Why Do Premiers Rarely Become PM's?

[jbg]

I recall Lord of the Fried dance - Oh perchance to have that in and out scenario versus one at present

How about Mike Harris - strategically could keep west in and tight with Preston, , appeals to base/rural , native son in Ontario, probably would bring in other p*ssed premiers (esp. williams)or would premier baggage a la Bob Rae be the major factor

I didn't want to raise this question on another thread because of the risk of "thread drift".

Something I never understood about Canada; why is it that Premiers rarely become party leaders and thus Prime Ministers? In the US, three of the last four Presidents have been former governors, and even before that a significant number were. I would think that Canadians would want to see how someone ran something other than their mouths before electing them to the highest position of responsibility.

Thoughts?

[Michael Bluth]

I didn't want to raise this question on another thread because of the risk of "thread drift".

Something I never understood about Canada; why is it that Premiers rarely become party leaders and thus Prime Ministers? In the US, three of the last four Presidents have been former governors, and even before that a significant number were. I would think that Canadians would want to see how someone ran something other than their mouths before electing them to the highest position of responsibility.

Thoughts?

Part of it is systemic. The separation between the legislative and executive branches in the Canadian system aren't as sharp as they are in the American system. Premiers are MPs or MPPs, PM is also an MP. Whereas the President cannot be a member of Congress.

Hence a statehouse is a pretty good training ground for a potential President. Whereas the House of Commons is probably a better training ground for a potential PM than a given Premier's office.

[nothinarian]

Part of it is systemic. The separation between the legislative and executive branches in the Canadian system aren't as sharp as they are in the American system. Premiers are MPs or MPPs, PM is also an MP. Whereas the President cannot be a member of Congress.

Hence a statehouse is a pretty good training ground for a potential President. Whereas the House of Commons is probably a better training ground for a potential PM than a given Premier's office.

Other reason is the inevitable adversarial relationships that develop between premiers and feds which can lead to alienation from the federal arm of their party (i.e. Danny Williams)

Premiers are into fed bashing as a political tool and more provincial rights(taxing, encroachment in provincial jurisdiction, infrastructure, etc...) so would also difficult for them to do an about face on policy

That said- we could use some leadership and excitement on all sides at the federal level - former premiers that could spice things up include McKenna, Klein and Harris - and they all are fiscally responsible

[oreodontist]

Some good points in above postings...especially about legislators, etc.

In the USA since Kennedy, a 98 sitting US Senators have declared their intention to run for leadership of their party and then be elected as President. Zero have become President. 2008 will be break the trend of the last 44 years...Obama, Clinton and McCain are all sitting senators.

[August1991]

Something I never understood about Canada; why is it that Premiers rarely become party leaders and thus Prime Ministers? In the US, three of the last four Presidents have been former governors, and even before that a significant number were. I would think that Canadians would want to see how someone ran something other than their mouths before electing them to the highest position of responsibility.

George Drew was premier of Ontario and then became leader of the federal Progressive Conservatives. He never became a federal PM. Robert Stanfield was premier of NS, and his story was the same as Drew. OTOH, Jean Lesage was a federal cabinet minister who went on to become Prime Minister of Quebec. If Bob Rae becomes federal Liberal leader (possible) and becomes federal PM (very unlikely) then he would be the second. To my knowledge, only John Thompson was premier of a province (NS) who then went on to be federal PM. (Thompson died tragically at 49 while federal PM and his death was of great significance for Canada. Laurier won the subsequent election in 1896 and Canada dramatically changed as a result... )

jbg, the simple answer to your question is that regionalism drives Canadian federal politics. This is a fact that many people outside Quebec simply cannot understand. Once a politician is successful in the provincial sphere, the politician is "damaged goods" at the federal level.

Many provincial PMs have tried to become federal leaders (Duff Roblin comes to mind) or a federal PM but without success. They are too identified with their region. A federal PM must constantly balance regional interests. In many ways, Canada is a geographic definition - like the equator or a meridian.

----

The US is different. In general, governors are successful as presidents. I'm not sure what the experience of Australia - another democratic federal state - has been.

Edited May 2, 2008 by August1991

[Michael Bluth]

The US is different. In general, governors are successful as presidents. I'm not sure what the experience of Australia - another democratic federal state - has been.

The experience of Australia has been quite similar to that of Canada.

Australia has had two Prime Ministers who previously served as Premiers of Australian states. Neither of whom served as Prime Minister in the last 60 years.

George Reid served as Premier of New South Wales then was PM for a little more than 10 months ending in 1905.

Joseph Lyons served as Premier of Tasmania then was PM for a just over 7 years ending in 1949.

[jbg]

Hence a statehouse is a pretty good training ground for a potential President. Whereas the House of Commons is probably a better training ground for a potential PM than a given Premier's office.

Why, though, when an MP in Ottawa administers nothing, unless he or she is in the Cabinet?

[jbg]

Premiers are into fed bashing as a political tool and more provincial rights(taxing, encroachment in provincial jurisdiction, infrastructure, etc...) so would also difficult for them to do an about face on policy

Governors in the US make a career about railing against the Feds. The "laundry list" includes:

1. Unfunded mandates;
   
2. Taxation disproportionate to returned moneys;
   
3. Dumping of social service needs on States;
   
4. Inadquate or delayed disaster assistance, i.e. Katrina; and
   
5. The list goes on.
   

Doesn't seem to have stopped such perennial attackers of the Feds as Governors Reagan, Carter, Bush or Clinton from becomng President. In fact, they always promise to do right by states and never do.

[jbg]

(Thompson died tragically at 49 while federal PM and his death was of great significance for Canada. Laurier won the subsequent election in 1896 and Canada dramatically changed as a result... )

Out of curiousity what were Laurier's "drastic changes" besides promising that Canada would "fill the 20th Century"?

[jbg]

Joseph Lyons served as Premier of Tasmania then was PM for a just over 7 years ending in 1949.

Followed by Menzies a/k/a Ming the Merciless?