Week 1: Evan Bray’s panel discusses seat predictions, voter turnout

The Evan Bray Show hosts a weekly panel this election season to discuss everything from seat predictions to voter turnout in Saskatchewan.

Evan is joined by John Gormley, lawyer, former Member of Parliament and host of The John Gormley Show, and Kevin Fenwick, Saskatchewan mediator and facilitator, former Deputy Minister of Justice and Saskatchewan’s provincial ombudsman.

Listen to Week 1 of the panel on The Evan Bray Show

Gormley, what are the main storylines that you’ll be watching in this provincial election?

GORMLEY: Well, those of us who follow politics closely and passionately, of course, look at the seats. I mean, you’ve got 61 seats. How are they distributed? In the last election, the Sask. Party won 48 of those seats. The NDP won 13. Historically, the NDP was Saskatchewan’s natural governing party. 1944, till 2007 there were only 16 years when we didn’t have NDP governments, and that was over two governments, one in the 60s, and one in the 80s. So you’ve seen this turn since 2007 so for me, it’s numbers. How does that 48 seats for the Sask. Party Redistribute? Do they lose? Some likely. How many do they lose? How many does the NDP gain? But the important issue is to always take politics to the eye level, the average family, the average person, do they see their lives in Saskatchewan better than in the past? Do they see new opportunities they may not have sensed in the past?

John Gormley is a lawyer, former Member of Parliament and host of The John Gormley Show.

What are some of the main storylines Fenwick, that you think will play out that will be important in this election?

FENWICK: Evan, I’m as fascinated by the process of politics as I am by the results. What I’m really interested in this election is looking at how the strategy that the governing Sask. Party has been using over the last number of years plays out into votes. And what I mean by that is I think most people would agree that under Scott Moe’s leadership, the Sask. Party has been more worried about losing votes to the right to the Buffalo Party or the Sask. United Party than they have been to the NDP.

So there have been lots of subtle shifts, some not so subtle shifts in that direction. I don’t understand that, because when I look at where they would be concerned about losing votes, largely in rural Saskatchewan to the Buffalo or the Sask. United Party, the Sask. Party wins those seats with 65 to 75 per cent of the vote. So if they lost 10 per cent of that vote to the to the Sask. United Party, who cares? It just means they win with 65 instead of 75. But the strategy, I think is costing them votes on the on the center right. I talked to someone the other day who told me that she and her husband had been longtime Sask. Party supporters and donors and are now hosting a meet and greet for their local NDP candidate, because for them, the party has moved too far to the right. So they may not lose as many votes over there, but those center votes they’re going to lose could very well cost them seats in especially in the urban ridings. So that’s the examination of strategy that fascinates me this time around.

Kevin Fenwick is a Saskatchewan mediator and facilitator, former Deputy Minister of Justice and Saskatchewan’s provincial ombudsman.

Recent polling shows of undecided voters, and there’s some 28 per cent in the province, that the topics of health care, cost of living, taxes, economy and education are the top priorities. Now the Sask. Party and the NDP both have what I would call historical relationships with certain priorities in that group.

How do you see the Sask. Party and the NDP appealing to undecided voters while maintaining the support of their base, Gormley?

GORMLEY: That’s the challenge. In this province, the undecided will often determine elections. And you know, those are priorities that I think are universal, not just in Saskatchewan, but certainly post COVID across Canada, you’ve got educational funding challenges. You’ve got health challenges.

In Saskatchewan, it’s been a direct response, and this becomes part of the Sask. Party narrative to 200,000 more people living here than when the NDP governed. What do you need? You need way more schools. You have very complex school arrangements. You need more health care. So both of the parties will talk about what they have done, what they’ve promised to do.

I admire people who are genuinely undecided. I mean, the crowd I run with are pretty solidly NDP or Sask. Party. I mean, these are people you know, who know where they’re coming from politically.

I bump into people who say, ‘Gosh, I loved Grant Devine in 1982 and by 1991 I voted for Roy Romanow because I was ready for change.’ And I always think, wow. So it’s that group who you’ve got to appeal to on the benchmarks or the metrics of life.

