Analyzed by Region Mean S.D. Min. Max. M Western 47.2 7.8 33 65 (66) Central 50.7 8.0 37 69 (47) Atlantic 48.6 9.8 31 73 (76) All 48.6 8.7 31 73 - (189) RELIGION OF THE PREMIERS There are sharp regional differences in the religious composition of the country and consequently, religion has always been a critical issue in Canadian provincial politics. Traditionally, Roman Catholics support the Liberal Party and Protestants support the Conservatives.2! John Courtney in The Selection of National  Party Leaders in Canada has shown that this electoral support is reflected in the religion of national party leaders. As of 1972, "only two of the thirteen Conservative leaders have been Roman Catholics, whereas three of the Liberals' seven leaders have been Roman Catholics"22 It is hypothesized that this pattern is replicated among provincial premiers. 12 TABLE 2-5 Religion of the Premiers Analyzed by Political Party Roman Catholic Protestant Other Unknown % (N) Liberal 24.7(19) 58.4 (45) 0(0) 16.9(13) 40.5 (77) Conservative 20.6 (14) 66.2 (45) 0(0) 6.9(9) 35.8 (68) Other 33.3(9). 55.6(15) 4.0(1) 10.0(2) 14.2 (27) None 27.8 (5) 44.4 (8) 0(0) 27.8(5) 9.5(18) TOTAL 24.7 (47) 59.5(113) 1.0(1) 15.3(29) 100.(190 As Table 2-5 illustrates, 70.2 percent of premiers have been non-Catholic. The plurality of premiers was from the United Church of Canada (37.3 percent). The traditional hypothesis that Liberals are disproportionally Roman Catholic is not supported. With the exclusion of the Parti Quebecois and Union Nationale, both Quebec based parties with Roman Catholic supporters and leaders, the religious affiliation of premiers, regardless of political party, has been diverse. It is expected that provincial differences in religious distributions will be reflected in the premierships.23 In his analysis of the social composition of cabinets, David Dunlop shows that the Catholic majorities of New Brunswick and Quebec have been well represented in provincial cabinets.24 Quebec is heavily Roman Catholic (88.2 percent in 1982), as is New Brunswick (53.9 percent in 1981). It is anticipated that the Roman Catholic majorities of these populations will be reflected in the religion of their respective premiers (Table 2-6). 13 TABLE 2-6 Religion of Premiers Analyzed by Province2^ Roman Catholic Protestant Other Unknown % (N) British Columbia 22.2(6) 55.6(15) 3.7(1) 18.5(5) 14.2(27) Alberta 0 100.0(11) 0(0) 0(0) 5.8(11) Saskatchewan 9.1(1) 90.9(10) 0(0) 0(0) 5.8(11) Manitoba 16.7(3) 66.7(12) 0(0) 16.7(3) 9.5(18) Ontario 5.0(1) 90.0(18) 0(0) 5.0(1) 10.5(20) Quebec 85.2(23) 0(0) 0(0) 14.8(4) 14.2(27) Newfoundland 0(0) 100.0(3) 0(0) 0(0) 1.6(3) New Brunswick 11.5(3) 88.5(23) 0(0) 0(0) 13.7(26) Prince Edward Island 11.1(3) 51.9(14) 0(0) 37.0(10) 14.2(27) Nova Scotia 35.0(7) 35.0(7) 0(0) 30.0(6) 10.5(20) TOTAL 24.7(47) 59.5(113) .5(0 15.3(29) 100.0(190 This provincial analysis is consistent with Dunlop's result, for Quebec. In all the cases surveyed, Quebec has always had a Roman Catholic premier.26 The Roman Catholic majority in New Brunswick has not however, had a proportionate share of the province's premierships. Alberta and Newfoundland, though 27.7 and 36.3 percent respectively of their populations are Roman Catholic (1981 statistics), have never had a Roman Catholic premier. Overall, excluding Quebec, Roman Catholics are under-represented in the offices of provincial premiers. Just under 25 percent of premiers have been Roman Catholic, while approximately 45 percent of the electorate has been Catholic. (The percentage of Roman Catholic Canadians has varied little over time; in 1871 some 42 percent were Catholic and in 1981, just over 47 percent.)27 OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND OF THE PREMIERS Alexander Brady, John Porter and Donald Mathews have hypothesized that lawyers are a substitute for a Canadian ruling class. Many of the skills of a lawyer 14 are advantageous for people in public office. Skills of mediation, compromise and oral communication are prime assets for both lawyers and politicians. It has been argued that "lawyers are about the only group for which sustained political activity is not incompatible with the career system".28 In provincial cabinets, lawyers are heavily over-represented, and at the national level party leaders are most often trained as lawyers. It is expected that the previous occupation of most provincial premiers will be the legal profession. Over one-half (53.7 percent, 102) of provincial premiers were lawyers before entering public office which contrasts with the small percent of lawyers in the Canadian work force.29 This confirms the hypothesis that lawyers are the Canadian ruling political class. John Courtney has shown that, at the national level, Conservatives have shown a greater tendency to select lawyers as leaders, than have the Liberals.30 it is hypothesized that at the provincial level this tendency will be repeated. TABLE 2-7 Previous Occupation Analyzed by Political Party Law Bus. Lab/Far. Prof. Other Unknown % (N) Liberal 597(46) 16.9(13) 9.1(7) 1.3(1) 13.0(10) 0(0) 40.5(77) Conservative 58.8(40) 16.2(11) 7.4(5) 3.2(6) 7.4(5) 1.5(1) 35.8(68) Other 333(9) 14.8(4) 14.8(4) 11.1(3) 25 9(7) 0(0) 14.2(27) None 38.9(7) 38.9(7) 5.6(1) 56(1) 11.1(2) 0(0) 9.5(18) TOTAL 537(102) 18.4(35) 8.9(17) 5.8(11) 12.6(24) .5(1) 100.0(190) There is little difference in previous occupation between the major political parties. It was found that 59.7 percent of Liberal and 58.8 percent of Conservative premiers were lawyers before becoming premiers (Table 2-7). Third party / 15 premiers are less likely to be lawyers. Less than 40 percent of these premiers were law-trained. Courtney's finding that more Conservatives tend to be lawyers than do Liberals is not replicated at the provincial level. Over three-quarters of premiers in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia were trained as lawyers. In British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, businessmen were more typically premier. The percentage of the labour force employed as lawyers is similar in all provinces, so it is more likely a consequence of political culture that lawyers become premiers in some provinces, but not as often in others.31 TABLE 2-8  Previous Occupation Analyzed bv Province Lav Bus. Lab/Far. Prof. Other Unknovn 7o (N) B.C. 29.6(8) 44.4(12) 7.4(2) 37(1) 14.8(4) 0(0) 14.2(27) Alta. 455(5) 9.1(1) 27.3(3) 0(0) 18.2(2) 0(0) 5.8(11) Sask. 18.2(2) 36.4(4) 9.1(1) 9.0(1) 27.3(3) 0(0) 5.8(11) Man. 33.3(6) 38.9(7) 5.6(1) 16.7(3) 5.6(1) 0(0) 9.5(18) Ont. 550(11) 10.0(2) 20.0(4) 0(0) 15.0(3) 0(0) 10.5(2)) Que. 66.7(18) 37(1) 0(0) 18.5(5) 7.4(2) 3.7(1) 14.2(27) Nfld. 0(0) 33.3(1) 0(0) 0(0) 66.7(2) 0(0) 1.6(3) N.B. 769(20) 11.5(3) 3 8(1) 0(0) 7.7(2) 0(0) 137(26) P I ! . 63.0(17) 11.1(3) 14.8(4) 37(1) 7.4(2) 0(0) 14.2(27) N.S. 750(15) 5.0(1) 50(1) 0(0) 15.0(3) 0(0) 10.5(20) TOTAL 537(102) 18.4(35) 18.9(17) 58(11) 12.6(24) .5(1) 100.0(190) New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, who have predominately had law-trained premiers, have political cultures which are traditional, cautious, and conservative. The electorate of these two provinces has not challenged the traditional role of lawyers as "the high priesthood of the the political system".32 in British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba, premiers were more typically businessmen, challenging the lawyer's role. Here, traditional patterns have been changed by a 16 political culture of pioneering spirit. British Columbia's political culture has been described as a: "parvenu" or frontier orientation,... it is unstable or lacks traditions, all of which fosters a mentality centered around future growth rather than past accomplishments33 With a mentality fostered around future growth in a resource driven economy, it is not surprising that almost one-half (44.4 percent; 12) of British Columbian premiers were businessmen. As earlier discussed, Saskatchewan has long felt a victim of central Canadian corporate elites. "These feelings of dependence and lack of control have engendered hostility toward the federal and corporate decision makers".34 The Saskatchewan electorate turned to third parties led by teachers, professionals, and businessmen/who better represent provincial needs. Manitoba, though more conservative than the more radical, populist provinces to the west, has been described as more politically experimental and progressive than Central or Atlantic Canada. Consequently, businessmen have entered the office of premier more frequently than any other occupational group. It is surprising that Alberta has had such a high percentage of lawyer premiers. Though below the national average, almost one-half of Alberta's premiers have been lawyers. Alberta has a political culture similar to that of the other Western provinces, and would be seemingly more receptive to businessmen as premiers rather than lawyers. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND OF PREMIERS Political elites traditionally have a higher level of education than the electorate they represent. John Porter, David R. Dunlop and many others have shown that provincial cabinets and other elected officials are members of an 17 educated elite. It is anticipated that provincial premiers have a higher level education than the average Canadian. Tables 2-9 and 2-10 display the relevant data. TABLE 2-9 Educational Background Analyzed by Political Party Unknown Hieh-School Post-Secondary % (N) Liberal 1.3(1) 23.4(18) 75.3(58) 40.5(77) Conservative 4.1(3) 16.2(11) 79.4(54) 35.8(68) Other 7.4(2) 25.9(7) 66.7(18) 14.2(27) None 5.6(1) 38.9(7) 556(10) 9.5(18) TOTAL 3.7(7) 22.6(43) 73.7(140) 100.0(190) Nearly three-quarters of provincial premiers have had a post-secondary education. Just under 10 percent of the Canadian population has a post-secondary education (1981 figure).35 Since 1911, the proportion of the Canadian population aged 5 to 24 attending school has just about doubled.36 Prior to that date, mandatory school attendance and the institutionalization of schooling had not been established. These statistics further validate the hypothesis that premiers have primarily been an educated elite. Analysis by political party shows that third party premiers were less likely to have a post-secondary education (Table 2-9). TABLE 2-10 18 Educational Background Analyzed by Province High School Post-Secondarv % (N) British Columbia 55.6(15) 44.4(12) 14.2(27) Alberta 45.5(5) 54.5(6) 5.8(11) Saskatchewan 27.3(3) 72.7(8) 5.8(11) Manitoba* 27.8(5) 61.1(11) 9.5(18) Ontario 10.0(2) 90.0(18) 10.5(20) Quebec 0(0) 100.0(27) 14.2(27) Newfoundland 0(0) 100.0(3) 1.6(3) New Brunswick* 19.2(5) 76.9(20) 13.7(26) Prince Edward Island* 11.1(3) 74.1(20) 14.2(27) Nova Scotia 25.0(5) 75.0(15) 10.5(20) TOTAL 22.6(43) 73.7(140) 100.0(190) * (level of education for seven premiers was undetermined) The Western region premiers have had less formal education. It was found that, excluding the nine third premiers elected outside of the western provinces, 65.1 percent of the premiers with just a high school education are from the west. Only 44.4 percent of British Columbian and 54.5 percent of Alberta premiers have had a post-secondary education. There is not a significantly lower level of education in the Western provinces. Therefore, these statistics must reflect a less traditional, more experimental political culture. Quebec and Newfoundland have never had a premier without post-secondary education. These provinces have an overall lower percentage of population with post-secondary degrees than the western provinces, but the electorates have insisted that political elites be educated elites. PLACE OF BIRTH OF PREMIERS It is hypothesized that the place of birth of premiers be reflective of population demographics. Provinces with primarily Liberal and Conservative 19 leanings should be expected to have indigenous premiers, reflecting the established roots and traditions of these parties (Tables 2-11 and 2-12). TABLE 2-11 Place of Birth Analyzed bv Political Partv37 In Province Out of Province Out of Country % (N) Liberal 77.9(60) 15.6(12) 6.5(5) 40.5(77) Conservative 86.8(59) 13.2(9) 0(0) 35.8(68) Other 55.6(15) 29.6(8) 14.8(4) 14.2(27) None 0(0) 33-3(6) 61.1(11) 9.5(17) TOTAL 70.5(134) 18.4(35) 10.5(20) 100.0(189) Close to 90 percent of Canadian provincial premiers have been born in the country. The 10 percent born outside of Canada mainly come from the British Isles (12 from England, three each from Ireland and Scotland) and one each from France and Holland. No significant difference in place of birth exists between Liberal and Conservative premiers, yet with respect to C.C.F./N.D.P. premiers, 50 percent (three of six) were born outside of their eventual premiership location. Not one premier from the United Farmers of Alberta or of Manitoba was born in his respective province. The statistics show (Table 2-11) that Liberal and Conservative premiers were more likely to have been indigenous. The hypothesis that political parties with established roots and traditions would have native premiers is confirmed. 20 TABLE 2-12  Place of Birth Analyzed by Province In Province Out of Province Out of Country % (N) British Columbia 18.5(5) 33.3(9) 48.1(13) 14.2(27) Alberta 27.3(3) 54.5(6) 18.2(2) 5.8(11) Saskatchewan 36.4(4) 45.595) 18.2(2) 5.8(11) Manitoba* 27.8(5) 55.6(10) 11.1(2) 9.5(18) Ontario 95.0(19) 5.0(1) 0(0) 10.5(20 Quebec 85.2(23) 11.1(3) 3.7(1) 14.2(27) Newfoundland 100.9(3) 0(0) 0(0) 1.6(3) New Brunswick 96.2(25) 3.8(1) 0(0) 13.7(26) Prince Edward Island 100.0(27) 0(0) 0(0) 14.2(27) Nova Scotia 100.0(20 0(0) 0(0) 10.5(20) TOTAL 70.5(134) 18.4(35) 10.5(20) 100.0(190) * (place of birth of A. Boyd, Manitoba's first premier, is unknown) The western provinces average the highest number of premiers born inside Canada but outside of the province. In particular, British Columbia and Alberta have the highest percentage, in overall population, of internal migrants.35 British Columbia has traditionally 25 to 30 percent of its population born outside of its provincial boundaries. It is difficult to deter mine whether the fact of third party premiers being born outside of the province or country, is a result of regional or partisan phenomena. The above statistics suggest the former. The early premiers of the western provinces were not born in their constituent provinces. The first homeborn British Columbian premier was R. McBride who came to office in 1903; in Alberta and Saskatchewan, the first homeborn premiers were respectively H.E. Strom (1968) and W.J. Patterson (1935). In contrast, every premier of Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia, has been a provincial native. Again, migration statistics suggest that this is reflective of provincial demographics. 21 CONCLUSION This chapter has shown that regional, provincial and partisan differences exist between premiers. The political cultures of the nation's three regions -Western, Central, Atlantic - have shaped the characteristics of their premiers. A Western premier is likely to be a young businessman, whereas a Central Canadian premier is likely to be an older lawyer. In ail regions, the Roman Catholic electorate has been statistically under-represented. In contrast, 53.7 percent of all premiers have been lawyers, although less than one percent of the Canadian labour force are trained in the profession. Canadian provincial premiers have been members of an educated elite. Though some regional differences exist, the educational level of premiers has been higher than that of the average Canadian. Partisan differences in characteristics of premiers also emerged. The Conservative party is most likely to govern the Central region, whereas a third party is more likely to govern in the west. A third party premier is more likely to be young, a non-lawyer and without post-secondary education. This is in contrast to the older, well educated Conservative or Liberal lawyer premiers. Third party premiers have been born outside of the province in 12 of 27 cases (44.4 percent), which is significantly higher than the overall average of 28.9 percent of premier ships. Many results obtained by John Courtney in The Selection of National Party  Leaders in Canada, and David R. Dunlop in his paper "Cabinets: Social Composition", were replicated for the present analysis of provincial premiers. Analogous to these studies, premiers have been more highly educated, had higher status occupations, have been more likely non-Catholic and have been older statistically than the average Canadian. Provincial premiers have not been statistically representative of the average Canadian. 