| Prov/Reg | 2007 $ | 2007 % | 2008 $ | 2008 % | 2009 $ | 2009 % | 2010 $ | 2010 % |
| AB | $307,001.80 | 10.31% | $406,575.72 | 9.23% | $307,350.79 | 10.01% | $143741.94.50 | 9.44% |
| BC | $805,217.20 | 27.04% | $1,109,104.94 | 25.18% | $680,108.02 | 30.22% | $504,443.60 | 33.13% |
| MB | $148,937.94 | 5.00% | $251,361.54 | 5.71% | $174,442.71 | 5.68% | $64,005.27 | 4.20% |
| NB | $34,410.77 | 1.16% | $42,393.92 | 0.96% | $38,635.19 | 1.26% | $13,144.86 | 0.86% |
| NL | $13,894.00 | 0.47% | $22,273.00 | 0.51% | $22,290.00 | 0.73% | $11,340.00 | 0.75% |
| NS | $105,734.34 | 3.55% | $155,442.45 | 3.53% | $110,203.00 | 3.59% | $37,112.50 | 2.44% |
| NT | $7,146.00 | 0.24% | $21,542.00 | 0.49% | $9,433.00 | 0.31% | $2,150.00 | 0.14% |
| NU | $2,830.00 | 0.10% | $2,420.00 | 0.05% | $4,018.00 | 0.13% | $2,040.00 | 0.13% |
| ON | $1,199,357.72 | 40.28% | $1,841,233.15 | 41.81% | $1,364,679.90 | 44.46% | $583,063.67 | 38.29% |
| PE | $7,145.00 | 0.24% | $8,300.82 | 0.19% | $5,952.00 | 0.19% | $2,470.00 | 0.16% |
| QC | $94,120.42 | 3.16% | $120,570.19 | 2.74% | $65,811.41 | 2.14% | $30,502.58 | 2.00% | SK | $243,518.12 | 8.18% | $411,029.18 | 9.33% | $278,655.30 | 9.08% | $124,664.37 | 8.19% | YT | $8,300.92 | 0.28% | $11,703.92 | 0.27% | $8,174.92 | 0.27% | $3,887.34 | 0.27% | Total | $2,977,614.23 | n/a | $4,403,950.83 | n/a | $3,069,754.24 | n/a | $1,522,571.13 | n/a |
I'll note that the above chart doesn't include one of the ways I played around with the data, which was to compare the parties' 2008 donations to their votes in each province. Based on the Cons' numbers alone I wasn't entirely sure what to look for, but there are some rather interesting comparisons to be drawn between the Cons and the NDP:
- Both parties posted their top fund-raising take per vote in...the Yukon, with the Cons raking in $11.85 per vote and the NDP $9.17. The Northwest Territories also rank near the top of both parties' lists, but Nunuvut breaks the territorial trend as the Cons' lowest per-vote source of income.
- The Cons' most efficient province for fund-raising is predictably the one where they hold a stranglehold on the popular vote, with $4.53 finding its way into party coffers for every vote won in Alberta. Next in line were B.C. ($3.89), Ontario ($3.69), Manitoba ($3.52) and Saskatchewan ($3.36).
- For the NDP, by far the most efficient province for fund-raising compared to votes received (and the lone one where it exceeded the Cons on that measure) was Saskatchewan, with $3.83 raised by the NDP for each vote it won. Surprisingly to me at least, Alberta ranks second at $2.52, followed by B.C. ($2.37), Manitoba ($2.24) and Ontario ($1.96) - making the fund-raising bases substantially the same for the NDP and the Cons, even if they've had varying success in cultivating them.
- Meanwhile, the NDP had two provinces far below the rest in dollars raised per vote. In Newfoundland and Labrador ($0.34), the party's vote was itself based largely on Danny Williams' ABC campaign, making for an obvious explanation for the disconnect. But even that effect couldn't win the bottom place on the NDP's list of dollars raised per vote - which leads us back into the discussion of the NDP generally.
While I noted that the Cons' returns in Quebec has always been less than impressive, the NDP's (at least for the years covered by La Presse's data) have been substantially lower...and declining by the year as a proportion of the NDP's overall fund-raising. And even in the 2008 election which saw the party make modest gains with a 12% showing at the polls and its first ever general-election seat, the NDP raised only 27 cents for every Quebec vote it won.
Which isn't to say that the NDP can't indeed build up its capacity in Quebec now that it has 59 MPs and a majority of popular support to work with. And one can't say that the model of working toward winning votes based on relatively soft support which doesn't yet reflect a donor base has been anything but a stunning success.
But there's an awfully long way to go for the NDP to turn what had previously been its least efficient fund-raising generator into a national power base. And I'll be highly curious to see whether the party's fund-raising base shifts substantially based on its Quebec success.
I'll note one other trend in the NDP's data, as the close relationship between the NDP and its provincial sections looks to have a significant influence on how the party raises its money. The 2007 and 2009 years offer an ideal basis of comparison since the dollars raised are such a good match, and they show an almost unbroken pattern: where a provincial party faces an election (including Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario in 2007, and B.C. in 2009), the federal party's fund-raising is lower for the year.
And the exception that proves the rule is Nova Scotia - where despite the euphoria of winning a provincial election for the first time and the added attention from hosting the party's federal convention in Halifax, the federal NDP improved on its 2007 fund-raising numbers by less than $5,000.
Don't forget the federal NDP's explicit promise to stay out of the field in the first two quarters of 2009, in favour of their provincial cousins set to go to the polls. They roared back in the third quarter that year, but it may not have been equally in every province. Interesting theory.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the reminder - which seems to suggest that the theory has a basis in publicly-stated practice.
ReplyDelete