You know, people in this province are pretty tolerant. They obviously want change, but they want an acknowledgement that you are hearing them and you’re doing something. They’re patient enough to give you time if you appear impervious to that, if you appear to be making excuses and blowing them off, that’s when you get punished at the ballot box.

How do they appeal to those undecided voters while maintaining the the support that they have in their base, Fenwick?

FENWICK: I think the first question we need to ask is, who are the undecided voters? And there’ll be undecided voters across the political spectrum. But I think the largest group of undecided voters this time, will be what I’ll call the former liberals from the Sask. Party. We have to remember, the Sask. Party was a coalition of liberals and conservatives when it was formed, and that, you know, that woman that I talked about a few minutes ago, who has moved away (from the Sask. Party), is probably somebody who came from the liberal wing of the Sask. Party, which really doesn’t exist any longer.

Mark Docherty is gone. Gord Wyant is gone. June Draude is gone. So my question would be, where are that group of people going to go and and that’s an interesting question.

So when you look at those issues that you talked about, I mean, healthcare is healthcare. It’s extremely complex. Always will be, for whatever party that’s in government.

The one that’s interesting for me this time is education. Because of what was going on in April, May and June, with the teachers. The government did not do particularly well, I think, with respect to that, but they did a good job of eventually kicking it down the road until after the election.

A big question for me is, how many people are going to remember what they were feeling in April, May and June, when the government was not doing a very good job with respect to the teachers job action? So I think that’s I think that’s a big issue.

How long of a memory do voters have typically? Do those types of events, like the governments handling of COVID-19 and the teachers job action creep back into the minds of voters when they’ve got the pen in their hand, John?

GORMLEY: I’ve often said, and I think I observed in my first book on politics in Saskatchewan, the public memory politically, is about 100 days.

So you can get away after three months with all sorts of things. Institutionally, I would argue the memory’s longer. The NDP used the Grant Devine fear from 1986 election to 2007 and finally, then walked away.

The Sask. Party talks about the NDP closing, 175 schools, 54 hospitals, that still dogs the NDP. But then 17 years of the Sask. Party government, there are voters today in their mid 30s who were teenagers the last time we had an NDP government. I think it’s important for parties to keep wanting to reach back and remind their base. You start with your base in politics, and then you work into the undecided about things you want them to remember.

Fenwick?

FENWICK: I want to agree with John. I think the memory issue by issue is relatively short. So when I go back to the education issue, I think a lot of people will have moved on, and they won’t remember what happened in June, except for teachers. And in an election that will be as close as this one is, it might just take a small group or two like that to tip the balance in some constituencies.

It’s a provincial law that dictates every 10 years, a committee is brought together. There’s a formula that is used to determine whether or not boundaries have to change to make sure that we keep that balance of population and representation throughout the province. So there is no political influence affecting this. However, is there political gain? Fenwick?

FENWICK: It’s important to point out the boundary changes now are governed by a plus or minus 5 per cent rule.

In other words, you take a look at how many people are in the province, and every constituency is supposed to be within 5 per cent of what would be the average.

It used to be 15. So when it was 15, there was much more room for playing around with those numbers.

One of the bigger shifts that’s happened this time is there are some former split urban, rural ridings that are now mostly urban. If you’d asked me this question three years ago, I would have said that would have been an advantage for the NDP. Because they were losing some of those split seats because of the rural portion of the riding that was going Sask. Party.

I’m not sure that’s the case anymore, because the urban portions are voting so heavily NDP, it would appear that they might have gone in the NDP’s  favour. I don’t know if it’s going to have a big impact this time.

I want to put a plug in for our independent boundaries commission. We need to be very proud of how the system is set up for how those boundaries are created, because it keeps the large politics out of it, and that’s a good thing for sure.

GORMLEY: I don’t disagree with Kevin at all on this. There’s a few ridings I’m watching. As a political center rightist conservative, I shudder usually when I see the word University.

Because whether it’s Regina or Saskatoon, the area right around the university is typically an NDP deadlock.

