WHY B.C.'S TINY PARTIES MIGHT MATTER IN THE NEXT ELECTION

VICTORIA - They've got few members, no money, and trailed the
Marijuana Party in the last election.

But B.C.'s clutch of small centre-right parties could still cost
Gordon Campbell the election next May.

Sure, it sounds implausible. Liberal politicians were quick to dismiss
the impact of a planned merger between the Unity Party and the BC
Conservatives under the Conservative banner. The parties barely
register in the polls and are already bickering internally. They
shouldn't matter.

But they do. If the parties have even the most modest success -- an
extra 30,000 or 40,000 votes across the province -- the Liberals will
be vulnerable in a dozen critical ridings.

University of British Columbia professor Werner Antweiler has come up
with a "voter migration matrix," a handy way to test the effects of
swings in the popular vote.

It's a crude tool. The changes in voting patterns are applied equally
to all ridings, without considering regional strengths or the quality
of candidates. But it's still a useful indicator.

The last Mustel Group poll showed the NDP at 42 per cent, Liberals at
40 per cent, the Greens at 11 per cent and the rest of the parties
sharing six per cent of the vote. Plug those values into the model and
it predicts a comfortable Liberal majority in next May's election.
They would hold 46 seats, the NDP 33.

But the outcome changes radically with even a modest increase in
projected support for a right-wing alternative.

Take the "other" parties from six per cent to 8.4 per cent support --
the level they reached in the 2001 election -- and the model predicts
the NDP would take 40 seats to the Liberals' 39 seats.

It's nowhere near a precise prediction. But it is an indication of how
easily Unity, Reform, the Conservatives or some new entity could tilt
the game -- just a little -- and cause big problems for the Liberals.

The problem for Mr. Campbell starts with his own unpopularity. There
will always be grumpy and disaffected voters, especially in cranky
B.C. But the Liberals have driven away people who should be
supporters, failing to convince them that the party -- despite faults
- -- comes closest to representing their views.

The risks to the Liberals are compounded by the number of ways in
which a new party can grab a share of the vote. A popular leader --
remember Gordon Wilson and the PDA -- can make up for a lack of
organization. One or two strong candidates, or supporters, can provide
a regional boost. (The new Conservative party already has support from
federal Conservative MP Darrel Stinson.) Or the party could just
stumble into a moment, an issue that defines the campaign.

New parties also have novelty on their side. Vancouver Island lawyer
Tom Morino -- a two-time provincial Liberal candidate and former
member of the party's provincial executive -- has launched the BC
Democrat Alliance, aiming at the former supporters of Mr. Wilson's
PDA. Voters can project a wide range of hopes on to any new party

Even if the smaller parties don't make a big impact, voters may still
decide to send a message that neither of the two main parties is
acceptable. The Marijuana Party captured three per cent of the vote in
2001, slightly ahead of Unity. That result speaks as much to general
voter anger as it does to support for the party's quirky policies.
(The Marijuana Party isn't likely to run candidates this time; where
those voters decide to land could be significant.)

What about strategic voting, and the argument that centre-right voters
will ultimately recognize the pragmatic value of supporting Liberal
candidates when any other vote would increase the chance of an NDP
win? In 2001 almost 200,000 British Columbians voted Green, the vast
majority of them with the clear knowledge that their local candidate
could not win.

Ramshackle, quirky, bickering, broke -- none of that changes the
reality. Any new strength for the parties of the right poses a
significant problem for the Liberals -- unless they can improve their
own popularity.