22 ENDNOTES 1. For a list of the 185 premiers see Appendix A. 2. For an explanation of why the number of administrations does not equal the number of premiers or the number of premierships, see Chapter I, p.3-4. 3. The 11 political parties are: (1) the Liberal Party, (2) the Conservative Party, (3) Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, and its contemporary counterpart, the New Democratic Party, ,(4) the Social Credit Party, (5) the Union Nationale, (6) United Farmers of Alberta, (7) United Farmers of Ontario, (8) United Farmers of Manitoba, (9) the Liberal-Progressives, (10) the Parti Quebecois, and (11) the Confederationist Party. 4. S.S. Garson's and D.L. Campbell's administrations, that united the Liberal-Progressive-Conservative-Social Credit coalition government in Manitoba, from 1943 through 1958, have been coded as Liberal-Progressive, as per Canadian Parliamentary Guides. 5. C.B. Macpherson, Democracy in Alberta (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1962), p.7. 6. See S.M. Lipset, Agrarian Socialism (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press, 1968) and Macpherson, Democracy in Alberta. 7. Censuses of Canada cited by John Filion, ed. The Canadian World Almanac  and Book of Facts 1987 (Toronto: Global Press, 1986), p.242. 8. Rand Dyck, Provincial Politics in Canada (Scarborough: Prentice-Hall Canada, Inc., 1986), p.84. 9. Doug Norman, "Regional and Provincial Political Cultures", in The Provincial  Political Systems: Comparative Essavs. ed. Donald C. Rowat (Ottawa: Carleton University, 1974), p. 18. 10. Rand Dyck. Provincial Politics in Canada. D.83. 11. John Porter, The Vertical Mosaic (Toronto: The University of Toronto Press, 1965). 12. R.M. Punnett, The Prime Minister in Canadian Government and Politics (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1977). 23 13. W.A. Matheson, The Prime Minister and the Cabinet (Toronto: Methuen Publications, 1976) 14. J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1973). 15. David R. Dunlop, "Cabinets - Social Composition", in The Provincial Political  Systems: Comparative Essavs. p.159. 16. 'Other,' throughout this thesis, includes C.C.F./N.D.P., Social Credit, United Farmers of Alberta, United Farmers of Ontario, United Farmers of Manitoba, Liberal-Progressives, Union Nationale, Parti Qiiebecois and Confederationist Party. 17. 'None, throughout this thesis, refers to the non-partisan premiers of British Columbia prior to 1903, and Manitoba prior to 1883. 18. N = 189 as the date of birth of Manitoba's first premier, A. Boyd, is unknown. 19. Mean age of entire population is 29.6 (1981). Mean age of electorate is not an available statistic. Given the overall mean is 29.6 (fn. 20).eliminating the non-voting population (age 0-19) would increase mean age. 20. Information from Census of Canada. 1971, 1976 and 1981. Mean Aee Analyzed bv Province and Year 1971 1976 1981 Canada B.C. Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario Quebec Newfoundland New Brunswick P.E.I. Nova Scotia 26.2 27.9 24.9 26.7 26.8 27.2 25.6 20.7 23.9 24.8 25.5 27.8 29.1 26.1 27.6 28.0 28.6 27.7 22.6 25.7 26.6 27.1 29.6 30.9 26.9 28.7 29.9 30.6 29.7 25.2 28.1 28.8 29.3 21. For example, see Frederick C. Engelmann and Mildred A. Schwartz, Political  Parties and the Canadian Social Structure (Scarborough: Prentice-Hall of 24 Canada Ltd., 1967), chap. 3 and 12, George M. Hougham "The Background and Development of National Parties" or John Meisel "Recent Changes in Canadian Parties" in Party Politics in Canada, ed. Hugh Thorburn (Scarborough: Prentice Hall of Canada Ltd., 1967) or Hugh Thorburn "Interpretations of the Canadian Party System" in Party Politics in Canada, ed. Hugh Thorburn (Scarborough: Prentice-Hall of Canada Ltd., 1979), pp. 34-51. 22. J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada, p. 134. Interestingly, since Courtney's study both national Conservative leaders have been Roman Catholics. 23. Religious distribution analyzed by province. Roman Catholic (%) Protestant (%) Other/None (%) Canada 47.4 41.2 11.4 British Columbia 19.8 54.7 25.4 Alberta 27.7 56.0 16.3 Saskatchewan 32.4 58.3 9.3 Manitoba 31.5 56.6 11.9 Ontario 35.6 51.8 12.6 Quebec 88.2 6.4 5.4 Newfoundland 36.3 62.6 1.1 New Brunswick 53.9 42.9 3.2 Prince Edward Island 46.6 50.5 2.9 Nova Scotia 37.0 58.0 5.0 from Census of Canada. 1981. 24. David R. Dunlop, "Cabinets - Social Composition", p. 175. 25. Religious affiliation of 29 premiers was not determined. These cases are included in the N column, but do not appear in another column in Table 2-6. 26. The religion of four Quebec premiers was undetermined. 27. Censuses of Canada cited by John Filion, ed., The Canadian World Almanac. p. 425. 28. W.A. Matheson, The Prime Minister and the Cabinet, p. 114. 2 5 29. Statistics Canada, Census of Canada 1981 shows that 0.5% of the Canadian labour force are employed as lawyers (34,995 of 7,378,835). 30. I.C. Courtney. The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada, D.131. 31. Analysis by province shows little variation in this statistic: (B.C. - .5%. Alberta - .5%, Saskatchewan - .4%, Manitoba - .4%, Ontario - .5%, Quebec -.4%, New Brunswick - .4%, P.E.I. - .1%, Newfoundland - .2%, Nova Scotia - A%). 32. John Porter, The Vertical Mosaic, p. 392. 33. Rand Dyck. Provincial Politics in Canada, p. 511. 34. Rand Dyck, Provincial Politics in Canada, p. 395. 35. Censuses of Canada cited by John Filion, ed., The Canadian World Almanac. p. 427. 36. Daniel Kubat and David Thornton, A statistical Profile of Canadian Society (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd., 1974), p. 110. 37. N = 189 as the place of birth of Manitoba's first premier, A. Boyd, is unknown. 38. Internal migration in Canada. Number of Persons Living in Each Province Who Were Born in Another Province (1 OOP's of Persons) Total N f l d PE1 NS NB Que Qnt Man Sask A l t a BC 1971 2470.0 16.8 13.1 90.3 72.0 256.3 785.8 1 3 5 0 105.7 342.5 631.8 1951 1382.4 4.1 5-6 52.7 26.1 161.0 410.0 97.3 107.0 161.0 349.3 1941 916.7 - 2.8 24.1 25.3 109.5 218.0 87.8 125.0 124.3 197.3 1901 298.1 - 2.5 11.2 12.7 25.2 71.6 81.8 41.8 39.8 1871 67.8 - - 4.0 7.9 8.8 47.2 - - -From: F.H. Leacy, ed., Historical Statistics of Canada (Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1983), pp. A327-38. 26 CHAPTER U\  WHAT IS A PREMIER'S CAREER PATTERN This chapter shifts from the question of what sort of person becomes a premier to explore how these individuals acquire the post of premier. Drawing on Campbell Sharman's, Owen Hughes' and Kevin Tuffin's analysis of Australian state premiers,1 this chapter will focus on the career patterns of the premiers. Utilizing the same approach as "State Premiers" this chapter asks: what are the paths to office?; when is one first elected?; and how long does one serve in the backbenches and cabinet?" Broad patterns and explanations can be determined by analysis of career paths. As Sharman, Hughes and Tuff in explain, the approach has two substantial strengths: The first is that it points to elements of the role of the premier that derive not from interaction with the broader political context but from the inherent structural logic of our constitutional system ... second ... the approach will tend to move the focus of analysis from a concern with the description of detail and particular cases to a concern with broad patterns and explanation.2 The approach has limitations in that it concentrates on a few characteristics and ignores the political context. Common to all premierships are two structural requirements. First, an aspiring premier must be a member of the provincial assembly. If an unelected individual is chosen leader of a ruling party, the individual must win a seat in a by-election or general election. In addition to this parliamentary requirement, a second partisan requirement must be fulfilled by an aspiring premier. A premier-to-be must be the recognized leader of the political party with the parliamentary majority. In the case of a coalition government, the individual must be able to attract enough minor party support in order to obtain a working 27 majority. With both the parliamentary and partisan elements fulfilled, an individual can become premier. After analysis of how one becomes a premier, three career patterns emerged and they will be explained with respect to partisan and/or regional differences between them. PATH-ONE TO THE PREMIERSHIP The first path to the premiership is the replacement of one premier by another while the party is in power. In such cases, the individual becomes premier without spending any time in parliamentary opposition. This route to office has been followed by 64.7 percent of premierships (123 of 190). In 116 (94.3 percent) of these cases the individual rose through the ranks as a backbencher, in most cases through the cabinet, and eventually to the premiership. In the seven remaining cases,4 the individual became premier without any parliamentary experience in government or opposition. Diagram 3-1 illustrates the partisan and parliamentary elements of the first path to the premiership. DIAGRAM 3-1 Path-One to the Premiership Parliamentary Entry to parliament Entry to cabinet Premier Elements 1 I I I GOVERNMENT | ( CABINET ) PARTY LEADER / PREMIER Partisan Elements 28 PATH-TWO TO THE PREMIERSHIP In the second observable path, an individual is in government as a backbencher, cabinet minister or premier, the party then goes into opposition, and the individual regains or gains the premiership. Only 13.2 percent of premiers (25) have led such "comebacks". In order to fulfill the partisan element of this path, the individual must win an election in order to become premier. [In seven cases, a premier lost office, became the opposition leader, and then won an election to once again become premier.5 In these cases, the leader was chosen while the party was in power. Only the first time these individuals became premier is entered in the data set. Consequently, all tables and statistics are calculated with 18 path-two premiers and the overall N=190.] In the 18 cases (9.5 percent), the leader was chosen while in opposition after his party had lost office. Diagram 3-2 illustrates the partisan and parliamentary elements of the second path to the premiership. DIAGRAM 3-2 Path-Two to the Premiership Elements P a r t i s a n Elements 1 government op p o s i t i o n government Premier ' GOVERNMENT / PARTY LEADER LEADER OF THE ELECTION / OPPOSITION PREMIER PATH-THREE TO THE PREMIERSHIP The third path to the premiership is via the post of leader of the opposition. Moving across the floor from opposition to government has been the route 49 individuals (25.8 percent) have used to win a provincial premiership. In these 29 cases, the individual has no experience, as a backbencher or in cabinet, on the government side of the house. Premiers following this path are necessarily chosen party leader while in opposition (Diagram 3-3). DIAGRAM 3-3  Path-Three to the Premiership Parliamentary E n t r y '° Parliament Elements I Premier OPPOSITION Partisan Elements CHOSEN LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION ELECTION / PREMIER Path-one is the most frequented route to the premiership (64.7 percent). The route via leader of the opposition is the second most frequented route (25.8 percent), and the comeback route is the least common (9.5 percent). It is surprising that such a large percentage of Canadian premiers follow path-one to office. In Australia only 510 percent of state premiers follow this path. No other comparative work in this area has been done, and consequently it is impossible to determine whether or not the Canadian provinces are unique in having such a large number of replacement premiers. When analysis is by geographical region or party lines, differences in paths to office are expected. Over 40 percent of premiers have been Liberals (see Chapter II, page 7), and consequently it is expected that most Liberals follow path-one into office. The Conservatives, who have formed nearly as many governments (35.8 percent), are expected to have followed similar career paths. Third parties in Canadian provincial politics have formed only 23.7 percent of governments. These parties traditionally challenge ruling governments and gain office via the position 30 of the leader of the opposition. It is hypothesized that these parties are less likely to frequent path-one to office. TABLE 3-1 Paths to Office Analyzed by Political Party Path 1 Path 2 Path 3 % (N) Liberal 63.6(49) 7.8(6) 28.6(22) 40.5(77) Conservative 63.2(43) 10.3(7) 26.5(18) 35.8(68) Other 59.3(16) 14.8(4) 25.9(7) 14.2(27) None 83.3(15) 5.6(1) 11.1(2) 9.5(18) TOTAL 64.7(123) 9.5(18) 25.8(49) 100.0(190) Over 63 percent of Conservative and Liberal premiers followed path-one to office (Table 3-1). The overall statistics do not confirm that partisan differences exist in paths to office. The third parties follow path-one 59.3 percent of the time. This is remarkably similar to the Liberals and Conservatives. The hypothesis,that third parties are more likely to gain office via the post of leader of the opposition, is not confirmed. The largest variations occur in the "none" category. When the 18 premiers belonging to the "none" category were elected prior to 1903 in British Columbia and 1883 in Manitoba, premiers were chosen by the Lieutenant-Governor. Partisan lines were not drawn and inevitably the Lieutenant-Governor chose a premier from the ruling political elites. This explains why over 80 percent of the "none" premiers followed path-one to office. Analysis by region would be expected to reflect the above results. The "none" category premiers were elected in the west, and consequently it is expected that statistics reflect that Western region premiers were more likely to follow path-one to office than Central or Atlantic region premiers. 