SASKATOON – In the few hours remaining before voting begins, all the party workers and candidates are frantically trying to ensure that their message is getting through to voters.

Automated telephone calls, faxes and e-mails are streaming through Saskatchewan communications lines urging people to choose one party or another.

The question of who forms the next government boils down to two issues. First, do voters want to leave the Crown corporations untouched and unaltered? Second, are people willing to trust Mr. Hermanson and the Saskatchewan Party to effect change?

From the beginning of the campaign, the New Democratic Party staked its future on the Crowns issue. Despite evidence that other issues were more important, such as health care or the economy, Mr. Calvert's party has consistently affirmed that citizens need to choose between preserving the Crowns (by supporting the NDP) or opening them to privatization (by supporting the Saskatchewan Party). Clearly, this issue has dogged the Saskatchewan Party, as it struggled to define its position while reassuring people of their position during the last few weeks.

Aside from its obvious resonance with voters, discussion about the future of the Crowns has allowed Mr. Calvert to suggest that Mr. Hermanson isn't trustworthy. One of Mr. Hermanson's largest obstacles since becoming leader of the Saskatchewan Party has been to win voters trust.

The CBC-sponsored poll released last week provided further evidence that this is a problem when it reported that 31 per cent of respondents chose Mr. Calvert as the best option for premier, while 23 per cent chose Mr. Hermanson. However, looking only at respondents living in the major cities, the difference became much greater with 35 per cent choosing Mr. Calvert and only 19 per cent choosing Mr. Hermanson. While these numbers are less statistically reliable, owing to a higher margin of sampling error, they confirm trends that have been apparent for several years. For the Saskatchewan Party, winning government hinges on overcoming Mr. Hermanson's so-called "high negatives" to win more support and seats in the two main urban constituencies of Saskatoon and Regina.

On the other hand, the CBC-sponsored poll is outdated and, besides, any trends in party support aren't evident from the polling data. Yet, because the CBC's and other polls suggest that the two parties are practically tied, it is worth considering the possible outcomes of Wednesday's vote.

Obviously, if either the NDP or the Saskatchewan Party secures enough seats to form a majority government, the new administration has much more latitude for action than the old Romanow/Calvert/Melanchuk coalition government.

However, depending on the results in individual ridings, it is possible that a minority government may be returned to the legislature. In the case that either the Saskatchewan Party or the NDP holds the largest number of seats in the provincial legislature (but less than 29), any elected Liberals will be key to their power. In such a scenario, a few Liberals sent to Regina become extremely powerful.

Liberal leader David Karwacki has firmly pledged that his party will not enter into another coalition agreement. Rather the optimal strategy for Karwacki's party is to agree to support the government party conditionally, and ensure full accountability for the people of Saskatchewan. Thinking about the options strategically, this is the Liberal's best approach, and the one that ought to have been followed in 1999.

Although the actual test of a minority government's support would have to await the formal beginning of the next legislative session, it is likely that party leaders would negotiate a conditional agreement quickly.

Facing a tie

Another option, albeit one that is very unlikely to occur, is a tie. If the Liberals are shut out and each of the two main parties elects 29 representatives, it is unclear who may form the government. Section 13 (1) of the Legislative Assembly Act simply states that "The Assembly, on its first assembling after a general election, shall proceed with all practicable speed to elect one of its members as Speaker."

To secure this goal and allow business to proceed, one side will have to give up a voting member, since the Speaker normally presides over debates and does not vote unless there is a tie. So, it may be that the election of a Speaker from party A implies that Party B forms a government, because Party B will hold on to 29 voting members.

To complicate the issue further, the members of the legislature, minus the Premier, decide whom to choose as their Speaker. If this scenario occurs, it may ultimately be resolved through negotiations among the parties in the legislature or because one party manages to convince a member or members from the other side to cross the floor.

In any event, resolving the conundrum of a tie in the number of party representatives elected may take time and several intense rounds of negotiation.

to top