Editing Party system (section)

=== Canada ===

==== Federal party systems ====
According to recent scholars, there have been four party systems in Canada at the federal level since Confederation, each with its own distinctive pattern of social support, [[patronage]] relationships, leadership styles, and electoral strategies.<ref>[[#Gag07|Gagnon and Tanguay, 2007]]: 1</ref> Political scientists disagree on the names and precise boundaries of the eras, however. Steve Patten identifies four party systems in Canada's political history.<ref>[[#Pat07|Patten, 2007]]: 57–58</ref>

Clarkson (2005) shows how the [[Liberal Party of Canada|Liberal Party]] has dominated all the party systems, using different approaches. It began with a  "clientelistic approach" under [[Sir Wilfrid Laurier|Laurier]], which evolved into a "brokerage" system of the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s under [[William Lyon Mackenzie King|Mackenzie King]]. The 1950s saw the emergence of a "pan-Canadian system", which lasted until the 1990s. The [[1993 Canadian federal election|1993 election]] – described by Clarkson as an electoral "earthquake" which "fragmented" the party system — saw the emergence of regional politics within a four party-system, whereby various groups championed regional issues and concerns. Clarkson concludes that the inherent bias built into the first-past-the-post system has chiefly benefited the Liberals.<ref>Stephen Clarkson, ''The Big Red Machine: How the Liberal Party Dominates Canadian Politics'' (2005) {{ISBN?}}{{page?|date=January 2025}}</ref>
* The first party system emerged from pre-Confederation colonial politics, reached its zenith from 1896 to 1911, and lasted until the [[Conscription Crisis of 1917]]. It was characterized by local patronage administered by the two largest parties, the [[Liberals (Canada)|Liberals]] and the [[Conservative Party of Canada (historical)|Conservatives]].
* The second system emerged following the First World War, and reached its peak in the period between 1935 and 1957. It was characterized by regionalism and saw the emergence of several protest parties, such as the [[Progressives (Canada)|Progressives]], the [[Social Credit Party (Canada)|Social Credit Party]], and the [[Co-operative Commonwealth Federation]].
* The third system emerged in 1963 lasted until 1983, and began to unravel thereafter. This period saw the traditional two parries challenged by a strong third party, the [[New Democratic Party of Canada|New Democratic Party]]. Campaigns during this era became more national in scope due to the advent of [[electronic media]], and involved a greater focus on leadership. The dominant policy of the era was [[Keynesian]] economics. The Election Act of 1974 was introduced during this period, allowing candidates party affiliation to appear on ballots, therefore an increased importance of party labels.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Sevi |first1=Semra |last2=Yoshinaka |first2=Antoine |last3=Blais |first3=André |title=Legislative Party Switching and the Changing Nature of the Canadian Party System, 1867–2015 |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/canadian-journal-of-political-science-revue-canadienne-de-science-politique/article/abs/legislative-party-switching-and-the-changing-nature-of-the-canadian-party-system-18672015/32698D19C6CF4C3C297EEDC2E9020EE0 |journal=Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne de Science Politique |year=2018 |language=en |volume=51 |issue=3 |pages=665–695 |doi=10.1017/S0008423918000203 |s2cid=158947259 |issn=0008-4239|url-access=subscription }}</ref> This led to a shift from a candidate-centred system to a party-centred system, resulting in party leaders and the label of the candidate to play a major role in the deciding factor for voters.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Sevi |first1=Semra |last2=Yoshinaka |first2=Antoine |last3=Blais |first3=André |date=1867–2015 |title=Legislative Party Switching and the Changing Nature of the Canadian Party System, 1867–2015 |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/canadian-journal-of-political-science-revue-canadienne-de-science-politique/article/abs/legislative-party-switching-and-the-changing-nature-of-the-canadian-party-system-18672015/32698D19C6CF4C3C297EEDC2E9020EE0 |journal=Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne de Science Politique |language=en |volume=51 |issue=3 |pages=665–695 |doi=10.1017/S0008423918000203 |s2cid=158947259 |issn=0008-4239|url-access=subscription }}</ref> Leon Epstein characterized Canada as a "two-party plus" system, as only the Liberal and Conservative Party could form government, with the NDP present but not winning many seats.<ref name="ScottoStephenson2004">{{Cite journal |last1=Scotto |first1=Thomas J. |last2=Stephenson |first2=Laura B. |last3=Kornberg |first3=Allan |date=2004-09-01 |title=From a two-party-plus to a one-party-plus? Ideology, vote choice, and prospects for a competitive party system in Canada |journal=Electoral Studies |language=en |volume=23 |issue=3 |pages=463–483 |doi=10.1016/S0261-3794(03)00054-4 |issn=0261-3794}}</ref>
* The fourth party system began with the 1993 election, which saw the decline of the [[Progressive Conservative Party of Canada|Progressive Conservatives]] and NDP and rise of the [[Reform Party of Canada]] and the [[Bloc Québécois]], and eventually led to the PCs merging with the Reform-descended [[Canadian Alliance]]. It saw most parties move to one-member-one-vote leadership contests, and a major reform to campaign finance laws in 2004.  The fourth party system has been characterized by market-oriented policies that abandoned Keynesian policies, but maintained the welfare state. It was the elections of both 1997 and 2000 that showed that there was significant transformation in Canada's party system, showing they have undergone a transformation into a genuine [[Multi-party system|multiparty system]].<ref name="ScottoStephenson2004" />