31 TABLE 3-2 Paths to Office Analyzed by Region Path 1 Path 2 Path 3 %m Western Central Atlantic 67.2(45) 63.8(30) 63.2(48) 10.4(7) 14.9(7) 5.3(4) 22.4(15) 21.3(10) 31.6(24) 35.3(67) 24.7(47) 40.0(76) TOTAL 64.7(123) 9.5(18) 25.8(49) (190) Not surprisingly, path-one remains most frequent in all regions (Table 3-2). Consistent with the hypothesis, path-one is most common in the west. Nearly 15 percent of Central region premiers have followed the comeback route, compared to only 10.4 percent in the west. The comeback path is extremely rare in the Atlantic region with only 5.3 percent of premiers entering office by this route. Use of the post of leader of the opposition (path-three) to gain the premiership has been used by 31.6 percent of Atlantic premiers, 22.4 percent of Western premiers, and 21.3 percent of Central Canadian premiers. CAREER VARIABLES OF THE PREMIERS The career variables of: age when first elected to a provincial legislature or the federal parliament, length of service on the backbenches and in cabinet, years as leader before becoming premier, years served as premier, and reason for leaving office, will now be analyzed by path and geographical region. Sharman's consideration of Australian state premiers and Courtney's analysis of Canada's national party leaders6 provide comparative benchmarks. AGE WHEN FIRST ELECTED TO PARLIAMENT The first step in any career path to the premiership is election to a provincial legislature or, as in a few cases, the federal parliament. The mean age of premiers 32 when first elected is 37.4 years. The premier who was youngest when he started his political career was Ed Schreyer who, in 1958, was only 22 when he first won a seat in the Manitoba legislature. The oldest was W.R. Shaw of Prince Edward Island who, in 1957, was 72 when first elected to this province's legislature. It is anticipated that age variations occur when this parameter is analyzed by path, political party and region. It is hypothesized that path-two premiers would be elected at a younger age than path-one or path-three premiers. Path-two individuals have served first in government, then in opposition, and finally won back a seat in government a second time in order to become premier. This route would seem to require more time than the other pathways. It is expected that path-two premiers are elected at a younger age but it is also possible that path-two premiers become premiers at an older age and/or their careers could be broken into a greater number of shorter segments. The latter would result in their first election occurring at a similar age to other path-one and path-three premiers. In this thesis it is hypothesized that the last two alternatives are not the case, but rather path-two premiers have been elected at a younger age. TABLE 3-3 Age of Premiers (Years) When First Elected Analyzed by Path Mean S.D. Min. Max. (NI Path 1 37.8 7.4 23.0 27.0 123 Path 2 35.2 4.1 28.0 43.0 18 Path 3 37.1 7.9 22.0 72.0 49 ALL 37.4 7.3 22.0 72.0 189 33 Although the data set is small (N=18), analysis by path confirms that path-two premiers are first elected at a younger age (Table 3-3). Variation around the mean age is also more limited than in the other paths (S.D. = 4.1 yrs). Path-one and path-three premiers are first elected at similar ages. Analysis by political party and region produces results with little variation (Tables3-4, 3-5). TABLE 3-4 Age of Premiers (Years) When First Elected Analyzed by Political Party Mean S.D. Min. Max. (N) Liberal 38.1 7.1 27.0 57.0 77.0 Conservative 37.1 7.3 24.0 72.0 68.0 Other 36.5 7.8 22.0 57.0 44.0 ALL 37.4 7.3 22.0 72.0 189.0 Political party analysis has grouped together the "other" and "none" category. The small N of each gave skewed results when the two categories were analyzed independently. Grouping them together provided for a more relevant third party analysis. There is little variation in age when first elected when analysis is by political party, although analysis by region shows some variation (Table 3-5). 34 TABLE 3-5 Age of Premiers When First Elected Analyzed by Region Mean S.D. Min. Max. (N) Western 37.1 7.3 22.0 57.0 67.0 Central 35.7 6.2 23.0 52.0 47.0 Atlantic 38.7 7.9 27.0 72.0 76.0 ALL 37.4 7.3 22.0 72.0 189.0 These variations are not as large as the variations produced when the age of premiers is analyzed by path. It is shown that Central Canadian premiers, on the average, were first elected at a younger age than Western or Atlantic region premiers. Chapter II shows that Central Canadian premiers are oldest when they become premier (page 11). Being youngest when first elected, and oldest when becoming premier, lead one to believe that Central Canadian premiers have the most parliamentary experience before becoming premier. The next section contends with this expectation. PARLIAMENTARY AND CABINET EXPERIENCE Once elected, a premier-to-be serves in a provincial legislature or federal parliament as a backbencher or cabinet member. Both positions are traditionally regarded as training grounds for premiers-to-be.7 At the national level in Canada, excluding Brian Mulroney, and the state level in Australia, all prime ministers and premiers have had some parliamentary experience.8 Prior to being chosen as party leader, 90 percent of the provincial premiers had some parliamentary experience at the provincial or federal level and of those 637 percent have had experience in cabinet positions. Of the 10 percent without any experience, more than half (57.9 percent) were path-three premiers. They were individuals who were leaders of 35 new political parties or individuals co-opted from outside of politics just prior to an election. Analysis by time-period (see Chapter IV), path, political party, and region, shows that variations in years of experience do exist. The statistics in the following tables have calculated parliamentary experience by including cabinet experience. It is anticipated that, as a result of their "comebacks" and being elected at a younger age, path-two premiers will have the greatest parliamentary and cabinet experience. By definition, path-three premiers have no cabinet experience. TABLE 3-6 Years of Parliamentary Experience Analyzed by Path Mean S.D. Min. Max. INI Path 1 10.4 6.4 0 29.0 123.0 Path 2 14.0 7.1 3.0 30.0 18.0 Path 3 6.1 6.6 0 28.0 49.0 ALL 9.7 6.9 0 30.0 190.0 Premiers have an average of 9.7 years of parliamentary experience, of which 3.9 years are spent in cabinet positions (Tables 3-6, 3-7). Path-two premiers, as anticipated, have the most parliamentary experience. Surprisingly, they do not have the most cabinet experience. Path-one and path-two premiers have identical lengths of time in Cabinet positions. 36 TABLE 3-7 Years of Cabinet Experience Analyzed by Path Mean S.D. Min. Max. (NI Path 1 5.2 5.3 0 26.0 123.0 Path 2 5.2 4.2 0 12.0 18.0 Path 3 0 0 0 4.0 49.0 ALL 3.9 5.0 0 26.0 190.0 Premiers who achieve office via the post of leader of the opposition, have the least experience, and obviously have none in cabinet offices. The longest parliamentary apprenticeship was that of F.G. Marchand in Quebec; he spent 30 years in the National Assembly before attaining premiership in 1897. The longest amount of time spent in cabinet was J.S. Macdonald of Ontario who, in pre-confederation politics, had 26 years of cabinet experience. Analysis by political party shows small differences in amount of parliamentary and cabinet experience (Tables 3-8, 3-9). TABLE 3-8 Years of Parliamentary Experience Analyzed bv Political Party Mean SJL Min. Max. (Ni Liberal 9.2 6.9 0 30.0 77.0 Conservative 10.2 6.6 0 30.0 68.0 Other 9.3 7.6 0 29.0 45.0 ALL 9.7 6.9 0 30.0 190.0 / 37 TABLE 3-9 Years of Cabinet Experience Analyzed by Political Party Mean S.D. Min. Max. m Liberal 37 5.2 0 23.0 77.0 Conservative 3.8 4.7 0 26.0 68.0 Other 4.4 5.4 0 23.0 45.0 ALL 3.9 5.0 0 26.0 190.0 Conservatives, on the average, serve 10.5 years in the legislature before becoming premier, while Liberals average 9.2 years. Partisan analysis of cabinet experience shows that third party premiers average 4.4 years, in contrast to the 3.7 and 3.8 years of the Liberals and Conservatives, respectively. Regional differences in political experience exist (Tables 3-10,3-11). TABLE 3-10 Years of Parliamentary Experience Analyzed by Region Mean S.D. Min. Max. INI Western 8.6 6.2 0 26.0 67.0 Central 13.4 7.9 0 39.0 47.0 Atlantic 8.3 6.1 0 28.0 76.0 ALL 9.7 6.9 0 30.0 190.0 In Central Canada, premiers have more parliamentary and cabinet experience. Premiers of Atlantic provinces have the least experience; they averaged only 2.6 years in a cabinet position and only 8.3 years of total parliamentary experience before becoming premier. 38 The regional variations in years of cabinet and parliamentary experience may result from differences in cabinet and legislature size. Central Canadian premiers have the most experience and.in this region, more cabinet TABLE VI1 Years of Cabinet Experience Analyzed by Region Mean Min. Max. m Western 3.5 4.8 0 23.0 67.0 Central 6.8 6.3 0 26.0 47.0 Atlantic 2.6 3.5 0 14.0 76.0 ALL 3.9 5.0 0 26.0 190.0 positions and legislature seats are available (Tables 3-12).9 TABLE 3-12 Average Size of Legislatures Analyzed bv Region Number of Legislative Cabinet Size Seats (Mean) (Mean 1986) Western 49.4 22.5 Central 95.6 24.5 Atlantic 35.2 17.8 ALL 60.1 21.6 Consistent with this finding, premiers from the Atlantic region, where fewer cabinet positions and legislative seats are traditionally available, have the least experience. Possible effects that differences in parliamentary and cabinet 39 experiences might have on a premier's rise to power, and the change in these variables over time.will be examined in Chapter IV. YEARS AS LEADER BEFORE BECOMING PREMIER Premiership is achieved via several stages: election to a legislature as a backbencher, usually service in a cabinet position (74.2 percent), and then acquisition of the party leadership. After being chosen party leader, by convention or caucus, an individual becomes (a) premier, (b) leader of the opposition, (c) leader of a third party in opposition, or (d) a candidate in an upcoming election. Path-one leaders become premier concurrent with being chosen party leader.10 As such, 64.7 percent of premiers spend no time as party leader before becoming premier. The one-third of the premiers who achieve the office via path two or path-three typically spend an average of 36 years as party leader before becoming premier (Table 3-13). TABLE 3-13 Years as Leader Before Becoming Premier Analyzed by Path Mean S.D. Min. Max. [N] Path 1 0 0 0 0 123.0 Path 2 3.5 3.1 0 9.0 18.0 Path 3 3.7 3.3 0 12.0 49.0 ALL 3.6 2.9 0 12.0 190.0 The path-three individual who becomes leader while in opposition serves 3 7 years before winning an election and becoming premier. The longest time served in opposition before becoming premier was the 12 years spent by Tommy Douglas in Saskatchewan between 1932 and 1944. 40 There is little difference in the amount of time spent as leader prior to premiership between path-two and path-three. The previous parliamentary and cabinet experience of path-two leaders (versus inexperienced opposition leaders)is not a factor in becoming premier following selection as party leader. DURATION OF PREMIERSHIPS The average length of service for a premier is 54 years. Analysis by path, however, shows a large difference in duration of premierships (Table 3-14). The differences in these means are the largest discovered in the analysis of premiers' career paths. TABLE 3-14  Duration of Premiership Analyzed bv Path Mean S.D. Min. Max. (M Path 1 4.7 5.4 0* 27.0 123.0 Path 2 5.4 3.4 1.0 12.0 18.0 Path 3 7.1 4.7 1.0 21.0 49.0 ALL 5.4 5.1 0 27.0 190.0 * refers to less than six months in office The longest average tenure, 7.1 years, has been experience by individuals who have been leaders of the opposition, won an election, and subsequently become premiers. In contrast, individuals who become premier while their respective party is in power have an average duration of only 4.7 years. Analysis by political party also reveals differences in the duration of premierships. Third party premiers do not endure as long as their partisan counterparts. Liberal premiers last one and a half years longer. Conservative 41 party premiers last an average of five months longer than the average third party premier (Table 3-15). TABLE 3-15 Duration of Premierships Analyzed by Political Party Mean S.D. Min. Max. (Ml Liberal 5.9 5.3 0 27.0 77.0 Conservative 4.9 4.1 0 17.0 68.0 Other 4.3 6.2 0 25.0 45.0 ALL 5.4 5.1 0 27.0 190.0 Regional differences are apparent through an analysis of the length of premierships. Western premiers have served, on average, seven months longer than premiers from other regions (Table 3-16). TABLE 3-16 Duration of Premierships Analyzed bv Region Mean SJL Min. Max. IN] Western 5.8 5.3 0 25.0 67.0 Central 5.2 5.3 0 24.0 47.0 Atlantic 5.2 4.9 0 27.0 76.0 ALL 5.4 5.1 0 27.0 190.0 It can be stated that path-three, Western Liberal premiers, of which the last was R. Thatcher in Saskatchewan in 1971, have had the longest durations. 42 DEPARTURE OF PREMIERS The last step in the career pattern of a premier is leaving the leadership. Termination of a leadership arises in four distinct ways: (1) passing away in office, (2) election loss (including loss at convention), (3) co-option to another government position, (4 Retirement or resignation, (5) still serving.The most frequent reason for termination of a premiership is resignation or retirement (Table 3-17).12 TABLE 3-17 Termination of Party Leadership Analyzed by Path 1 2 3 4 5 X(N) Path 1 6.5(8) 33.3(41) 16.3(20) 39.8(49) 4.1(5) 64.7(123) Path 2 16.7(3) 5.6(1) 1 1.1(2) 44.4(8) 22.2(4) 9.5(18) Path 3 10.2(5) 28.6(14) 22.4(1 1) 30.6(15) 8.2(4) 25.8(49) TOTAL 8.4(16) 29.5(56) 17.4(33) 37.9(72) 6.8(13) 100.0(190) (1-deceased, 2-eleclion loss, 3-co-opted, 4-retired/resignation, 5-still serving) Analysis by career path shows that path-one premiers are less likely to pass away in office. Surprisingly, probably the result of a statistical oddity, path-one premiers are also the oldest when first elected (Table 3-3). Premiers who make comebacks (path-two) are least likely to face a subsequent election loss. Of the 18 men who have made comebacks, only T.D. Patullo of British Columbia was later defeated at the polls. A partisan analysis of reason for departing party leadership shows interesting results (Table 3-18). 43 Liberal Conservative Other TOTAL 1 7.8(6) 4.4(3) 15.6(7) TABLE 3-18 Termination of Party Leadership Analyzed bv Political Party 33.8(26) 25.0(17) 28.9(13) 19.5(15) 19.1(13) 11.1(5) 35.1(27) 42.6(29) 35.6(16) 5 3.9(3) 8.8(6) 8.9(4) % (N) 40.5(77) 35.8(68) 23.7(45) 8.4(16) 29.5(56) 17.4(33) 37.9(72) 6.2(13) 100.0(190) (1-decreased, 2-election loss, 3-co-opted, 4-retired/resignation, 5-still serving) Analysis by political party shows that Liberal and Conservative premiers leave office via similar methods. Third party premiers are less likely to be co-opted and are more likely to pass away in office. Less than ten percent of premiers have passed away in office, yet over 15 percent of third party premiers die in office. A regional analysis of reasons for leaving party leadership shows that co-option is rarely practiced in the West (Table 3-19). Almost 50 percent (16 of 33) of premiers co-opted from office were from the Atlantic region. TABLE 3-19 Termination of Party Leadership Analyzed bv Region 1 2 3 4 5 % (N) Western 1 1.9(8) 29.9(20) 13-4(9) 37.3(25) 7.5(5) 35.3(67) Central 10.6(5) 27.7(13) 17.0(8) 38.3(18) 6.4(3) 24.7(47) Atlantic 3.9(3) 30.3(23) 21.1(16) 38.2(29) 6.6(5) 40.0(76) TOTAL 8.4(16) 29.5(56) 17.4(33) 37.9(72) 6.8(13) 100.0(190) (1-deceased, 2-election loss, 3-co-opted, 4-retired/resignation, 5-still serving) Atlantic region premiers are the least likely to pass away in office. 44 CONCLUSIONS The analysis of career variables has shown that a career as premier begins via election to the provincial legislature at age 37.4. Once elected to office, the average premier-to-be serves 9.7 years in parliament, of which 3.9 years are in a cabinet position. The individual is then chosen party leader and premier. The average premier serves for 5.4 years and leaves office through resignation or retirement. Analysis by path shows that three different career patterns are discernible. CAREER PATH-ONE An individual following an average career path-one is first elected at an average age of 37.8 years. DIAGRAM 3-4  Career Path-One POSITION BACKBENCHER | CABINET PREMIER YEARS Age 37.8 10.A years parliament 5.2 years A.7 years r e s i g n a t i o n / cabinet premier retirement He serves for 10.4 years in parliament, of which 5.2 years are in cabinet, before becoming concurrently party leader and premier of the respective province. The path-one leader has a premiership of 4.7 years before retiring or resigning from the office (Diagram 3-4). 45 CAREER PATH-TWO An individual following the typical career path-two is first elected at an average age of 35.2, serves 14.9 years in parliament, of which 5.2 years are in cabinet (Diagram 3-5). DIAGRAM 3-5  Career Path-Two PARTY POSITION BACKBENCHER [CABINET LEADER PREMIER YEARS Age 35.2 14.9 years 5.2 years 3.5 years 5.4 years r e s i g n a t i o n / parliament cabinet party leader premier retirement After 11.4 years, the individual is chosen party leader, and then 3.5 years later becomes premier. The duration of the premiership is 5.4 years and is ended by retirement or resignation. CAREER PATH-THREE The average premier who acquires office via the post of leader of the opposition is first elected at age 37.1 (Diagram 3-6). DIAGRAM 3-6 Career Path-Three PARTY LEADER PREMIER POSITION YEARS Age 37.1 6.1 years 3.7 years o p p o s i t i o n party l e a d e r 7.1 years premier r e s i g n a t i o n / retirement 46 He serves in opposition for 6.1 years and has no cabinet experience. Once becoming leader some 2.4 years after being first elected, he becomes premier 3.7 years later. Such a premiership lasts for an average of 7,1 years before expiration, usually retirement or resignation. OVERALL This chapter has shown that three distinct paths emerge through which an individual can acquire the post of premier. Common to all premierships are the two requirements: (1) he must be a member of a provincial house of parliament, and (2) he^ must be the recognized leader of the political party that can command a majority. Career variables of the premiers were analyzed by path, party and region. Table 3-20 provides a summary of all three analyses. TABLE 3-20 Comparison of Career Variables Analyzed bv Path. Party and Region Control Age When Parliamentary Duration Age When Variable First Elected Experience (Total) As Premier Left Office Path 1 37.8 10.4 4.7 52.9 Path 2 35.2 14.9 5.4 55.5 Path 3 37.1 6.1 7.1 50.3 Liberal 38.1 9.2 5.9 53.2 Conservative 37.6 10.5 4.9 530 Other 36.5 9.3 4.3 50.1 Western 37.1 8.6 5.8 51.5 Central 35.7 13.4 5.2 54.3 Atlantic 38.7 8.3 5.2 52.2 47 The analysis shows that three distinct paths can be followed to the premiership. It has been shown that certain career variables are common to all premiers regardless of path to power, political party or geographical region. / 48 ENDNOTES 1. Campbell Sharman, Owen Hughes and Kevin Tuffin. "State Premiers" in Australian State Politics, ed. Brian Galligan (Melbourne: Longmen Chethine, 1986), p. 229-243. 