IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v27yi1p59-81.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Falling From Grace: Nonestablished Brokerage Parties and the Weight of Predominance in Canadian Provinces and Australian States

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Lusztig
  • Patrick James
  • Jeremy Moon

Abstract

Given the conventional meaning of party predominance—winning a majority of legislative seals in four or more consecutive elections—all sixteen subnational political systems (SPS) in Australia and Canada have featured at least one predominant party since the end of World War II. In Australia, no predominant party has failed ever again to hold office, and failed to secure even official opposition status for two consecutive elections, upon losing predominance. In Canada's central and Atlantic (CAC) provinces, only two of eleven predominant parties have failed. In Canada's four western provinces, however, three of six predominant parties have failed since governing after World War II. Several factors combine to produce differences among predominant parties in Australia and Canada. When these parties engage in brokerage politics, and therefore lack entrenched social foundations, and where patterns of socialized party identification have been interrupted, the “weight of predominance” can become fatal. Upon losing power, these parties may cease to be relevant. The worldwide proliferation of federal systems suggests that the life-cycles of SPS as just described may become more relevant with time. Copyright , Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Lusztig & Patrick James & Jeremy Moon, 0. "Falling From Grace: Nonestablished Brokerage Parties and the Weight of Predominance in Canadian Provinces and Australian States," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 27(1), pages 59-81.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:27:y::i:1:p:59-81
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:27:y::i:1:p:59-81. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.