Saskatoon, this University-Sutherland riding, which was in the past, part of three other ridings, now stretches out to College Park, East College Park, and that’s an area that’s now vacant.

Jennifer Bowes of the NDP, only won four years ago, didn’t run again. You’ve got Joanne McLeod for the Sask. Party. You’ve got to Tajinder Grewal for the NDP. That’s a riding that could be a takeaway from the NDP for the Sask. Party, because it now has more suburban areas in it. But generally, this urban/rural issue, again, is a story of Saskatchewan politics, and it bears a much deeper look.

Do you expect to see higher voter turnout this election, more than we did in 2022 which I believe was about 52 per cent, and if so does one party of all of the parties involved be advantaged by that, John?

GORMLEY: Yes, I expect higher voter turnout because 2020 of course, was right in the grip of the pandemic. So voter turnout was clearly affected.

The Saskatchewan I grew up in had a consistent level of 70 to 75 per cent which made us one of, next to PEI, the greatest participating democracies in Canada.

One of the reasons that worked was the NDP ground game. The NDP had a ground game for 40 years that made the Roman legions look weak.

Now, the NDP ground game with the baby boomers moving on, isn’t as effective as it used to be. The Sask. Party ground game has actually proved fairly effective.

People who follow politics, like Fenwick and I know the ground game wins elections. So, identify your vote. Get them out to vote.

We’ve seen voter turnout steadily declining since the very early 2000s, any thoughts on that?

GORMLEY: 2016 was the biggest Sask. Party win ever. Man, they took 51 of 61 seats. Voter turnout was weak because generally, I think the NDP knew they didn’t have a sniff. The Sask. Party were fairly complacent, because the election before they, you know, beaten Dwain Lingenfelter with 49 seats.

This time, there will be a higher voter turnout, because the NDP, if they’re on their game, will be mobilizing a strong concern on education and health. The Sask. Party, if they’re on their game, will be mobilizing a strong preserve what you have and don’t go back to the NDP. Really, that becomes the crux for the two parties.

Will voter turnout be bigger, Fenwick? And if so, does it have a positive impact for any one particular party?

FENWICK: I agree with everything that both of you have said. Yes, I think it will be higher.

I’ll add one other factor, in terms of the last few elections and low voter turnout. I think a lot of people thought that the result was not in doubt. The Sask. Party was going to win. It was just a question of how big their majority was going to be.

That’s not the case this time, this election will be much closer. So that’s another reason for people to get out and vote, because their vote matters. It is shameful that we have voter turnout that’s 52, 53, 54 per cent.

My goodness, people get out and vote! This is your opportunity to have input into how our province and our country are run. So it’s really good to think that the voter turnout might go up. We’re not going to hit 70 per cent or 80 per cent this election, but it’s at least a step in the right direction, I hope.

GORMLEY: Let’s give a shout out (Dr.) Michael Boda, the Chief Electoral Officer, you know, I give him a huge shout out, because this idea of a voting week is way overdue.

I’m old enough to remember when if you wanted an advanced vote ballot, you actually had to prove you were going to be physically out of town, or prove in advance that you were going to be sick. So, I mean, that’s changed. And the idea that we can now vote for six days before the 28th, the opportunities there now make sure you vote.

Of the 48 candidates who won in the last election for the Sask. Party, 22 of them are changing. Will this be a factor in the election? Your thoughts on that, John?

GORMLEY: It will absolutely. And what this is, again, for those of us who are non-New Democrats. There’s never been in history, except for the very first Liberal government of Walter Scott, who got 24 years, the longest continuous run. There’s never been a run of 17 years.

So, usually the longest non-NDP peers have had, might be nine years historically. But for the party, like a lot of things in life, it’s a challenge or an opportunity.

The opportunity is brand new candidates, brand new younger, more new Canadians, more women, an opportunity to recalibrate some of the issues that Fenwick talked about in the cities. So I see this is pretty positive for the Sask. Party.

Fenwick, your thoughts on the change that’s happening?