2. Sharman et al., "State Premiers", p.231. 3. These three distinct paths mirror those outlined by R.M. Punnett, The Prime  Minister in Canadian Government and Politics (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1977), pp. 30-31 and Campbell Sharman et al., "State Premiers", p.233. 4. These seven individuals are: (1) J.F. MCreight of B.C., (2) H. Greenfield and (3) W. Aberhart of Alberta, (4) R. Davis and (5) A. Boyd of Manitoba, (6) L. Tweedie of New Brunswick and (7) W.B. Campbell of Prince Edward Island. 5. The seven individuals who have been premier twice, without leaving the party leadership are: (1) J.G. Gardiner of Saskatchewan, (2) M. Duplessis and (3) J.A. Godbout of Quebec, (4) J.D. Stewart and (5) W.M. Lea of Prince Edward Island, (6) M.A. Girard of Manitoba and (7) G.A. Walkem of British Columbia. 6. John Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1973). 7. P. Weller, First Among Equals: Prime Ministers in Westminster Systems (Boston: George Allen and Unwin, 1985), p. 166. 8. See Sharman et al., "State Premiers", p. 235 and Courtney, The Selection of  National Party Leaders in Canada, p. 141. 9. Rand Dyck, Provincial Politics in Canada (Scarborough: Prentice-Hall of Canada Ltd., 1986), pp. 76, 84, 134, 173, 253, 321, 383, 439, 498, 462, 575. 10. J. Oliver, premier of British Columbia from 1918-1927, is an interesting case. In 1905, he became leader of the Liberal opposition. He was defeated in 1909 and did not return to the legislature until 1916 as a minister in H.C. Brewster's cabinet. On the death of Brewster in 1918, Oliver succeeded to the office of premier. J. Oliver has been coded as a path-one premier, even though he was leader of the opposition for four years. This classification was chosen as he did not gain the premiership via the opposition post, but rather through being a cabinet minister. 49 11. Table 3-14 deals with duration of premierships, not administration^ does Table 2-2. For a fuller explanation see Chapter I, pages 3-4. 12. Making the distinction between resignation/retirement and election loss is difficult. If the individual retired or resigned immediately, i.e. within one month of an election loss, it was counted as such, otherwise the individual was counted in the resignation/retirement category. CHAPTER IV  DOES SELECTION PROCESS MAKE A DIFFERENCE? 50 Chapters II and III have asked what sort of a person becomes premier and what does his career pattern look like? This chapter will examine the processes by which provincial premiers have been chosen and will ask whether the process has made a difference in the type of leader chosen. Two methods of achieving party leadership exist in Canada. The first method, little used since World War II, is through caucus selection; the second, commonly used method today, is by party leadership convention. The literature on provincial leadership selection is sparse. Some papers have been written on specific conventions, yet no general overview has yet appeared. 1 Leadership selection at the national level is well documented. John Courtney's The  Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada^  remains the classic text and consequently provides the benchmark for this chapter. Courtney argues that,with the adoption of the leadership convention, a major alteration took place in the type of person chosen as party leader. Courtney puts forth several hypotheses concerning the selection process of national leaders; this chapter tests these hypotheses at the provincial level. At the national level, prior to the introduction of the convention process, Canadian party leaders typically were men of parliament. As such, they had several years of experience as parliamentary backbenchers and,in most cases, had served in cabinet positions. Since the change to selection by leadership convention, "the mean parliamentary experience of Conservative and Liberal leaders at the time of their selection has been nearly half of what it had been in the pre-convention period".3 This chapter will ask whether or not the amount of / 51 parliamentary experience of provincial premiers has been reduced since the introduction of leadership conventions. Courtney argues that the convention process has made it easier for outsiders to become party leaders. "Party conventions have been instrumental in opening up the competition to outsiders - to provincial premiers, public servants, and in some cases, others who had not previously been identified with party politics."4 The convention process has altered the recruitment patterns and career routes of party leaders. At the national level, convention chosen party leaders are younger than caucus chosen leaders. Are provincial premiers who are chosen by convention younger than those chosen by caucus? This chapter will examine the variables used by both Courtney and Sharman.5 Hypotheses exploring the effects of the convention process on duration of premierships, level of education, previous occupation, place of birth and reason for leavingjWill be explored. Has the switch from the caucus to convention process resulted in the selection of more highly educated premiers, more lawyers as premiers, more Canadian born premiers, and/or different distributions in reasons for leaving office? This chapter will answer these questions by exploring whether a difference in the career paths of premiers occurs when the selection process is considered as a variable. Presentation of an analysis of the selection process also produces an analysis of career variables by time period. The convention process has been commonly used since World War II. Agar Adamson et al. state that "by the end of the Second World War, the convention process had become established in the provincial party constitutions"6' The two time periods involved are: 1867-1945 and 1946-1987 (Diagram 4-1). 52 DIAGRAM 4-1  Time Analysis of Selection Process Caucus 89.1% (123) ^  Caucus 15.4%(8) Convention 10.9%(15) Convention 84.6%(44) 1867 1945 1987 As the above diagram illustrates, prior to 1945, close to 90 percent of premiers were chosen by caucus. After 1945, 84.6 percent of premiers were chosen by convention. In cases where differences in a variable occur when analyzed by selection process, this chapter asks whether or not the difference may be a result of time period. Before proceeding with the time analysis and the examination of career paths, a brief historical account of provincial leadership conventions will be presented. A HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF PROVINCIAL LEADERSHIP SELECTION Almost 69 percent (131 of 190) of provincial premiers were chosen by a parliamentary caucus to be party leader. Once the caucus met and selected a new leader, some form of recognition at subsequent meetings or policy conventions was usually given to the individual. When the caucus method was used, the number of possible successors to the leadership was limited. As Frank MacKinnon noted about the Prince Edward Island political arena: the selection of leaders by caucus has been followed as a matter of convenience ... In many instances a new leader has been the crown prince of the previous administration whose obvious availability rendered a leadership] convention unnecessary.7 What was true for Prince Edward Island was equally true in the other nine provinces. The caucus process was based upon the premise that at an appropriate 53 time the individual best suited to lead the party would emerge from the cabinet or backbenches. As a British parliamentarian explained: Great leaders of parties are not elected, they are evolved ... I think it will be a bad day [when we]... have solemnly to meet to elect a leader. The leader is there, and we all know it when he is there.8 It would appear that we have entered those "bad" days. Commonly since 1945, political parties have called leadership conventions to elect new leaders. In the Atlantic region (excluding Newfoundland) and Quebec the caucus method endured longer than in Ontario and the Western provinces.9 (Table 4-1) Quebec was the last province in which a premier was chosen by the caucus route. TABLE 4-1 The Selection Process of Premiers Analyzed by Province Number of Last First Caucus Convention Premiers Caucus Convention British Columbia 19 8 27 1952 1912 Alberta 8 3 11 1943 1968 Saskatchewan 5 6 11 1935 1924 Manitoba 13 5 18 1948 1954 Ontario 11 9 20 1948 1920 Quebec 21 6 27 1960 1958 Newfoundland 0 3 3 0 1949 New Brunswick 21 5 26 1940 1925 Prince Edward Island 20 7 27 1953 1902 Nova Scotia 13 7 20 1954 1930 ALL 131 59 190 1960 1902 54 When Paul Sauve suddenly died in January I960, the Union Nationale caucus chose A. Barrette as party leader and premier. Subsequent Quebec premiers have been chosen by convention.10 The provinces did not adopt conventions at the same time, nor did different parties within the provinces simultaneously adopt the process. Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia continued to use the caucus process routinely into the 1950 s. Saskatchewan was the first province to use the convention commonly, and has done so since 1935. Newfoundland, joining confederation in 1949, is the only province that has had more convention than caucus chosen premiers. Differences in selection process of premiers appear when the data set is analyzed by political party. Over 71 percent of Liberal premiers were chosen by caucus, while only 63.2 percent of Conservative premiers were so chosen. Third party premiers were most often chosen by caucus (73.3 percent). TABLE 4-2 Provincial Premiers Analyzed bv Party and Selection Process Caucus Convention (N) Conservative 63.2(43)' 36.8(25) 35.8(68) Liberal 71.4(55) 28.6(22) 40.5(77) Other 73.3(33) 26.7(12) 23.7(45) ALL 68.9(131) 31.1(59) 100.0(190) The convention process is perceived as more democratic and representative of the party as a whole than the parliamentary caucus. A party caucus does not statistically represent the electorate in the manner that a party leadership convention attempts. Though it has not completely lived up to its billing as being completely democratic and representative, the leadership convention approaches 55 these aims by inviting youth delegates, women representatives, constituency delegates, ex-officio delegates and other members-at-large.1* Courtney shows that at the national level an average of 1,968 delegates have attended the 13 Liberal and Conservative leadership conventions. These conventions have averaged six candidates and three ballots to determine a winner. At the provincial level, conventions have tended to be smaller, with fewer candidates and have required fewer ballots in order to select a new leader. Table 4-3 illustrates that, of the provincial party leadership conventions, those in the Western region are smallest, while those in Central Canada are the largest. TABLE 4-3 Number of Delegates at Leadership Conventions Analyzed by Region Mean S.D. Min. Max. N Western 858.4 475.2 283 1902 16 Central 1679.8 618.0 567 2928 12 Atlantic 1054.2 453.4 322 1553 9 ALL 1172.5 624.2 283 2928 37 Analysis of number of delegates by political party shows little variation. The Conservative and Liberal parties average almost the same number of delegates. Third party conventions average about 180 more delegates than the overall average of 1172.5 These figures do not include the 1985 Parti Quebecois convention where P.M. Johnson was chosen leader and premier. All members of the party were given delegate status, and consequently over 100,000 delegates voted. Because of its unique nature, the number of delegates at this convention have been excluded from the analysis. 56 On average, as Table 4-4 illustrates, three or four candidates contest the leadership at provincial conventions. There is little partisan or regional variation in these numbers. At the national level, as previously stated, six candidates have tended to be on the first ballot.12 Differences also exist in the number of delegates. The Western region averages 821.4 less delegates than the Central region, yet both have three or four candidates on the first ballot and take, on average, 1.8 ballots to select a leader. TABLE 4-4 Number of Candidates on First Ballot at Leadership Conventions. Analyzed by Region and Political Party Mean S.D. Min. Max. N Conservative 3.7 1.8 2 10 19 Liberal 3.3 1.4 2 6 16 Other 4.6 3.3 1 12 9 Western 3.8 2.6 1 12 16 Central 39 1.3 2 6 13 Atlantic 3.5 2.2 2 10 15 ALL 3.7 2.1 1 12 44 Leadership conventions at the provincial level have been decided on the first ballot two-thirds (67.4 percent) of the time. This statistic shows little variation when the data are analyzed by region or political party. At the national level, due to the larger number of candidates, three ballots are needed to decide leadership contests. Overall, provincial leadership conventions have tended to have fewer delegates, candidates, and ballots than their national counterparts. 57 At the national level, as Courtney shows, the selection process has made a difference in the type of person chosen party leader. The background variables that describe who becomes a premier, and the career variables identified in Chapter III, will be analyzed by selection process to see if, at the provincial level, this has caused an alteration in the type of person chosen as premier. BACKGROUND VARIABLES ANALYZED BY SELECTION PROCESS The background variables of: age on becoming party leader, previous occupation, level of education, and place of birth, will be analyzed by selection process. AGE ON BECOMING PARTY LEADER John Courtney shows that at the national level, Conservative leaders chosen by convention were 1.4 years younger than those chosen by caucus, but Liberal leaders chosen by convention were 7.2 years older than those chosen by caucus (Table 4-5). These results are not replicated at the provincial level. TABLE 4-5 Mean Age of National Liberal and Conservative Leaders Analyzed by Selection Process Conservative Liberal Caucus chosen 58.0(7) 47.3(3) Convention chosen 56.6(6) 54.5(4) ALL 57.4(13) 51.4(7) Provincially, convention chosen leaders are 34 years younger than caucus chosen leaders (Table 4-6). Conservative premiers chosen by convention are 2.3 years younger than their caucus counterparts. Liberal premiers chosen by 58 convention are 3-0 years younger. Overall, except for the three national Liberal leaders chosen by caucus, provincial leaders are chosen at a younger age than are national Liberal or Conservative leaders. TABLE 4-6 Mean Age of Provincial Premiers on Becoming Party Leader Analyzed by Selection Process Conservative Liberal Other Overall Caucus chosen 48.5(43) 48.9(53) 46.6(32) 48.2(128) Convention chosen 46.2(25) 43.9(22) 43.6(12) 44.8(59) ALL 47.7(68) 47.7(75) 45.8(44) 47.1(187) At the provincial level, the convention process has produced younger premiers. The convention process is given a large amount of media exposure and, in comparison with the low-key caucus process, allows for more free publicity of new leaders. The impact of image has become a dominant factor in leadership selection. This attention has diverted focus from policy issues to consideration of personal style and appearance. The image of a younger candidate is becoming more favourable than that of an older, established candidate. PREVIOUS OCCUPATION OF PREMIERS Over 50 percent (537 percent) of premiers were lawyers before entering office. Analysis by selection process reveals a significant difference in previous occupations. Of the 131 caucus chosen premiers, 56.5 percent were lawyers before entering office, yet of convention chosen leaders, 47.5 percent were lawyers (Table 4-7). 