Advertisement

Do Parties Matter? A Qualitative Answer with Numbers

  • Jean Crête
  • Nouhoun Diallo
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Public Choice book series (SIPC, volume 15)

Abstract

A central condition for liberal democracy to persist is that the authorities implement what they said they were going to do. The actions of the authorities, or policies, are here observed through the Inaugural Speeches which list what the governments would do in the following months. The content of those addresses is compared to the content of the electoral party platforms of the parties forming the government. The data cover 46 years of political life in Quebec. The Inaugural Speeches as well as the party platforms are analyzed along a left–right dimension using the categories of the Comparative Manifesto Project. The results show that policies diverge as much in the years 2000 as they did in the 1960s. The detailed study of the party platforms do not predict exactly the policies, but the relative position of the parties, on a left–right continuum, gives a clear idea of what their policies will be. When a political party takes control of the government it implements what it said it was going to do. There is no dissonance between the before and the after.

Keywords

Political Party Prime Minister Liberal Democracy Policy Position Ideological Position 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgment

We thank Benoît Collette, Department of Political Science at Laval University, for providing the data on party platforms.

References

  1. Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson. 2006. Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bartels, Larry M. 2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Beaud, Jean-Pierre. 1984. “Vingt ans de sondages d’opinion au Québec.” In Comportement électoral au Québec, ed. J. Crête. Chicoutimi: Gaëtan Morin.Google Scholar
  4. Bobbio, Norberto. 1996. Droite et gauche : essai sur une distinction politique. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  5. Boix, Carles. 1998. Political Parties, Growth and Equality: Conservative and Social Democratic Economic Strategies in the World Economy. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Catonguay, Claude. 2005. Mémoires d’un révolutionnaire tranquille. Montréal: Boréal.Google Scholar
  7. Crête, Jean. 1995. “La vie des partis.” In Québec 1996, eds. D. Monière and R. Côté. Montréal: Fides/Le Devoir.Google Scholar
  8. Dion, Stéphane, and James Iain Gow. 1989. “L’administration québécoise à l’heure des libéraux.” In L’année politique au Québec 1987–1988, ed. D. Monière. Montréal: Éditions Québec/Amérique.Google Scholar
  9. Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  10. Easton, David. 1965. A Framework for Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  11. Erikson, Robert S., Mackuen, Michael B., and J.E. Stimson. 2002. The Macro Polity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Finer, Samuel Edward. 1997. The History of Government from the Earliest Times. 3 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Imbeau, Louis M., and Guy Lachapelle. 1994. “Les déterminants des politiques provinciales au Canada. Synthèse des études comparatives.” In Politiques provinciales comparées, eds. J. Crête, L. M. Imbeau and G. Lachapelle. Sainte-Foy: Les Presses de l”Université Laval.Google Scholar
  14. Imbeau, Louis M., François Pétry, and Moktar Lamari. 2001. “Left-Right Ideology and Government Policies: A Meta-Analysis.” European Journal of Political Research 40:1–29.Google Scholar
  15. Katznelson, Ira, and John S. Lapinski. 2006. “The Substance of Representation: Studying Policy Content and Legislature Behavior.” In The Macropolitics of Congress, eds. E. S. Adler and J. S. Lapinski. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Laponce, J. A. 1981. Left and Right: The Topography of Political Perceptions. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  17. Latouche, Daniel. 1976. “Le contenu thématique et l’orientation idéologique des programmes électoraux en 1973.” In Le processus électoral au Québec: Les élections provinciales de 1970 et 1973, eds. D. Latouche, G. Lord, and J.-G. Vaillancourt. Montréal: Hurtubise/HMH.Google Scholar
  18. Laver, Michael, ed. 2001. Estimating the Policy Positions of Political Actors. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Lemieux, Vincent. 1969. “Les plates-formes électorales des partis.” In Quatre élections provinciales au Québec: 1956–1966, ed. V. Lemieux. Québec: Les Presses de l’Université Laval.Google Scholar
  20. Mayhew, David R. 2006. “Lawmaking and History.” In The Macropolitics of Congress, eds. E. S. Adler and J. S. Lapinski. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  21. McDonald, Michael D., and Silvia M. Mendes. 2001. “The Policy Space of Party Manifestos.” In Estimating the Policy Position of Political Actors, ed. M. Laver. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Murray, Shoon Kathleen. 2006. “Private Polls and Presidential Policymaking: Reagan as a Facilitator of Change.” Public Opinion Quarterly 70 (4):477–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Péladeau, Normand. 2006. QDA Miner: User's Guide. Montréal: Provalis Research.Google Scholar
  24. Pétry, François, and Benoît Collette. 2006. “Le gouvernement Charest a-t-il respecté ses promesses?” In Le Parti libéral: enquête sur les réalisations du gouvernement Charest, eds. F. Pétry, É. Bélanger, and L. M. Imbeau. Québec: Les Presses de l’Université Laval.Google Scholar
  25. Pétry, François, and Réjean Landry. 2001. “Estimating Interparty Policy Distances from Election programmes in Quebec, 1970–89.” In Estimating the Policy Position of Political Actors, ed. M. Laver. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Pétry, François, and Matthew Mendelsohn. 2004. “Public Opinion and Public Making in Canada 1994–2001.” Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique 37(3):505–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pierson, Paul. 2000. “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics.” American Political Science Review 94(2):251–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Volkens, Andrea, and Derek Hearl. 1990. Content Analysis of Party Programmes in Comparative Perspectives: Handbook and Coding Instructions. Berlin: Science Center Berlin and University of Exeter.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Département de science politiqueUniversité LavalQuébecCanada

Personalised recommendations