==== Provincial party systems ====
Party systems differ across Canada in each province, as different provinces have different priorities, and values for their residents.<ref name="WesleyBuckley2021">{{Cite journal |last1=Wesley |first1=Jared J. |last2=Buckley |first2=Clare |date=2021-04-03 |title=Canadian Provincial Party Systems: An Analytical Typology |journal=American Review of Canadian Studies |volume=51 |issue=2 |pages=213–236 |doi=10.1080/02722011.2021.1923249 |issn=0272-2011 |s2cid=237436279}}</ref> According to Jared Wesley and Clare Buckley, there are two ways of comparing provincial party systems in Canada: "conflict intensity"'','' which is the extent to which parties challenge each other on priorities and opinions, some party systems features more competition when it comes to party options; and competitiveness, a measure of how close the average election is in terms of outcome, an uncompetitive system would show dominance in one party but competitiveness is good in sense that it gives a better sense of democracy.<ref name="WesleyBuckley2021" /> This leads to what they determine are the two types of party systems that are common in provincial politics: centripetal party systems and centrifugal party systems.
* Centripetal party systems are most prevalent in [[Central Canada|Central]] and [[Atlantic Canada]], due to regional, linguistic, religious, and ethnic cleavages. They are regions where typically one prominent party reigns. These regions are where the Liberal Party has remained a strong political force prominently for decades.<ref name="WesleyBuckley2021" />
* Centrifugal party system which has been polarized to describe party systems such as those in [[Western Canada]]. Competition between various different parties with vast differences in ideologies and values.<ref name="WesleyBuckley2021" />

Additionally, from elections based from 1960 to 1995, Wesley and Buckley concluded that there are four different classifications of a party system for each of the ten provincial party systems.<ref name="WesleyBuckley2021" /> These groupings of classifications have most likely changed since 1995, as there has been a rise in different political parties for different provinces since these times. The four categories include:
* [[Dominant-party system|One-party dominant]]: Alberta
* [[Two-party system|Traditional two-party]]: Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland
* [[Multi-party system|Three-party]]: Ontario, Manitoba
* Polarized: British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Quebec, New Brunswick

There has been a growing separation between federal and provincial political party systems, resulting in a separation of political perspectives typically associated with specific parties therefore fewer provincial and federal systems are symmetrical. Provincial systems for example, are simpler, stable, and often reflect the cleavages of each province (such as language, religion, class and ethnicity).<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Carty |first=R. Kenneth |date=2006 |title=Political Turbulence in a Dominant Party System |journal=PS: Political Science and Politics |volume=39 |issue=4 |pages=825–827 |doi=10.1017/S1049096506061026 |doi-broken-date=1 November 2024 |issn=1049-0965 |s2cid=155027795}}</ref>

==== Territorial party systems ====
[[Nunavut]] and the [[Northwest Territories]] do not have political parties, and instead operate under [[Consensus government in Canada|consensus government]]. All candidates run and are elected as independents, and the newly elected legislature decides which of its members will make up the executive council. Due to their smaller populations, many argue that the absence of political parties makes it easier for voters to decide the person they are voting for. Other argue that it makes it harder for voters to recognize the goals and priorities of candidates, and that the lack of an opposition makes it harder for identify issues during debates.<ref name="Henderson2006">{{Cite journal |last=Henderson |first=Ailsa |date=2004 |title=Northern political culture?: Political behaviour in Nunavut |journal=Études/Inuit/Studies |volume=28 |issue=1 |pages=133–154 |doi=10.7202/012643ar |issn=0701-1008 |doi-access=free}}</ref>