59 TABLE 4-7 Previous Occupation of Premiers Analyzed by Selection Process 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Caucus chosen % 56.5 9.2 3.3 17.6 3.8 .8 .8 Convention chosen % 47.5 8.5 6.8 20.6 6.8 6.8 1.7 ALL % 53.7 8.9 5.8 18.4 4.7 2.6 1.1 (1-lawyers, 2-labourer/farmer, 3-professional, 4-businessman, 5-administrator, 6-teacher, 7-minister, 8-military, 9-journalist) Convention chosen leaders have more diverse backgrounds. Ministers, teachers, administrators, businessmen and professionals are more likely to become premiers when the convention process is used. This confirms Courtney's hypothesis that conventions have opened up the competition to outsiders. Traditionally, as Chapter II discussed, lawyers are the Canadian ruling class, but the convention process is leading to a change in the pattern of the occupational backgrounds of provincial premiers. The legal profession, however, still remains the most common occupational background for premiers. A time analysis of occupation does not explain the phenomenon. The percentage of lawyers in the work force has not decreased since 1945.12  LEVEL OF EDUCATION OF PREMIER Provincial premiers have always been an educated elite. Nearly three-quarters of premiers have a post-secondary education. Analysis by selection process shows that convention chosen leaders are more likely to have a higher level of education than caucus chosen leaders (Table 4-8). Over four-fifths (83.1 8 9 (N) 1.5 3.8 (131) 0 1.7 (59) 1.1 3.2 (190) 60 percent) of convention premiers, and 69.5 percent of caucus premiers;have a post-secondary education. TABLE 4-8 Caucus chosen Convention chosen ALL Level of Education of Premiers Analyzed bv Selection Process Unknown High School Post-Secondary 5.3(7) 0(0) 3.7(7) 25.2(33) 16.9(10) 22.6(43) 69.5(91) 83.1(49) 73.7(140) N 131 59 190 Level of education may be a function of time rather than the selection process. The proportion of the Canadian population attending school nearly doubled between 1911 and 1987. Accordingly, the percentage of the population with a post-secondary degree has increased.14 It is difficult to conclude whether or not the increased level of education of premiers has resulted from the selection process used or from basic alterations in the country's education levels. PLACE OF BIRTH OF PREMIERS It is also difficult to determine whether the variable of place of birth is reflective of selection process or time period. As Table 4-9 shows, 83.1 percent of convention chosen premiers were born in the province of which they became premier, while only 64.9 percent of caucus chosen premiers could claim the same. The percentage of Canadian born premiers has increased with the adoption of the convention process. TABLE 4-9 61 Place of Birth of Premiers Analyzed by Selection Process Out of Province Out of In Province In Country Country N Caucus chosen 64.9(85) 22.1(29) 12.2(16) 130 Convention chosen 83.1(49) 10.2(6) 6.8(4) 59 ALL 70.5(134) 18.4(35) 10.5(20) 189 An analysis of the Canadian population shows that the percentage of foreign-born Canadians has decreased since 1945, when the convention process was first commonly used. An analysis of internal-migration patterns suggests that caucus chosen premiers would be more likely to have been born in-province than their convention chosen counterparts, which is not the case. There is considerable population mobility in Canada. The percentage of internal migrants has increased since 1945 (Table 4-10). TABLE 4-10 Canadian Population Statistics - Foreign Born and Internal Migration Percent Percent of Foreign Born of Internal Total Population Canadians Migrants of Canada (1000 s) 1971 15.3 11.5 21,568 1951 14.7 9.9 14,009 1941 17.5 8.0 11,507 1921 22.3 7.8 8,788 1901 22.0 5.6 5,371 1871 - 1.8 3,689 62 Just as the results from the level of education statistics are ambiguous, it is difficult to determine whether or not the place of birth statistic analyzed by selection process is a reflection of demographics. CAREER VARIABLES ANALYZED BY SELECTION PROCESS The variables of cabinet and parliamentary experience, duration of premierships, and reason for leaving, will now be analyzed by selection process. PARLIAMENTARY AND CABINET EXPERIENCE Leaders chosen by convention are younger (Table 4-11) than those chosen by caucus. Courtney demonstrates that, at the national level, the parliamentary experience of Conservative and Liberal leaders at the time of their selection by convention is half of what it had been in the pre-convention period (Table 4-11). TABLE 4-1116 Mean Parliamentary Experience of National Leaders at the Time of Their Selection (Years) Experience (N) Caucus Chosen Conservative 13.5 7.0 4.4 2.0 (6) Liberal 10.1 1.3 5.1 .6 (3) Convention Chosen Conservative 7.1 1.7 9.3 6.2 (6) Liberal 5-3 4.7 0.0 0.0 (4) (1-parliamentary experience, 2-cabinet experience, 3-provincial legislative experience, 4-provincial cabinet experience) 63 It is anticipated that convention chosen provincial premiers will have less parliamentary experience because of their younger age, and because it is eipected that provincial results will mirror those found by Courtney (Table 4-12). Since the advent of the convention process, provincial premiers have had less experience - but only one year less. TABLE 4-12 Mean Parliamentary Experience of Provincial Leaders at the Time of Their Selection Total Parliamentary Experience Caucus Chosen Liberal Conservative Other All Convention Chosen Liberal Conservative Other All TOTAL 9.6 11.5 8.6 10.0 8.2 8.7 11.4 9.1 9.7 Cabinet Experience 3.8 4.5 4.1 4.1 3.5 2.6 5.3 3.5 3.9 [Ml (55) (43) (33) (131) (22) (25) (12) (59) (190) When the caucus process was used, every Conservative premier had at least one year of parliamentary experience (an average of 11.5 years). Since the convention process was adopted, four Conservative premiers have had no parliamentary experience, federal or provincial,and the mean amount of time in parliament has dropped to 8.7 years. Liberal premiers have also spent less time in positions in parliament. Within third parties, the opposite has occurred: the convention 64 process has produced premiers with an average of 16 months more in parliament and 14 months more in a cabinet position. Younger and lesser experienced premiers can have a variety of influences upon a government. It can be argued that some degree of parliamentary experience is useful and beneficial to a potential premier. Parliamentary experience will better prepare a person for the atmosphere of the political arena, and provide some indication of the informal and formal rules and procedures of the legislature. Similarly, it can be argued that a premier without any experience is not restricted by traditional practices and attitudes. An inexperienced, young leader can be presented to the electorate and his party as the symbol of something new and a change from leaders and policies of the past. Whether or not this experience has a resulting positive effect, convention chosen premiers have less parliamentary and cabinet experience than caucus chosen leaders. The differences are not as profound as those found between national party leaders, but at the provincial level differences do exist. DURATION OF PREMIERSHIPS Convention chosen leaders have served an average of 6.5 years as premier, while caucus chosen premiers have served just 4.9 years. Conservative convention chosen premiers serve on the average almost four years longer than Conservative caucus chosen leaders. Overall, a premier serves for an average of 5.4 years. (Table 4-13). 65 TABLE 4-13 Duration of Premierships Analyzed bv Selection Process Mean SJL Min. Max. N Caucus chosen 4.9 5.3 0 27 131 Convention chosen 6.5 4.7 0 23 59 ALL 5.4 5.1 0 27 190 It is plausible that, as Laurier noted in 1919, a leader who has faced convention delegates and won their support is more likely to have the qualities desired by the electorate. The statistics for provincial premiers confirm the hypothesis. Convention chosen premiers endure 32 percent longer than caucus chosen premiers. DEPARTURE OF PREMIERS We noted that caucus chosen leaders are older than convention chosen leaders (Table 4-14). There are also differences in the factors that end their career. Almost twice as many caucus chosen premiers, when compared to convention chosen premiers, pass away in office. TABLE 4-14 Reason for Leaving Analyzed bv Selection Process 1 2 3 4 5 N Caucus chosen % 9.9 30.6 19.8 40.5 0 131 Convention chosen % 5.1 27.1 11.9 33.9 22.0 59 TOTAL % 8.4 29.5 17.4 37.9 6.8 190 (1-deceased, 2-election loss, 3-co-opted, 4-retired/resignation, 5-still serving) 66 Caucus chosen premiers have been more often co-opted to another government position. The practice of co-option is not frequently used; the last provincial premier to be co-opted was Ed Schreyer in 1979, and this statistic may reflect the time period during which the caucus process was utilized, not the process itself. There is little variation among those who leave premiership for the other two reasons. CONCLUSION Replicating Courtney's findings for national party leaders, this chapter has shown that selection process has had an impact upon the type of person that becomes premier. Provincial premiers chosen by convention are younger and have less parliamentary and cabinet experience than caucus chosen premiers. Consistent with Courtney's findings for the national level, provincial convention chosen premiers have more diverse occupational backgrounds. The variables of level of formal education, and place of birth,also differ when analyzed by selection process. As discussed earlier, it is impossible to determine whether or not the differences in these variables are solely a result of selection process. The convention process has been used commonly since 1945, and the level of formal education of all Canadians has increased since 1945. The place of birth statistic has also changed over time. Since 1945, there have been fewer foreign-born Canadians, yet more internal-migration. With the use of the convention process, there have been fewer premiers born out of the country and fewer out-of-province premiers. Though there has been more internal migration, more indigenous leaders have been chosen when the convention process has been used. Canadian provincial premiers chosen by caucus serve the same duration as Australian state premiers.17 Provincial premiers chosen by convention serve for 1.6 years longer than caucus chosen premiers. The termination of premierships also differs when analyzed by selection process. Almost twice as many caucus 67 chosen premiers pass away in office, and they have also been more often co-opted to another government position. 68 ENDNOTES For an example of a study limited to a specific convention see Don E. Blake, R.K. Carty, and L. Erickson, "Ratification or Repudiation: The Social Credit Leadership Convention" (Paper for Canadian Political Science Association, Hamilton, Ontario, June 1987). J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada (Toronto: Macmillan of Canadian, 1973). J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada, p. 141. J.C. Courtney, "Leadership Conventions and the Development of the National Political Community in Canada" in National Politics and Community in  Canada, ed. R.K. Carty and W.P. Ward (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1986), p.100. Campbell Sharman, Owen Hughes and Kevin Tuffin, "State Premiers" in Australian State Politics, ed. Brian Galligan (Melbourne: Longmen Chethine, 1986), p. 229-243. Agar Adamson, M.W. Conley and Patrick J. Smith, "Provincial Party Conventions in Canada: Contexts and Cases" (Paper for the Conference on Party Democracy in Canada, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, July 1985), p.8. Frank Mackinnon, The Government of Prince Edward Island (Toronto: The University of Toronto Press, 1953), p. 257. J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada, p. 3. These dates and figures represent caucuses and conventions which produced leaders who became premiers. Conventions may have been used earlier, but the data set does not include leaders who never became a premier. In 1967, Rene Levesque left the Quebec Liberal party and founded the "Mouvement Souverainete - Association", which in October 1968 became the Parti Quebecois. Levesque was the founder of the party and did not face a convention to become party leader, nor did a caucus select him to be leader. Throughout this thesis, his premiership is included in the caucus category. 69 11. See J. Lele, G. Perlin, and H.C. Thorburn, "The National Party Convention," in Party Politics in Canada, ed. Hugh Thorburn (Scarborough: Prentice-Hall of Canada Ltd., 1979), p. 77-82. 12. See J.C. Courtney, "Leadership Conventions and the Development of the National Political Community in Canada", pp. 94-111. 13- J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada, p. 136. 14. Daniel Kubat and David Thornton, A Statistical Profile of Canadian Society (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd., 1974), p. 110. 15. F.H. Leacy, ed. Historical Statistics of Canada (Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1983), pp. A327-38. 16. J.C. Courtney. The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada, pp. 142-43. 17. Sharman et al., "State Premiers", p. 235. 70 CHAPTER V  GENERAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS This thesis has asked and responded to the questions: "who becomes a premier?", "what is a premier's career pattern?" and "does selection process make a difference in the type of leader's chosen?". The previous chapters have provided a clear portrait of the type of men who have reached the top level of Canadian provincial politics. This chapter will summarize the major findings of the substantive analysis and summarize the answers to the above three questions. In conclusion, it will compare these findings with others and indicate how this thesis contributes to the literature. WHO BECOMES A PREMIER? S. Encel in his Cabinet Government in Australia remarks that: There is no such thing as an identikit for prime ministers. The men who reach the top of the greasy pole vary enormously .J Chapter II, in responding to "who becomes a premier?", shows that there is also no such thing as an identikit for a Canadian provincial premier. The typical Canadian provincial premier is a Protestant lawyer who reaches the office at age 48.6. He was born in the province in which he becomes premier and has had a post-secondary education. As one might expect, the data do reveal that premiers have varied across parties and across the regions. Western premiers are more likely to be businessmen and younger than the national average, while Central Canadian premiers have been older lawyers. Canadian provincial premiers have been younger than national party leaders, federal cabinet ministers, and Australian state premiers (Table 5-1). 71 TABLE Comparison of Mean Age on Becoming Canadian Premier, National Party Leader, Federal Cabinet Minister, and Australian State Premier Mean N Canadian Provincial Premier National Party Leader Federal Cabinet Minister Australian State Premier 48.6 54.4 50.2 517 189 20 379 81 In all studies of political elites surveyed for this thesis, leaders have not reflected the age composition of their electorates. Canadian provincial premiers are significantly younger than other political elites. This finding is one upon which further research needs to be done. Provincial premiers have not reflected the country's religious composition. Religion has always been a crucial dividing line in Canadian politics, and premiers and prime ministers have paid close attention to getting as balanced a representation of the major religious denominations in their governments as possible. At the federal level, "for many years, however, the proportion of Roman Catholics in the cabinet was considerably less than their share of the Canadian population, but this has been increasing over time.3 Similarly, at the provincial level "cabinets continue to be unrepresentative of religion according to population,"4 even though the religious composition of the cabinet has been an important factor in selecting ministers. With the exception of Quebec, Roman Catholics have seen disproportionately few of their denomination become provincial premiers. 