FENWICK: It’s a mixed bag. There needs to be renewal. You used in the analogy yesterday about the Edmonton Oilers and it’s time for teams to rebuild. So I agree with part of that.

However, it’s also a sign that there’s some dissension within the Sask. Party ranks. It is not unusual to see turnover.

What is unusual to see how many MLAs had been nominated and then stepped down and said, ‘I’m not going to run after the nomination took place.’

There were contested nominations where sitting MLAs were tossed out. That’s not impossible to happen, but it’s unusual.

So I think that not all is calm and warm and fuzzy within the Sask. Party, and that can cause them some problems. You’ve got two former Sask. Party MLAs running against Sask. Party and in a couple of constituencies. There’s some dynamics going on there that could cause the government some problem.

GORMLEY: I was actually advocating the topple of a few longtime MLAs.  You’ve got to work for the respect and the confidence of your voters. There were some older, longer term MLAs who saw this as a lifetime gig. Gosh, you’ve got bright young people who should be toppling them. I don’t disagree, though, with Fenwick. The party is now facing, in some respects, a little bit of this new right, the Sask. United Party, which I don’t think is going to be a factor, but it does force a dialog within the party.

How impactful do you think the Sask. United Party who have candidates names in over half of the provincial constituencies now will be in the election, Gormley?

GORMLEY: Well, the Sask. United Party, remember, in terms of its foothold, has Nadine Wilson in the riding just on the edge of PA. She will be defeated by the Sask. Party.

For the Sask. United, in its adherence, many of them have a long memory. We talked about memory on COVID, they feel the government mishandled that. They feel the government overreached. I don’t see the Sask. United Party, other than what Fenwick laid out, maybe pairing 10, perhaps 15 per cent away in the strongest Sask. Party seats. I see them pushing the party to re-identify where the base is.

Fenwick, thoughts on Sask. United?

FENWICK: I think that they’ll have minimal impact for the reasons that Gormley just outlined, they’re mostly going to take votes in seats where it doesn’t matter.

There’s three possible exceptions. Nadine Wilson’s riding is one where the Sask. Party will probably out poll her, but there’s absolutely room for Nadine to hold enough votes for the NDP to come up the middle. I mean, that has been an NDP riding in the past.

Jon Hromek constituency is another one where there’s a possibility that he might take enough votes to split it. I doubt that will happen.

The other one that’s a little bit interesting is Jeremy Harrison’s riding in Meadow Lake, because that’s one of the ones where a former MLA is running. And Jeremy’s had a tough year. So it is unlikely, but possible, that they could peel off enough votes there from people who are tired of Jeremy.

GORMLEY: I always think election predictions are a bit of a mugs game, although we’re going to play that game in a second. But I will fearlessly predict —  Jeremy Harrison won last time with 72 per cent of the vote — I predict he will have at least 70 per cent this time.

FENWICK: I think he’ll win the seat, I think his majority won’t be as strong as it was last time.

I want to get seat count predictions. We’ve got 61 constituencies. Currently we have 42 Sask. Party, 14 NDP, if you count Nadine Wilson as a Sask. United, we have one Sask. United, three independent and one vacant. And of course, we know 31 are needed for a majority government.

GORMLEY: It’s a mugs game four weeks out to make predictions. Because, of course, the old saying is in politics, a weekend can be an eternity. So we have four weeks yet.

I’m looking at this as much closer to Brad Walls, 2007 win. Mr. Wall ended 16 years of an NDP reign with 38 seats to 20 NDP. It was only later when Wall went from 38 to 49 then to 51 you saw these huge numbers.

So, 38 was Brad Walls entry number into politics, if you asked me today, Bray, I’m predicting somewhere each side, 38 to 40 somewhere in there.

FENWICK:  I play this game all the time. About eight times out of 10, my prediction at the start of the campaign is more accurate than my one at the end, we’ll see if that plays out. The winner in this election, I think, is going to have somewhere between 32 and 34 seats. I’m just not sure yet which party that’s going to be. So I’ll get back to you.

Editor’s note: This transcript has been edited for length and clarity.