The Bruce Report

In this most brutal of winters for New Brunswick politics – the harshest in decades – the public is turning a bitterly cold shoulder to its elected leaders and, just possibly, to a system many now believe is irreparably fractured.

            Recent polling data tells a troubling tale of widespread contempt for the traditional parties, public officials and the legislative process, itself.

According to Corporate Research Associates and Omnifacts – which conducted opinion surveys last month – only 34 per cent of New Brunswickers are either “completely satisfied” or “mostly satisfied” with the Liberal government’s performance. Fully 55 per cent are either “mostly dissatisfied” or “completely dissatisfied”.

            Adding insult to injury, the public remains deeply sceptical about Premier Shawn Graham’s ability to lead: His personal popularity has dropped to 25 per cent, from 29 per cent last November. Meanwhile, only 36 per cent say they would vote for the Grits if an election were held today.

            This, in itself, is no great shocker. As the Omnifacts research suggests, as much as three-quarters of New Brunswickers do not support the provincial government’s proposed agreement to sell much of NB Power to Hydro-Quebec. And over the past few months, as opinions on the subject have hardened, almost everyone has become an energy expert.

            What is noteworthy, however, is that Conservative Leader David Alward has not benefitted from the public’s growing enmity towards the Liberals. He’s polling at 27 per cent, down from 29 per cent late last year. In fact, the good fellow has not once cracked the 30 per cent mark in more than a year. His party has dropped to 42 per cent popular support, from 46 per cent in November.

            All of which puts the Grits and the Tories in something approaching a statistical dead heat for parties declared least likely to succeed now or in the foreseeable future. Still, a growing proportion of the electorate do have a compelling message to send, if only by their diffidence or silence. Nearly half polled (45 per cent) checked the box labelled, “undecided/no answer/do not plan to vote/refused to state.” That’s a whopping 10 percentage-point increase since February of last year.

            Welcome to the new “none-of-the-above” era, in which no citizen can be wooed with any of the traditional techniques in the playbook of political persuasion: not reason or logic, not demagoguery or populism, not threats or coercion, not complaints or entreaties. The public is voting with its feet as it scampers away from a titular democracy it no longer admires or trusts.

            To some extent, the Liberals and Conservatives must share some of the blame for this sorry state of affairs. The former have consistently failed to inform voters about the reasons for their policy decisions before they’ve announced them as fait accompli. The latter, on the other hand, have missed virtually every opportunity to counter their rivals’ plans with coherent, articulate ones of their own. The result: disputatious, sometimes vicious, legislative sessions in which nothing useful is accomplished.

            On the other hand, the public also bears some responsibility. For a generation or more, citizens (not just of New Brunswick, but of every jurisdiction in North America) have parlayed their distaste for political jousting into a moral justification for disengagement. Over the years, voter turnout has declined in direct proportion to individual comprehension of the crucial issues of the day. Indeed, anyone who has followed the tortured health care debate in the United States understands this implicitly.

            And here, according to Omnifacts, as much as 50 per cent of New Brunswickers – despite their professed energy expertise – can’t numerate the differences between the first NB Power/Hydro-Quebec deal and the revised one. They either fail or refuse to appreciate that the current proposal addresses many or all of their original concerns.

            In the end, if the political apparatus we have inherited fails to inspire confidence, then it is the right and obligation of every citizen to change that system. Is some form of direct democracy required? Should we rewrite the conventions of participation?

            Turning a cold shoulder to the frozen status quo, without a sunnier alternative to pursue, guarantees only a bad case of democratic frostbite.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.