72 Over one-half of Canadian premiers were lawyers before coming to office. This replicates the occupational background patterns of national party leaders and federal cabinet ministers (Table 5-2). TABLE 5-2 Percentage of Lawyers as Canadian Premiers, National Party Leaders .and Federal Cabinet Ministers^ 1 N Canadian Provincial Premiers 53.7(102) 190 National Party Leaders 65.0(13) 20 Federal Cabinet Ministers 53.0(201) 379 Lawyers continue to be the dominant Canadian political class. With the adoption of the convention process (Chapter IV), more diverse occupational backgrounds are entering the Canadian political elite, although lawyers still remain the political ruling class. The educational background of Canadian premiers is also considerably different from that of the general population. As with Canadian prime ministers and federal cabinet ministers, provincial premiers are an educated elite (Table 5-3). TABLE 5-3 Comparison of Level of Education of Canadian Premiers, Federal Cabinet Ministers, and Provincial Cabinet Ministers6 Percent with Post-Secondary Education Total N Canadian Provincial Premiers 73.7(140) 190 Canadian Prime Ministers 72.2(13) 18 Federal Cabinet Ministers 65.7(249) 379 / 73 Less than 10 percent of the Canadian population has a post-secondary education, yet consistently more than 50 percent of the country's political leaders do. The place of birth of Canadian premiers varies regionally, yet over 70 percent of premiers have been born in the province of their premiership. Of the remaining 30 percent, 18.4 percent were born in Canada. No comparative data of this variable are available. It can be concluded that Canadian provincial premiers are typical of other Canadian political elites. Though regional, provincial,and partisan differences exist between premiers, overall they have been highly educated , Canadian-born lawyers. WHAT IS A PREMIER'S CAREER PATTERN? Chapter III, drawing upon the work of Sharman et al.7, responds to the question "what is a premier's career pattern?". It becomes apparent that in Canada, as in Australia, three distinct political career paths exist. The first path, replacing one premier by another while the party is in power, is the most frequented in both Canadian provincial politics and Australian state politics. The second path, or the comeback path, is the least frequented in Canada though the second most frequented in Australia. Using the post of leader of the opposition to gain the premiership, path-three, is the second most frequently used method in Canada, but the least used in Australia. Table 5-4 provides a comparison of the careers of Australian and Canadian premiers. Australian premiers, who are still all chosen by traditional caucus selection process, have averaged 6.1 years more parliamentary and cabinet experience than Canadian premiers.8 Though they have more experience, Australian premiers serve six months less time as "premier than their Canadian counterparts. Sharman et al. conclude that in Australian state politics: 74 the strength of the logic of parliamentary institutions coupled with disciplined mass parties (is) in constraining the career pattern of the chief executive officer to a narrow hierarchical pattern of fixed sequence, long apprenticeship and relatively short enjoyment of office.9 The data in this thesis indicates that, overall, Canadian premiers have comparatively shorter apprenticeships and longer premierships. Table 5-4 also reveals that the path-one and path-two Australian and Canadian premiers serve similar lengths of time as premier. Path-three premiers in Canada serve significantly longer than their Australian counterparts. A further analysis of opposition parties in the two countries, and premiers who cross the floor to the premiership, may further explain this phenomenon. The last step in the career pattern of any premier is leaving the party leadership. Four distinct ways in which a leader can leave office exist: (1) passing away, (2) election loss (including loss at a convention), (3) co-option to another government position, and (4) retirement or resignation. 75 TABLE 5-4 Comparison of Careers of Canadian Provincial Premiers and Australian State Premiers10 Years of Years of Parliamentary Cabinet Experience Experience Path-One Canadian Australian Path-Two Canadian Australian Path-Three Canadian Australian All Canadian Australian 10.4 16.5 14.9 15.7 6.1 14.2 9.7 15.8 5.2 7.7 5.2 3.9 0.0 0.0 3.9 5.0 Years as Premier 4.7 4.9 5.4 5.5 7.1 4.1 5.4 4.9 (%]N 64.7(123) 50.6(41) 9.5(18) 28.4(23) 25.8(49) 21.0(17) 100.0(190) 100.0(81) Over the 120 years surveyed, 37.9 percent of provincial premiers left office as a result of resignation or retirement. No other data for this variable were available, except for those dealing with the exi t of Canadian federal cabinet ministers. Table 5-5 reveals that reasons for leaving elected office are similar. 76 TABLE S-S Comparison of Reason for Leaving Party Leadership and Exit from Federal Cabinet (As % of Total)11 1 2 3 4 5 6 N Premiership 8.4 29.5 17.4 37.9 - 6.8 190 Federal Cabinet 6.3 33.5 26.1 22.2 4.0 7.7 379 (1-deceased, 2-election loss, 3-co-opted, 4-retired/resignation, 5-other, 6-still serving) Premiers are less likely to be co-opted to another government position, and more likely to retire or resign from office, but otherwise the statistics show little variation. Analysis of a Canadian premier's career pattern shows it to be different from that of an Australian counterpart, A Canadian provincial premier, on average, serves in parliament for almost 10 years before becoming premier. Once becoming premier, the average individual serves for 54 years and leaves office through retirement or resignation. DOES SELECTION PROCESS MAKE A DIFFERENCE? Chapter IV draws from Courtney's work,12 and analyzes the impact that the convention process has had upon the type of individual chosen as premier. In responding to the question "does selection process make a difference", the background and career variables (Chapters II and III) were analyzed by selection process. As explained in Chapter IV, prior to 1945, over 89 percent of premiers were chosen by caucus, while post-1945 over 84 percent of premiers were chosen by convention. Provincial leadership conventions are smaller than national leadership conventions: they average about 950 less delegates, two less candidates and one less ballot than their national counterparts.^  77 TABLE 5-6 Comparison of Provincial and National Leadership Conventions (Means) Number of Delegates Number of Candidates Number of Ballots N Provincial National 1172.5 1968.0 3.7 6.0 1.8 3.0 13 At the national level, Conservative leaders chosen by convention were 14 years younger than those chosen by caucus, but Liberal leaders chosen by convention were 7.2 years older than those chosen by caucus.14 Regardless of partisan affiliation, at the provincial level, convention chosen leaders are younger than their caucus chosen counterparts. The change in selection process has also brought to the fore premiers from more diverse occupational backgrounds. At the provincial and national level, the convention process has opened up the leadership race to outsiders. This has resulted in a greater number of businessmen, professionals, teachers, ministers and administrators running for, and achieving, party leadership. Lawyers still dominate as political leaders, but to a lesser extent since the adoption of the convention process. Chapter IV (Tables 4-12 and 4-13) shows that since the adoption of the convention process, national party leaders and premiers have had less parliamentary and cabinet experience at the time of being selected party leader. This is understandable at the provincial level because, since the convention method has been used, leaders have been selected at younger ages and consequently have had less parliamentary experience. 78 Convention chosen leaders, on average, serve 6.5 years as premier, while caucus chosen leaders serve, on average, only 4.9 years. Of interest, Australian state premiers, who are all caucus chosen, serve an identical 4.9 years.!5 These statistics support the hypothesis that a premier who has faced convention delegates and won their support is more likely to have the qualities desired by the electorate. CONCLUSION The analyses presented in this thesis have answered the questions: "who becomes a premier?", "what is a premier's career pattern?', and "does selection process make a difference?'. With reference to Canadian provincial premiers, these questions have never been asked previously. The data set created for this study allows for further statistical analysis. Inferential statistics, further correlations, and regression analysis will provide for a greater understanding of Canadian premiers. This thesis outlines the basic terrain on which future studies can build. Further studies must ask more detailed questions about the impact of leadership conventions upon political leadership. It is anticipated that the pioneering results of this study will stimulate further research into the leadership of Canadian provinces. 79 ENDNOTES 1. S. Encel, Cabinet Government in Australia (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1974), p. 165. 2. Data from: J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1973), p. 136, W.A. Matheson, The Prime Minister and the Cabinet (Toronto: Methuen Publications, 1986), P. 102., and Campbell Sharman, Own Hughes and Kevin Tuffin, "State Premiers", in Australian State Politics, ed. Brian Galligan ( Melbourne: Longmen Chethine, 1986), p. 235. 3. W.A. Matheson, The Prime Minister and the Cabinet, p. 105. 4. David R. Dunlop, "Cabinets: Social Composition," in The Provincial Political  Systems: Comparative Essavs. ed. Donald C. Rowat (Ottawa: Carleton Universtiy, 1974), p. 177. 5. Data from: J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders, p. 135., and W.A. Matheson, The Prime Minister and the Cabinet, p. 112, 6. Data from: R.M. Punnett, The Prime Minister in Canadian Government and  Politics (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1977), p. 12., and W.A. Matheson, The Prime Minister and the Cabinet, p. 108. 7. Sharman et al., "State Premiers". 8 Sharman et al., "State Premiers", p. 235. 9. Sharman et al., "State Premiers", p. 240. 10. Information from Sharman et al., "State Premiers", p. 240. 11. W.A. Matheson, The Prime Minister and the Cabinet, p. 117. 12. J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada. 13. J.C. Courtney, "Leadership Conventions and the Development of the National Political Community in Canada" in National Politics and Community in 80 Canada, ed. R.K. Carty and W.P. Ward (Vancouver: The University of British Columbia Press, 1986), p. 98. 14. J.C. Courtney, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada, p. 136. 15. Sharman et al., "State Premiers", p. 235. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 81 GENERAL Adamson, Agar; Conley, M.W.; and Smith, J., "Provincial Party Conventions in Canada: Contexts and Cases" Paper for the Conference on Party Democracy in Canada, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, July 1985. Bene my, F.W.G., The Elected Monarch. Toronto: George G. Harrap and Co. Ltd., 1965. Black, D, Winners and Losers: The Book of Canadian Political Lists. Toronto: Methuen Press, 1984. Canadian Annual Review. 1902-1938, 1960-1970. Canadian Annual Review of Politics and Public Affairs. 1971-1983. Canadian Parliamentary Companion. 1867-97 on microfiche. Canadian Parliamentary Guide. 1898-1986. The Canadian Who's Who. 1936-1986 - 1936-1966 Trans-Canada Press, 1967-78, Who's Who Canadian Pub., 1979-86 University of Toronto. Census of Canada. Ottawa: Statistics Canada 1971,1976,1981. Courtney, J.C, The Selection of National Party Leaders in Canada. Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1973. "Leadership Conventions and the Development of the National Political Community in Canada", In National Politics and Community in Canada pp. 94-111. Edited by R.K. Carty and W.P. Ward. Vancouver: The University of British Columbia Press, 1986. 82 Dunlop, David R., "Cabinets - Social Composition" In The Provincial Political Systems:  Comparative Essays, pp. 159-192. Edited by Donald C. Rowat. Ottawa: Carleton University, 1974. Dyck, R., Provincial Politics in Canada. Scarborough: Prentice-Hall Canada Inc., 1986. Encel, S., Cabinet Government in Australia Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1974. Engelman, F.C. and Schwartz, M.A., Political Parties and the Canadian Social  Structure. Scarborough: Prentice-Hall of Canada Ltd., 1967. Filion, John, ed., The Canadian World Almanac and Book of Facts 1987. Toronto: Global Press, 1986. The Globe and Mail on microfiche. Kubat, Daniel and Thornton, David, A Statistical Profile of Canadian Society Toronto: McGraw and Hill Ryerson Ltd., 1974. Leacy, F.H., ed. Historical Statistics of Canada. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1983. Lele, J.; Perlin, G.; and Thorburn, H.C. "The National Party Convention" In Party  Politics in Canada. 4th ed., edited by H.C. Thorburn. Scarborough: Prentice-Hall of Canada, Ltd., 1977. Marsh, J.H., Ed., The Canadian Encyclopedia, vol. I-111. Edmonton: Hurtig Publishers, 1985. Matheson, W.A., The Prime Minister and the Cabinet. Toronto: Methuen Publications, 1976. 83 Norman, Doug, "Regional and Provincial Political Cultures" In The Provincial  Political Systems: Comparative Essays, pp. 11 -37. Edited by Donald C. Rowat. Ottawa: Carleton University, 1974. Parker, C.W. Who's Who in Western Canada., vol.1. Vancouver: Canadian Press Association, 1911. Porter, John, The Vertical Mosaic. Toronto: The University of Toronto Press, 1965. Punnett, R.M., The Prime Minister In Canadian Government and Politics. Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1977. Roberts, C.G.D. and Tunnell, A.L. Eds., Canadian Who Was Who, vol. 1 & 2, Toronto: Trans-Canada Press, 1983. Robbins, J.E., ed., Enclyclopedia Canadiana, vols. 1-10, Toronto: Grolier of Canada, 1970. Sharman, C, Hughes, 0., and Tuffin K. "State Premiers "In Australian State Politics, pp. 229-243. Edited by Brian Galligan. Melbourne: Longmen Chethine, 1986. Simeon, R., and Elkins, D., "Provincial Political Cultures in Canada." In Small Worlds. Edited by R. Simeon and D. Elkins. Toronto: Methuen, 1980. Van Loon, R.J., and Whittington, M.S., The Canadian Political System: Environment.  Structure and Process. 4th ed., Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd., \9S7. Wallace, S.W. The Dictionary of Canadian Biography. Toronto: The Macmillan Company of Canada Ltd., 1945. Weller, P., First Among Equals: Prime Ministers in Westminister Systems. Boston: George Allen and Unwin, 1985. 84 British Columbia B.C. Pictoral and Biographical, vol. 1 k 2, Vancouver: The S.J. Clarke Publishing Co., 1914. Carter, S.M., Ed. Who's Who in B.C.. vol. 3,4,7,8. Vancouver: S.M. Carter Publishers, 1939, 1940, 1948, 1950. Jack man. S.W.. Portraits of the Premiers. Sidney, B.C.: Grays Publishing Ltd., 1969. Kerr, J.B. Biographical Dictionary of Well-Known British Columbians. Vancouver: Kerr and Begg, 1890. Mitchell, D.J., W.A.C. Bennett and the Rise of B.C. Vancouver: Douglas and Mclntyre, 1983. Oglivie, E.M., B.C. Provincial Political Parties and Their Leaders 1925-1975: A  Bibiliography. University of British Columbia, Aug. 1979 (unpublished manuscript). The Vancouver Province on microfiche. The Vancouver Sun on microfiche. Alberta Bolton, K.; Fogarty, S.A.; Saul, D.; and Ursan, S.; The Albertans. Edmonton: Lone Pine Publishing, 1981. The Edmonton journal on microfiche. Irving, J.A., The Social Credit Movement in Alberta. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1960. 