Partis politiques municipaux: Une etude de sociologie electorale.
Sancton, Andrew
Quesnel, Louise, and Belley, Serge (with the collaboration of
Jacques Leveillee). Partis politiques municipaux: Une etude de
sociologie electorate. Montreal: Editions Agence d'Arc, 1991. Pp.
285. Illustrations. $36.00 (paper).
For good or ill, Paul Peterson's City Limits has been the most
influential book published in urban politics in the last decade. In it
he states: "In short, local politics is limited politics. Its
issues are not great enough to generate its own partisan political life.
As a result, national political parties easily eliminate any
ratepayers' associations, good government leagues, or other
independent groups seeking only local power."
When City Limits was published in 1981, Jean Drapeau's Civic
Party had controlled Montreal's municipal council for twenty-one
years; in Quebec City, the Progres civique de Quebec had been equally
dominant for sixteen. By the late 1970s, viable opposition parties had
emerged in both cities; elections were clearly local partisan events;
and the Quebec National Assembly had provided for government recognition
and funding of local political parties. Unfortunately, Peterson makes no
reference to either city in any of his pronouncements about limited city
politics.
Just as unfortunately, Partis politiques municipaux, a valuable new
book about Quebec City, makes no reference to Peterson's claims
that such parties have little, if any, chance of surviving. This
well-researched, thoughtful study places these parties, and the
fascinating election they fought in 1989, in the theoretical context of
parties and elections, not urban politics. Reference is made to the
American debates about urban machines and reformers and to the vibrant
English-Canadian literature of the late 1960s and early 1970s concerning
the apparent need for local parties, but the link between this material
and the Quebec experience is not fully developed.
There is lots of evidence that the authors are quite right in
treating the 1989 Quebec City municipal election as a battle between two
established local political parties. Each had its own high-profile
leader, elaborate advertising campaign, and sophisticated capacity for
public-opinion polling. Interesting as the authors' analysis of
these matters may be, however, there is always a nagging question: Why,
in the absence of strong local political parties elsewhere in North
America, have they become so deeply embedded in the political life of
Montreal, Quebec City, and, to a lesser extent, some other major cities
in the province? The authors attempt a brief explanation in their
"Introduction," but it is short and unconvincing. If local
political parties were caused by rapid urbanization, immigration, and
reformist zeal, then they should be just as strong elsewhere in North
America. What makes Quebec special?
As the authors of Partis politiques municipaux themselves
acknowledge, Montreal's local party system came first. Perhaps
developments elsewhere in the province are the result of a kind of
"demonstration effect," leaving us then to ponder the origins
of municipal political parties in Montreal. In any event, Quesnel and
Belley (and Leveillee) do not provide a satisfactory answer.
But there is much that they do provide. Never has a particular
municipal election in Canada been better documented and analyzed. Any
future studies of such elections will be seriously flawed if they ignore
this trail-breaking book. It will no doubt be widely used in
French-language university courses on urban politics. If it were
translated, it would be of great value in English-language Canadian
university courses as well.
There is much in the book for non-Quebecois to think about. For
example, there is a thorough description of how Quebec's
progressive municipal-election financing system actually works. Parties
and candidates face strict expenditure limits and developers (and all
corporate bodies) cannot contribute a cent.
Elsewhere in Canada, has there ever been a municipal election in
which two former provincial cabinet ministers from opposing parties
(Jean-Francois Bertrand, Parti quebecios, and Jean-Paul L'Allier,
Parti liberal du Quebec) contested the mayoralty and in which the winner
(L'Allier) appointed a former minister from his opponent's
party (Denis de Belleval) as the new city manager? In fact, is there
anywhere outside Quebec where it makes sense to use the English
equivalent of the authors' "le gouvernement
L'Allier?" Did anyone ever hear of "the Eggleton
government" in Toronto? Of course not. It was never there.
Experience in Montreal and Quebec City demonstrates that, under
certain conditions, municipal political parties can thrive and play a
crucial role in city government. In both cities, the dominant
pro-development party has eventually given way to a party whose
political base is in neighbourhood organizations. Whether the pendulum
will again swing back, whether the same parties will still be involved
in the battles to come, and whether they will remain independent of
national political parties are the significant questions about the
future. If the answers to these questions are affirmative, Paul Peterson
should start paying attention.
Andrew Sancton
Department of Political Science
University of Western Ontario
