The role of a minor party : a comparative study of the British Liberal Party and the Australian Country Party since 1918

and the Australian Country Party since 1918. 2. The thesis examines the proposition that the role of a minor party is determined, not by its total strength expressed as a percentage of the national vote, but by how its strength is concentrated. Australia and Britain were chosen for the comparison because of the many similarities in political culture and in the extent of class voting. Each country has a party - the Country Party in Australia and the Liberal Party in Britain - which has had a distinct impact on the political scene in their respective countries. In the period from 1918 to the present day neither party, at the national level, has ever held the largest number of seats in parliament let alone a majority of seats, and it is in this sense that they are herein defined as minor parties. In the thesis the constitutional background of and differences between Australia and Britain are reviewed, followed by a brief historical picture of each of the two parties being studied. The sources of supporc of the two parties are analysed and it is here that real differences emerge. The Country Party in Australia is a deliberately sectional party with a narrow rural base, whereas the British Liberal Party is more broadly based than either the Labour or Conservative Parties in Britain. 3. Party leadership and organisation are then discussed. Both parties have had outstanding leaders, Earle Page and McEwen for the Country Party; Asquith, Lloyd George and Grimond for the Liberal Party. Both parties have had relatively fewer leaders than their major party opponents. However, whereas the Country Party has been free of serious splits the Liberal Party was shattered on the leadership struggles of Asquith and Lloyd George. Both parties have been identified with decentralisation of state power, the Country Party through its support, albeit sometimes lukewarm of the New States Movement; the Liberal Party through its espousal of a federal system for Britain with separate Welsh, Scottish and regional assemblies. Unfortunately for the British Liberal Party the beneficiaries of their policies in this area have been relatively new nationalist parties in both Wales arid Scotland. The major part of the thesis is devoted to a study of how the electoral systems in the two countries have, in practice, worked to the advantage or disadvantage of the Country Party and the British Liberal Party. The Country Party has been as consistently over-represented in the House of Representatives as the Liberal Party has been under-represented in the British House of Commons. With the even distribution of its support the introduction of the single transferable vote, in itself, would bring little benefit to the British Liberal Party in terms of seats. Multimember urban constituencies combined with some type of list system are the only way the Liberals are likely to obtain House of Commons seats in proportion to their votes. 4. Finally, the relations of the two minor parties with their respective major parties are considered. In the conclusion the future of the two parties is reviewed. In general terms it appears that the Country Party is faced with a slow decline. Although the British Liberal Party made a major breakthrough, in terms of votes, in the February 1974 election, they were unable to maintain this momentum in the October election, even though they lost very little ground. In the long term they must make an inroad into Labour held seats if they are to progress further.

Taxpayers Coalition Niagara fonds

Taxpayers Coalition Niagara (TCN) was founded and incorporated in 1990 in response to the increasing tax burden faced by citizens, and the sometimes questionable use of taxpayers’ money by the government. Originally founded as the Committee for Responsible Government, the name was changed to Taxpayers Coalition Niagara in order to facilitate membership in a similar provincial organization, Taxpayers Coalition Ontario. The non-partisan Coalition was comprised of businessmen from St. Catharines, with Frank Sheehan as President. The objectives of the Coalition included individual freedom and responsibility; obtaining maximum value for tax dollars; identifying and exposing irresponsible government policy and practice; the reduction of debt at all levels of government; the elimination of wasteful and unnecessary programmes; encouraging elected officials to regain control of their bureaucracies; and discouraging ‘empire building’ within local government. Early in 1991, the Coalition began advertising for members and financial support, receiving $11 000 from 1100 supporters. The membership consisted of both businesses and private citizens, eventually reaching 3500 members. The Coalition formed several committees, each one responsible for monitoring a public sector, such as municipal councils, school boards, police services and regional council. The Coalition worked towards achieving their objectives through presentations given to these groups by the committee leaders, as well as through ‘letters to the Editor’ and advertisements in local newspapers. Frank Sheehan resigned as President in 1995, in order to run as a Conservative candidate in the Provincial election. In June 1995, Charles Atkinson was elected President. The recent election of the Conservative government (led by Mike Harris) resulted in the expectation that many of the Coalition’s objectives would be achieved by the newly elected government. Accordingly, it was decided that the organization would operate in a reduced capacity. The Coalition was terminated in April, 2003, after several years of little or no activity.