85 MacPherson, C.B., Democracy in Alberta. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1962. Thomas, L.G., The Liberal Party in Alberta. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1959. Who's Who in Alberta. Edmonton: L.U.L. Publications Ltd., 1979. Saskatchewan Eager, E., Saskatchewan Government - Politics and Pragmatism. Saskatoon: Western Producer Prairie Books, 1980. Lipset. S.M.. Agrarian Socialism. Garden Gity N.Y.: Achor Press, 1968. Lloyd, D., Woodrow: A Biography of W.S. Llovd. The Woodrow Lloyd Memorial Fund, 1979. A Who's Who in Saskatchewan. Lyone, H., Pub., Western Canada Directories Ltd., 1965. Manitoba Donnelly, M.S., The Government of Manitoba. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963. Jackson, J.A., The Centennial History of Manitoba. Toronto: Manitoba Historical Society and McClelland and Stewart Ltd., 1970. Kendle, J., John Bracken: A Political Biography. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1979. 86 Montgomery, R.B.C., "Premiers of Manitoba", Canadian Magazine. May-Oct 1897, pp. 386-395. Morton. W.L.. Manitoba: A History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967. Wiseman, N., Social Democracy in Manitoba. Winnipeg: The University of Manitoba Press, 1983. Ontario Willison; j.S.( "Premiers of Ontario", Canadian Magazine. Nov. 1897 - Apl, 1898, pp. 16-31. The Ottawa Citizen on microfiche. Quebec Black, C, Duplessis. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1977. Linteau, P.A.; Duracher, R. and Robert, J.C, Quebec: A History 1867-1829. Toronto: James Lorimer and Company Pub. 1983. MacDonald. L.I.. From Bourassa to Bourassa. Harvest House, 1984. Quinn, H.F., The Union Nationale. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963. Vigod, B.L., Quebec Before Duplessis. Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press, 1986. 87 Newfoundland Hefferton. T.B.. Newfoundland Who's Who. St. Johns, 1952. Nearly, P., "Party Politics in Newfoundland, 1949-71: A Survey and Analysis". In Newfoundland in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. Edited by James Hiller and Peter Nearly, Toronto: The University of Toronto Press, 1980. New Brunswick Doyle. A.T.. The Premiers of New Brunswick. Fredericton: Brunswick Press, 1983. Garland, R., and Machum, G., An Almanac of New Brunswick Elections 1870-1980. St. John: Keystone Printing, 1979. Hannay, J., "Premiers of New Brunswick". Canadian Magazine. May-Oct 1897, pp. 213-221. MacNutt, W.S., New Brunswick: A History: 1784-1867. Toronto: MacMillan of Canada Ltd., 1963. Stanley, D.M.M., Louis Robichaud: A Decade of Power. Halifax: Nimbus Publishing Ltd., 1984. Thorburn, H.G., Politics in New Brunswick. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1961. Woodward, C.A., The History of New Brunswick Provincial Election Campaigns and  Platforms 1866-1974. Toronto: Micromedia, 1976. 88 Prince Edward Island Barrett, J. I.. Who's Who On Prince Edward Island. Charlotte town: Walt Wheeler Publications, 1986. Cotton, W.L., "Premiers of Prince Edward Island". Canadian Magazine. May-Oct 1879, pp. 468-474. Mackinnon, F., The Government of Prince Edward Island. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1951. Mackinnon. W.E.. The Life of the Party. Summerside: Williams and Crue Ltd., 1973. Nova Scotia Beck, J.M., The Government of Nova Scotia. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1957. Langley, J.W., "Premiers of Nova Scotia." Canadian Magazine. May-Oct 1897, pp. 3-13. Stevens. G.. Stanfield. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Ltd., 1973. 89 APPENDIX A There have been 185 individuals who have served as the Premier of a Canadian province. The data base for this thesis has 190 men listed. If a premier left the leadership of the party (i.e. was not premier, leader of the opposition, or leader of the party in any capacity), but returned to the premiership, he has been treated as two individuals. This 'double premiership' has happened five times in Canadian history. These cases are noted in the following lists of premiers. Ths lists and spelling of names are taken from the 1986 edition of The Canadian Parliamentary  Guide. PREMIERS OP BRITISH COLUMBIA SINCE 1871 Premier Partv Year 1. John McCreight 1871 2. Amor De Cosmos (William Alexander Smith) 1872 3. George Walkem 1874 4. Andrew Elliott 1876 - George Walkem 1878 5. Robert Beaven 1882 6. William Smithe 1883 7. A.E.B. Davie 1887 8. John Robson 1889 9. Theodore Davie 1892 10. J.H. Turner 1895 11. C.A. Semlin 1898 12. Joseph Martin 1900 13. James Dunsmuir 1900 14. E.G. Prior 1902 15. Richard McBride Conservative 1903 16. William Bowser Conservative 1915 17. H.C. Brewster Liberal 1916 18. John Oliver Liberal 1918 19. J.D. MacLean Liberal 1927 20. S.E. Tolmie Conservative 1928 21. T.D. Pattullo Liberal 1933 22. John Hart Coalition 1941 23. Byron Johnson Coalition 1947 24. W.A.C. Bennett Social Credit 1952 25. Dave Barrett New Democratic Party 1972 26. Bill Bennett Social Credit 1975 27. William VanderZalm Social Credit 1986 91 PREMIERS OF ALBERTA SINCE 1905 Premier Partv Year 1. Alexander Rutherford Liberal 1905 2. Arthur Sifton Liberal 1910 3. Charles Stewart Liberal 1917 4. Herbert Greenfield UFA 1921 5. J.E. Brownlee UFA 1925 6. R.G. Reid UFA 1934 7. William Aberhart Social Credit 1935 8. Ernest Manning Social Credit 1943 9. Harry Strom Social Credit 1968 10. Peter Lougheed Progressive Conservative 1971 11. Don Getty Progressive Conservative 1985 92 PREMIERS OF SASKATCHEWAN SINCE 1905 Premier Party Year 1. Walter Scott Liberal 1905 2. W.M. Martin Liberal 1916 3. CA. Dunning Liberal 1922 4. James Gardiner Liberal 1926 5. J.T.M. Anderson Cooperative 1929 - James Gardiner Liberal 1934 6. W.J. Patterson Liberal 1935 7. T.C. Douglas CCF 1944 8. W.S. Lloyd CCF 1961 9. Ross Thatcher Liberal 1964 10. Allan Blakeney NDP 1971 11. Grant Devine Progressive Conservative 1982 93 PREMIERS OF MANITOBA SINCE 1870 Premier Partv Year 1. A. Boyd* 1870 2. N.A. Girard* 1871 3. H.J.H. Clarke* 1872 - N.A. Girard* 1874 4. R.A. Davis 1874 5. John Nor quay Conservative 1878 6. D.H. Harrison Conservative 1887 7. T. Greenway Liberal 1888 8. H.J. Macdonald Conservative 1900 9. Rodmond Robin Conservative 1900 10. T.C. Norris Liberal 1915 11. John Bracken UFM 1922 12. Stuart Garson Liberal-Progressive 1943 13. Douglas Campbell Liberal-Progressive 1948 14. Duff Roblin Progressive Conservative 1958 15. Walter Weir Progressive Conservative 1967 16. Ed Schreyer NDP 1969 17. Sterling Lyon Progressive Conservative 1977 18. Howard Pawley NDP 1981 "These men were not really Premiers but rather were in charge of the administration of the province. They have been included in the statistical analysis. PREMIERS OF ONTARIO SINCE 1867 Premier Party Year 1. John Sandfield Macdonald Coalition 1867 2. Edward Blake Liberal 1871 3. Oliver Mowat Liberal 1872 4. A.S. Hardy Liberal 1896 5. George Ross Liberal 1899 6. James Whitney Conservative 1905 7. William Hearst Conservative 1914 8. E.C. Drury United Farmers 1919 9. Howard Ferguson Conservative 1923 10. George Henry Conservative 1930 11. Mitch Hepburn Liberal 1934 12. Gordon Conant Liberal 1942 13. Harry Nixon Liberal 1943 14. George Drew Progressive Conservative 1943 15. Tom Kennedy Progressive Conservative 1948 16. Leslie Frost Progressive Conservative 1949 17. John Rob arts Progressive Conservative 1961 18. William Davis Progressive Conservative 1971 19. Frank Miller Progressive Conservative 1985 20. David Peterson Liberal 1985 95 PREMIERS OF QUEBEC SINCE 1867 Premier Party Year 1. Pierre Chauveau Conservative 1867 2. Gedeon Ouimet Conservative 1873 3. Charles Boucher de Boucherville Conservative 1874 4. Henri-G. Joly Liberal 1878 5. J. Adolphe Chapleau Conservative 1879 6. Alfred Mousseau Conservative 1882 7. John Jones Ross Conservative 1884 8. L. Olivier Taillon Conservative 1887 9. Honore Mercier Liberal 1887 *_ Charles Boucher de Boucherville Conservative 1891 *_ L. Olivier Taillon Conservative 1892 10. Edmund Flynn Conservative 1896 11. E. Gabriel Marchand Liberal 1897 12. S. Napoleon Parent Liberal 1900 13. Lomer Gouin Liberal 1905 14. L. Alexandre Taschereau Liberal 1920 15. Adelard Godbout Liberal 1936 16. Maurice Duplessis Union Nationale 1936 - Adelard Godbout Liberal 1939 - Maurice Duplessis Union Nationale 1944 17. Paul Sauve Union Nationale 1959 18. Antonio Barrette Union Nationale 1960 19. Jean Lesage Liberal 1960 20. Daniel Johnson Union Nationale 1966 21. Jean Jacques Bertrand Union Nationale 1968 22. Robert Bourassa Liberal 1970 23. Rene Levesque Parti Quebecois 1976 24. Pierre-Marc Johnson Parti Quebecois 1985 *_ Robert Bourassa Liberal 1985 'Double identifications were used for R. Bourassa, C.B. de Boucherville and L.O. Taillon. 96 PREMIERS OF NEWFOUNDLAND SINCE 1949 Premier Party Year 1. Joey Smallwood Liberal 1949 2. Frank Moores Progressive Conservative 1972 3. Brian Peckford Progressive Conservative 1979 PREMIERS OP NEW BRUNSWICK SINCE 1867 Premier Party Year 1. Andrew Wetmore Conservative 1867 2. George King Conservative 1870 3. George Hatheway Conservative 1871 *_ George King Conservative 1872 4. James Fraser Conservative 1878 5. Daniel Hanington Conservative 1882 6. Andrew Blair Liberal 1883 7. James Mitchell Liberal 1896 8. Henry Emmerson Liberal 1897 9. Lemuel Tweedie Liberal 1900 10. William Pugsley Liberal 1907 11. Clifford Robinson Liberal 1907 12. John Douglas Hazen Conservative 1908 13. James Kidd Flemming Conservative 1911 14. George Clarke Conservative 1914 15. James Murray Conservative 1917 16. Walter Foster Liberal 1917 17. Peter Veniot Liberal 1923 18. John B.M. Baxter Conservative 1925 19. Charles Richards Conservative 1931 20. Leonard Tilley Conservative 1933 21. Allison Dysart Liberal 1935 22. John McNair Liberal 1940 23. Hugh John Flemming Progressive Conservative 1952 24. Louis Robichaud Liberal 1960 25. Richard Hatfield Progressive Conservative 1970 *A double identification was used for G.E. King. PREMIERS OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND SINCE 1873 Premier Party Year 1. J.C. Pope Conservative 1873 2. L.C. Owen Conservative 1873 3. L.H. Davies Coalition 1876 4. W.W. Sullivan Conservative 1879 5. Neil MacLeod Conservative 1889 6. Frederick Peters Liberal 1891 7. A.B. Warburton Liberal 1897 8. Donald Farquharson Liberal 1898 9. Arthur Peters Liberal 1901 10. F.L. Haszard Liberal 1908 11. James Palmer Liberal 1911 12. J.A. Mathieson Conservative 1911 13. A.E. Arsenault Conservative 1917 14. J.H. Bell Liberal 1919 15. J.D. Stewart Conservative 1923 16. A.C. Saunders Liberal 1927 17. W.M. Lea Liberal 1930 - J.D. Stewart Conservative 1931 18. W.J.P. MacMillan Conservative 1933 - W.M. Lea Liberal 1935 19. T.A. Campbell Liberal 1936 20. Walter Jones Liberal 1943 21. A.W. Matheson Liberal 1953 22. Walter Shaw Conservative 1959 23. Alex Campbell Liberal 1966 24. Bennett Campbell Liberal 1978 25. Walter MacLean Conservative 1979 26. James Lee Conservative 1981 27. Joseph Ghiz Liberal 1986 PREMIERS OF NOVA SCOTIA SINCE 1867 Premier Party Year 1. Hiram Blanchard Confederate (Cons.) 1867 2. William Annand Anti-Confederate (Lib.) 1867 3. P.C. Hill Liberal 1875 4. S.D. Holmes Conservative 1878 5. J.S.D. Thompson Conservative 1882 6. W.T. Pipes Liberal 1882 7. W.S. Fielding Liberal 1884 8. G.H. Murray Liberal 1896 9. E.H. Armstrong Liberal 1923 10. E.N. Rhodes Conservative 1925 11. G.S. Harrington Conservative 1930 12. A.L. Macdonald Liberal 1933 13. A.S. MacMillan Liberal 1940 *_ A.L. Macdonald Liberal 1945 14. Harold Connolly Liberal 1954 15. Henry Hicks Liberal 1954 16. Robert Stanfield Conservative 1956 17. G.I. Smith Conservative 1967 18. Gerald Regan Liberal 1970 19. John Buchanan Conservative 1978 *A double identification was used for A.L. Macdonald. 100 APPENDIX B This thesis identifies a series of 22 variables about each of 185 individuals who have been premiers of a Canadian province. The corresponding data set has been attached as Appendix C. VARIABLE 1 VI identifies the province and identification number of the premier. The first one or two digits of the string identify the province, which are numbered 1 to 10 from West to East across the country. Consequently, the digit: The next two digits in VI identify the individual. The individuals are numbered in a chronological fashion. For example, 101' would represent the province of British Columbia's first premier - J.F. McCreight. Appendix A gives the province and identification numbers of each individual. VARIABLE 2 V2 represents the party affiliation of the individual who became premier of the respective province. This explains, for example, why W.A.C. Bennett (124) is coded as a Social Credit, not as a Conservative, the party of which he was a member for many years. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 represents represents represents represents represents represents represents represents represents represents British Columbia Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario Quebec Newfoundland New Brunswick Prince Edward Island Nova Scotia 101 0 represents not applicable 1 represents Conservative party 2 represents Liberal party 3 represents CCF/NDP 4 represents Social Credit 5 represents United Farmers of Alberta 6 represents Unionist party 7 represents United Farmers of Manitoba 8 represents Liberal-Progressive party 9 represents United Farmers of Ontario 10 not coded 11 represents Union Nationale 12 represents Parti Quebecois 13 represents Confederationist party "0" represents the situation in early British Columbia and Manitoba when party lines were not yet drawn, and consequently partisan affiliation was not applicable. VARIABLE 3 V3 stands for the last three digits of the year in which the individual was born. If this is not known, as in the case of A. Boyd (401), "0" was registered. VARIABLE 4 V4 represents the age at which the individual was first elected to a provincial or federal legislature. VARIABLE 5 V5 represents the number of years the individual was in the federal or a provincial cabinet before he became leader of the party and/or premier. VARIABLE 6 V6 represents the total number of years that the individual had been in elected office at the federal and/or provincial level. This includes years served in cabinet positions (V5). 102 VARIABLE 7 V7 indicates whether the individual was chosen as party leader by caucus or convention. 1 represents the convention process 2 represents the caucus process VARIABLE 8 V8 stands for the individual's occupation prior to entering provincial or federal politics. 1 represents lawyer 2 represents labourer or farmer 3 represents professional 4 represents businessman 5 represents administrator 6 represents teacher 7 represents minister 8 represents military 9 represents journalist In this context, a professional occupation includes university professor, medical doctor, etc. An administrator means municipal office position, school principal, etc. VARIABLE 9 V9 indicates the level of formal education. 0 indicates the information could not be found 1 indicates that the individual took no formal education further than high school 2 indicates that the individual went to a post-secondary institution. This classification includes law degrees and technical diplomas. 103 VARIABLE 10 V10 represents the number of years that the individual was leader of his respective party. If the individual is still serving as party leader, in the capacity of premier or leader of the opposition, the number of years as leader is calculated to July 1987. All years are rounded-up; as such, a "0" indicates that it is not known when the leader left the party leadership. VARIABLE 11 V11 represents why the individual left the leadership of the party. 1 represents deceased 2 represents election loss 3 represents co-opted by federal legislature 4 represents lost at leadership convention 5 not coded 6 represents still serving 7 represents retired/resignation 8 represents retired due to ill health VARIABLE 12 V12 indicates the individual's religion when he was leader of a provincial party. In the case of J.S.D. Thompson of Nova Scotia (1005) who changed religion in 1871 from Methodist to Roman Catholic, he is coded as a Roman Catholic because as premier in 1882 he was Catholic. 0 represents not identified 1 represents Roman Catholic 2 represents United Church of Canada 3 represents Protestant of unknown denomination 4 represents Unitarian 5 represents Anglican or Church of England 6 represents Presbytarian 7 represents Methodist 8 represents Baptist 9 represents Jewish 104 VARIABLE 13 V13 indicates where the individual was born. 1 means in the province of which he became premier 2 means out of the province of which he became premier, but within Canada 3 means outside of Canada VARIABLE 14 V14 represents the path the individual followed to the premiership. See Chapter III for an explanation of paths. VARIABLE 15 V15 is the last three digits of the year that the individual was appointed or elected leader of his respective party. VARIABLE 16 V16 is the last three digits of the year that the individual was first elected to a provincial or the federal legislature. VARIABLE 17 V17 is the last three digits of the year that the individual became premier of his respective province. VARIABLES 18 THROUGH 21 deal with convention information. Inasmuch, numbers other than zeros will appear only if V7= 1. VARIABLE 18 VI8 has seven digits which represent the day, month and year of the leadership convention at which the leader was originally chosen. Many conventions last for more than one day and the date given here, in most cases, indicates the day of the leadership vote. 10 5 V18 - - - / - - / - -day/fflonth/year of convention VARIABLE 19 V19 represents the number of delegates at the convention. In the case of the 1985 Parti Quebecois convention, where P.M. Johnson (626) was chosen leader, delegate numbers are given as 0'. Over 100,000 delegates voted as all members of the Parti Quebecois were given delegate status. Because of the unique nature of this convention, and the unparalleled number of delegates, delegate numbers of this event were excluded. VARIABLE 20 V20 represents the number of candidates on the first ballot. VARIABLE 21 V21 represents the number of ballots it took until a leader was chosen. VARIABLE 22 V22 indicates the number of years the individual was premier. If the time period was less than six months, rounding-down occurred and 0' years was registered. On the same basis, in cases of six to twelve months of premiership rounding-up was performed. The cut-off date for serving leaders was July 1987. VARIABLE 23 V23 is the name and initial of the party leader. APPENDIX C DATA SET V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13 V14 V15 V16 V17 V18 V19 V20 V21 V22 V23 101 0 827 44 0 0 2 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 871 871 871 0 0 0 0 1 McCrelght.JF 102 0 825 38 9 9 2 9 1 2 2 6 2 1 872 863 872 0 0 0 0 1 DeCosmos.A 103 0 834 30 2 9 2 1 2 7 8 0 3 1 874 864 874 0 0 0 0 2 Walkem.BA 104 0 828 47 0 1 2 1 2 3 2 1 3 3 875 875 876 0 0 0 0 2 El 1 lot,AC 105 0 836 35 8 7 2 4 2 12 2 5 3 1 882 871 882 O 0 0 0 1 Beaven,R 106 0 842 29 2 12 2 2 1 10 1 8 3 2 875 871 883 0 0 0 0 4 Smiths,W 107 0 847 28 5 7 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 887 875 887 0 0 0 0 2 Davie,AEB 108 0 824 47 2 18 2 4 1 3 1 8 2 1 889 871 889 0 0 0 0 3 Robson,J 109 0 852 30 3 10 2 1 2 3 3 1 3 1 892 882 892 0 0 0 0 3 Davie,T 110 0 834 52 8 9 2 5 1 3 2 0 3 1 895 886 895 0 0 0 0 3 Turner,JH 111 0 836 35 0 21 2 4 1 6 2 5 2 3 894 871 898 0 0 0 0 2 Semi1n,CA 112 0 852 31 4 12 2 1 2 1 7 0 2 1 900 883 900 0 0 0 0 0 Martin.d 113 O 851 44 0 2 2 4 2 2 7 0 3 1 900 898 900 0 O 0 0 2 Dunsmulr,d 114 0 853 33 1 13 2 4 1 1 7 5 3 1 902 886 902 0 0 0 0 1 Prior,EG 115 1 870 28 1 5 2 1 2 12 8 5 1 2 903 898 903 O 0 O O 12 McBrlde.R 116 1 867 36 8 12 2 1 2 9 2 7 2 1 915 903 915 0 0 0 0 1 Bowser,WJ 117 2 870 39 0 3 1 4 1 2 1 8 2 3 912 909 916 1305913 0 0 0 1 Brewster,HC 118 2 856 44 2 11 1 5 1 18 1 7 3 1 900 900 918 2918 0 0 0 9 01Iver.U 119 2 873 43 11 11 2 5 2 1 2 6 2 1 927 916 927 0 0 0 0 1 MacLean,JD 120 2 867 50 4 12 1 2 2 7 2 5 1 1 926 917 928 2311926 556 6 5 5 Tolmle.SF 121 2 873 43 12 17 2 4 1 13 2 6 2 2 928 916 933 0 0 0 0 8 Pattullo.TD 122 2 879 37 23 24 1 4 1 6 7 1 3 1 941 916 941 212941 789 2 1 6 Hart,J 123 2 890 43 0 6 1 4 1 5 2 2 1 1 947 933 947 2712947 942 3 0 5 Johnson 124 4 900 41 0 11 2 4 1 20 2 2 2 1 952 941 952 0 0 O 0 20 Bennett,WAC 125 3 930 30 0 9 1 3 2 14 2 9 1 3 969 960 972 506970 500 1 1 3 Barrett,D 126 4 932 41 0 0 1 4 1 13 7 0 1 3 973 973 975 2411973 1500 5 1 11 Bennett.W 127 4 934 41 8 8 1 4 1 1 6 1 3 1 986 975 986 3007986 1294 12 4 1 VanderZalm.B 201 2 858 47 0 3 2 1 2 5 7 2 2 1 905 902 905 0 0 0 0 5 Rutherford,A 202 2 859 46 0 5 2 1 2 7 3 2 2 1 910 899 910 0 0 0 0 7 S1fton,AL 203 2 868 41 5 8 2 2 1 4 2 2 2 1 917 909 917 0 0 0 0 4 Stewart ,C 204 5 869 52 0 0 2 2 1 4 7 4 3 1 921 921 921 0 0 0 0 4 Greenfield,H 205 5 884 37 4 4 2 1 2 9 7 2 2 1 921 921 925 0 0 0 0 8 Brownl ee, <JE 206 5 879 42 13 13 2 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 934 921 934 0 0 0 0 1 Reld.RG 207 4 878 57 0 0 2 7 2 8 1 2 2 1 935 935 935 0 0 0 0 8 Aberhart,W 208 4 908 27 8 8 2 5 1 25 7 2 2 1 943 935 943 0 0 0 0 25 Manning,EC 209 4 914 41 6 13 1 2 1 2 7 2 1 1 968 955 968 612968 1625 6 2 2 Strom,HE 210 1 928 37 0 4 1 1 2 16 7 4 1 3 965 967 971 2003965 450 3 1 14 Lougheed.P 211 1 933 34 4 8 1 4 2 2 6 2 1 1 985 985 985 1310985 1902 3 2 2 Getty,DR o C T l VI V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13 V14 V15 V16 V17 V18 V19 V20 V21 V22 V23 301 2 867 33 0 5 2 4 1 11 8 6 2 1 905 900 905 0 0 0 0 11 Scott,W 302 2 876 32 0 8 2 1 2 6 7 6 2 1 916 908 916 0 0 0 0 6 Martln.WM 303 2 885 31 0 6 2 4 1 4 3 6 3 1 922 916 922 0 0 0 0 5 Dunning,CA 304 2 883 31 4 12 2 2 2 9 3 6 2 1 926 914 926 0 0 0 0 5 Gardiner,JG 305 1 878 47 0 0 1 6 2 12 2 5 2 3 924 925 929 924 0 0 0 5 Anderson,JTM 306 2 886 35 0 14 2 4 1 9 2 2 1 1 935 921 935 0 0 0 0 9 Patterson,WJ 307 3 904 31 0 9 1 7 2 26 3 8 3 3 932 935 944 941 0 0 0 17 Douglas.TC 308 3 913 31 16 16 1 6 2 9 7 2 1 1 961 944 961 961 0 0 0 3 Lloyd.WS 309 2 917 28 0 12 1 4 2 12 2 2 1 3 959 945 964 2409959 645 3 1 8 Thatcher,WR 310 3 925 35 4 10 1 1 2 17 6 8 2 2 970 960 971 607970 0 0 0 11 Blakeney,AE 311 1 944 38 0 O 1 3 2 8 6 1 1 3 979 982 982 1011979 700 3 1 6 Dev1ne,G 401 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 2 1 7 3 0 1 871 870 871 0 0 0 0 0 Boyd,A 402 1 822 48 0 1 2 1 2 2 7 1 2 1 871 870 874 0 0 0 0 1 Glrard.MA 403 0 833 37 0 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 1 872 0 872 0 0 0 0 3 Clarke.NJH 404 0 841 33 0 0 2 4 0 4 7 0 2 1 874 874 874 0 0 0 0 4 Davie,RA 405 1 841 29 6 8 2 4 1 11 1 3 1 1 878 870 878 0 0 0 0 9 Norquay, <J 40G 0 843 40 1 4 2 3 2 1 7 3 2 1 887 883 887 0 0 0 0 0 Harrlson.DH 407 2 838 37 0 6 2 4 1 22 1 7 3 3 882 875 888 O 0 0 0 2 Greenway.T 408 1 850 41 1 3 2 1 2 11 3 3 2 2 899 891 899 0 0 0 0 1 Macdonald.HJ 409 1 853 35 0 11 2 4 1 26 7 7 2 1 889 889 9O0 0 0 0 0 15 RoblIn.RP 410 2 861 35 0 19 2 4 1 16 7 0 2 3 910 896 915 0 0 0 0 8 Norrls.TC 411 7 883 39 0 0 2 3 2 20 3 6 2 3 920 922 922 0 0 0 0 21 Bracken,J 412 8 898 29 7 16 2 1 2 5 3 2 2 1 943 927 943 0 0 0 0 6 Garson,SS 413 8 895 27 12 26 2 2 0 13 7 0 1 1 948 922 948 0 0 0 0 10 Campbel1,DL 414 1 917 32 0 9 1 4 2 13 7 5 1 3 954 949 958 1806954 283 3 2 10 RoblIn.D 415 1 929 30 7 8 1 3 1 3 2 2 1 1 967 959 967 2511967 470 4 3 2 Welr.W 416 3 935 22 0 11 1 5 2 9 3 1 1 3 969 958 969 906969 790 2 1 8 Schreyer.E 417 1 927 31 11 17 1 1 2 8 7 2 2 975 958 977 3975 468 2 1 5 Lyon.SR 418 3 934 33 11 20 1 1 2 8 6 4 2 979 969 981 511979 821 3 1 6 Pawley,HR 501 1 812 29 26 26 2 5 1 4 2 1 1 1 864 841 867 0 0 0 0 4 Macdonald,OS 502 2 833 34 0 2 2 1 2 2 3 0 1 3 869 867 871 0 0 0 0 1 Blake,E 503 2 820 37 3 3 2 1 2 24 3 7 1 1 872 857 872 0 0 0 0 24 Mowat.0 504 2 837 36 19 23 2 1 2 3 8 5 1 1 896 873 896 0 0 0 0 3 Hardy,AS 505 2 832 51 16 16 2 5 2 7 3 7 1 1 899 883 899 0 O 0 0 4 Ross.GW 506 1 843 45 0 8 2 1 1 18 1 5 1 3 896 888 905 0 0 0 0 10 Whitney,JP 507 1 864 44 9 11 2 1 2 5 2 8 1 1 914 908 914 0 0 0 0 5 Hearst,WH 508 9 878 42 0 0 2 2 2 10 2 8 1 3 914 920 919 0 0 0 0 4 Drury,EC 509 1 870 35 5 15 1 1 2 10 3 5 1 2 920 905 923 212920 1164 3 1 7 Ferguson,GH 510 1 871 42 9 12 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 1 930 913 930 0 o 0 0 4 Henry,GS 511 2 896 38 0 4 1 2 2 8 2 2 1 3 930 934 934 1512930 1200 2 1 8 Hepburn,MF 512 2 885 52 5 5 2 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 942 937 942 0 0 0 0 1 Conant,GD 513 2 891 28 12 21 1 4 2 1 2 2 1 1 943 919 943 105943 567 3 1 0 Nixon,HC 514 1 894 45 0 0 1 1 2 5 7 2 1 3 938 939 943 812938 1272 4 1 5 Drew.GA 515 1 879 40 9 26 2 2 2 1 7 5 1 1 948 919 948 0 0 0 0 1 Kennedy,TL 516 1 895 42 0 12 1 1 2 12 7 2 1 1 949 937 949 2704949 1462 4 1 13 Frost.L 517 1 917 34 3 10 1 5 2 10 7 5 2 1 961 951 961 2509961 1717 5 6 9 Robarts, <JP V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13 V14 V15 V16 V17 518 1 929 30 9 12 1 1 2 14 7 2 f 1 971 959 971 1202971 1748 6 4 14 Davls.W 519 1 927 44 11 14 1 4 2 1 2 2 1 1 985 971 985 802985 1711 4 3 0 Miller.F 520 2 943 32 0 7 1 1 2 5 6 2 1 3 982 975 985 2102982 2100 5 2 2 Peterson,D 601 1 820 24 0 11 2 1 2 6 3 1 1 1 867 844 867 0 0 0 0 6 Chauveau.PJ 602 1 823 34 6 18 2 1 2 0 7 1 1 1 873 857 873 0 O 0 0 2 Outmet,G 603 1 822 39 6 13 2 3 2 4 2 1 1 1 874 861 874 0 0 0 0 4 deBoucherv111e 604 2 829 32 0 17 2 1 2 12 2 3 3 867 861 878 0 O 0 0 2 doly.HG 605 1 840 27 3 12 2 1 2 3 3 1 1 1 879 867 879 0 0 0 0 3 Chapleau,JA 606 1 838 36 2 8 2 1 2 2 7 1 1 1 882 874 882 0 0 0 0 2 Mousseau,dA 607 1 833 28 11 23 2 3 2 3 7 1 1 884 861 884 0 0 0 0 4 Ross,dd 608 1 840 35 3 12 2 1 2 4 7 1 1 B87 875 887 0 0 0 0 0 Tal11 on,LO 609 2 840 32 1 1 14 2 1 2 6 7 1 1 2 885 872 887 0 O 0 0 5 Mercler,H 610 1 847 31 11 18 2 0 2 2 2 1 : 2 1 896 878 896 0 0 0 0 1 Flynn.Ed 611 2 832 35 1 30 2 1 2 8 1 1 1 2 892 867 897 0 0 O 0 4 Marchand,FG 612 2 855 35 3 10 2 1 2 5 7 1 : 2 1 900 890 900 0 0 0 0 4 Parent,SN 613 2 861 39 5 5 2 1 2 15 7 1 : 2 1 905 900 905 0 0 0 0 16 Gouin,L 614 2 867 33 13 20 2 1 2 0 7 1 1 1 920 900 920 0 0 0 0 16 Taschereau.LA 615 2 892 37 6 7 2 3 2 12 2 1 1 1 936 929 936 0 0 0 0 5 Godbout.A 616 11 890 37 0 6 2 1 2 21 1 1 3 933 927 936 0 O 0 0 18 Duplessls.M 617 11 907 23 23 29 2 8 2 1 1 1 1 959 930 959 0 0 0 0 0 Sauve.JP 618 11 899 37 16 24 2 4 2 1 2 1 1 960 936 960 0 O 0 0 0 Barrette,A 619 2 912 33 4 15 1 1 2 12 7 1 3 958 945 960 3105958 0 0 0 6 Lesage,d 620 11 915 31 5 15 1 1 2 7 1, 1 2 961 946 966 10966 1944 4 1 3 dohnson.D 621 11 916 32 a 20 1 1 2 3 7' 1 1 968 948 968 1906968 2345 2 1 2 Bertrand,dd 622 2 933 33 0 4 1 1 2 7 2 1 1 3 970 966 970 1510983 2928 3 1 7 Bourassa.R 623 12 922 38 6 9 2 9 2 18 7 1 1 2 968 960 976 0 0 0 0 9 Levesque,R 701 2 900 46 0 3 1 9 2 23 2 2 1 1 949 946 949 2705949 O 0 0 23 Smal1 wood,JR 702 1 933 35 0 2 1 4 2 7 7 2 1 3 970 968 972 970 0 0 0 7 Moores,FD 703 1 942 30 6 7 1 6 2 8 6 2 1 979 972 979 1703979 O 10 3 9 Peckford.B 801 13 820 45 0 2 2 1 0 2 2 3 1 867 865 867 0 0 0 0 3 Wetmore,AR 802 1 839 28 2 3 2 1 2 1 7 3 1 870 867 870 0 O 0 o 1 Klng.GE 803 1 813 37 3 13 2 2 2 7 3 2 871 850 871 0 0 0 0 1 Hatheway,G 804 1 829 36 7 13 2 1 2 4 3 3 1 878 865 878 0 0 0 0 4 Fraser,dd 805 1 835 35 4 8 2 1 2 1 7 5 1 882 870 882 0 0 0 0 1 Hannlngton.DL 806 2 844 34 0 5 2 1 2 13 7 3 3 879 878 883 0 0 0 0 13 Blair,AG 807 2 843 39 14 14 2 1 2 1 8 3 1 896 882 896 0 0 0 0 1 Mltchel1,d 808 2 853 35 5 7 2 1 2 3 3 8 1 897 888 897 0 0 0 0 3 Emerson,HR 809 2 849 51 0 0 2 1 2 7 3 6 1 900 900 900 0 o 0 0 7 Tweedle,LJ 810 2 850 35 10 15 2 1 2 1 7 3 1 907 885 907 0 0 0 0 0 Pugsley.W 811 2 866 31 0 10 2 1 2 1 2 7 1 907 897 907 0 0 0 0 1 Robinson,CW 812 1 860 31 0 5 2 1 2 12 3 5 3 899 891 908 0 0 0 0 4 Hazen.dD 813 1 868 32 3 11 2 4 1 3 7 6 1 91 1 900 911 0 o 0 0 3 F1emmi ng,JK 814 1 857 46 2 11 2 1 2 3 7 7 1 914 903 914 0 0 0 0 2 Clarke.Gd 815 1 864 44 0 9 2 4 1 1 2 6 1 1 917 908 917 0 0 0 0 0 Murray,dA 816 2 873 44 0 0 2 4 1 7 7 5 3 916 917 917 0 0 0 0 6 Foster,WE 817 2 863 31 6 12 2 9 1 2 2 1 1 1 923 894 923 0 o 0 0 3 Venlot.Pd 818 1 868 47 0 2 1 1 2 6 3 5 1 3 925 915 925 2906925 0 0 0 6 Baxter,dBM V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10 V11 V12 V 3 V14 V15 V16 V17 V18 V19 V20 V21 V22 V23 819 1 879 41~ 6 11 2 1 2 2 7 2 1 1 931 920 931 0 0 0 0 2 Richards,CD 820 1 870 46 8 17 2 1 2 2 2 5 2 1 933 916 933 0 O 0 0 3 T111ey,LPD 821 2 880 37 5 18 1 1 2 14 7 1 1 2 926 917 935 510933 0 2 1 5 Dysart,AA 822 2 889 46 5 5 2 1 2 9 2 6 1 1 940 935 940 0 0 0 0 13 McNalr.JB 823 1 899 45 0 7 1 5 1 9 2 2 1 3 951 944 952 949 0 0 0 8 F1emm1ng,HJ 824 2 925 27 0 6 1 1 2 12 2 1 1 3 958 952 969 1010958 883 5 3 10 Robfchaud,LJ 825 1 931 30 0 8 1 1 2 18 6 3 1 3 969 961 970 1406969 1553 3 1 17 Hatfield,R 901 1 826 31 6 8 2 4 . 0 8 3 0 1 1 865 857 865 0 O 0 O 0 Pope,JC 902 1 822 44 0 7 2 4 1 3 2 0 1 1 873 866 873 0 0 0 0 3 Owen,LC 903 2 845 27 0 4 2 1 2 3 2 0 1 3 876 872 876 0 0 0 0 3 Davies,LH 904 1 843 29 0 5 2 1 2 12 3 0 1 3 877 872 879 0 0 0 0 11 Sul1 Ivan.WW 905 1 842 37 3 10 2 1 0 3 2 0 1 1 889 879 889 0 O 0 0 1 McLeod.N 906 2 852 38 0 1 2 1 2 6 7 5 1 3 0 890 891 0 0 0 0 7 Peters,F 907 2 852 39 0 8 2 1 2 1 7 0 1 1 897 891 897 0 0 0 0 1 Warburton,AB 908 2 834 42 O 8 2 6 2 3 7 6 1 1 898 876 898 O O 0 0 2 Farquharson,D 909 2 854 36 1 11 2 1 2 7 1 0 1 1 901 890 901 0 0 0 0 7 Peters,A 910 2 849 55 0 4 2 1 2 3 3 5 1 1 908 904 908 0 0 0 o 3 Haszard,FL 911 2 851 49 1 8 2 1 2 1 2 5 1 1 911 900 911 0 0 0 0 1 Palmer.HJ 912 1 863 37 0 11 1 1 2 6 7 6 1 3 902 900 911 6903 O 3 1 6 Mathleson,JA 913 1 870 38 9 9 2 1 0 4 7 1 1 1 917 908 917 0 0 0 0 3 Arsenault.AE 914 2 846 40 0 18 2 1 0 0 7 6 1 2 0 886 919 0 0 0 0 4 Bel 1,JH 915 1 874 43 0 6 2 1 1 12 1 6 1 3 921 917 923 0 0 0 0 6 Stewart,JD 916 2 874 49 0 4 2 1 2 8 7 0 1 3 923 919 927 0 0 0 0 3 Saunders,AC 917 2 874 41 11 23 2 2 1 2 1 0 1 1 930 915 930 0 0 0 0 2 Lea,WM 918 1 881 42 O 10 2 3 2 O 2 1 1 1 933 923 933 0 0 0 0 2 MacMi1lan.WJP 919 2 895 36 1 5 2 1 2 7 2 0 1 1 936 931 936 0 0 0 0 7 Campbel1,TA 920 2 878 57 0 8 2 2 2 10 3 8 1 1 943 935 943 0 0 o 0 10 Jones.JW 921 2 903 37 10 13 2 1 2 12 7 2 1 1 953 940 953 0 0 0 0 6 Matheson,AW 922 1 887 72 0 0 1 2 2 13 7 2 1 3 957 959 959 933 0 2 1 7 Shaw.WR 923 2 933 33 0 0 1 1 2 12 3 2 1 3 966 966 966 1112965 130O 2 1 12 Campbel1,AB 924 2 943 27 O 0 1 6 2 1 2 3 1 1 978 970 978 912978 1345 2 1 1 Campbel1,WB 925 1 914 37 0 28 1 2 2 2 7 6 1 3 979 951 979 2509976 0 0 0 3 MacLean,JA 926 1 937 38 3 6 1 4 2 6 6 1 1 1 981 975 982 911981 1462 4 3 5 Lee,JM 927 2 945 37 0 0 1 1 2 6 6 5 1 3 981 982 986 2410981 1387 2 1 1 Ghiz.J 1001 1 820 39 0 8 2 1 2 7 7 0 1 1 867 859 867 0 0 0 0 0 Blanchard.H 1002 2 808 28 0 23 2 4 1 1 7 6 1 3 867 836 867 0 0 0 0 8 Annand.W 1003 2 821 49 1 4 2 1 2 4 2 0 1 1 875 870 875 0 0 0 0 4 HIIV.PC 1004 1 831 40 0 5 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 3 878 871 878 0 0 0 0 5 Holmes.SH 1005 2 844 33 4 5 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 882 877 882 0 0 0 0 0 Thompson,JSD 1006 2 850 32 0 0 2 1 2 2 3 0 1 3 882 882 882 0 0 0 0 2 PIpes.WT 1007 2 848 34 0 2 2 9 1 12 3 0 1 1 896 882 884 0 0 0 0 12 Fielding,WS 1008 2 861 35 5 7 2 1 2 27 2  1 1 896 889 896 0 0 0 0 27 Murray,GH 1009 1 864 42 0 19 2 1 2 5 3 7 1 1 925 906 923 0 0 O 0 3 Armstrong,EH 1010 1 877 31 5 17 2 1 2 5 3 0 1 1 930 908 930 0 0 0 0 6 Rhodes,EN 1011 2 883 42 5 5 2 8 2 7 7 5 1 1 930 925 930 0 0 0 0 3 Harrington,GS 1012 2 890 43 0 0 1 1 2 7 3 1 1 3 930 933 933 110930 500 3 1 6 Macdonald,AL 1013 2 871 53 7 16 2 2 1 5 7 1 1 1 940 924 940 0 0 0 0 5 Macml1lan,AS V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10 V11 V12 V13 V14 V15 V16 V17 V18 V19 V20 V21 V22 V23 1014 2 901" ~35 11 18 2 9 1 1 4 1 1 1 954 936 954 0 0 6 5 " 0 Connolly ,H 1015 2 915 30 6 10 1 1 2 6 7 2 1 1 954 945 954 0 0 0 0 2 Hicks.HD 1016 1 914 35 0 8 1 1 2 19 3 5 1 3 948 949 958 1011948 322 2 1 11 Stanfleld.RL 1017 1 909 40 5 18 1 1 1 4 2 2 1 1 967 949 967 411967 0 0 0 3 Smith,GI 1018 2 928 35 0 2 1 1 2 4 2 1 1 3 965 963 970 2407965 0 3 1 8 Regan,GA 1019 1 931 36 1 11 1 1 2 16 6 2 1 2 971 967 978 606971 736 3 1 9 Buchanan,UM 624 2 933 33 10 11 1 1 2 4 6 1 1 2 983 966 985 983 0 0 0 2 Bourassa,R2 625 1 822 39 10 30 2 2 1 7 1 1 2 891 861 891 0 0 0 0 1 deBouchervl1le2 626 1 840 35 12 18 2 1 2 3 3 0 1 1 893 875 893 0 0 0 0 3 Tall Ion,L02 1020 2 890 43 11 11 1 1 2 9 7 1 1 1 945 933 945 945 O O o 8 Macdonald.AL2 826 1 839 28 3 4 2 1 2 8 7 3 1 1 872 867 872 0 0 0 0 2 K1ng,GE2 627 12 946 30 5 6 1 3 2 1 6 1 1 1 985 976 985 3009985 0 6 1 0 Johnson,PM 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0097098/manifest

Comment

Related Items