1993 Canadian federal election

← 1988 October 25, 1993 (1993-10-25) 1997 →
← outgoing members elected members →
295 seats in theHouse of Commons 148 seats needed for a majority
Opinion polls
Turnout	69.6%[1] ( 5.7pp)
First party Second party Third party   Leader Jean Chrétien Lucien Bouchard Preston Manning Party Liberal Bloc Québécois Reform Leader since June 23, 1990 July 25, 1990 November 1, 1987 Leader's seat Saint-Maurice Lac-Saint-Jean Calgary Southwest Last election 83 seats, 31.92% New party 0 seats, 2.09% Seats before 81 10 1 Seats won 177 54 52 Seat change 96 44 51 Popular vote 5,647,952 1,846,024 2,559,245 Percentage 41.24% 13.52%[i] 18.69%[ii] Swing 9.32pp New party 16.60pp   Fourth party Fifth party   Leader Audrey McLaughlin Kim Campbell Party New Democratic Progressive Conservative Leader since December 5, 1989 June 13, 1993 Leader's seat Yukon Vancouver Centre (defeated) Last election 43 seats, 20.38% 169 seats, 43.02% Seats before 44 156 Seats won 9 2 Seat change 35 154 Popular vote 939,575 2,186,422 Percentage 6.88% 16.04% Swing 13.50pp 26.98pp
Results by electoral district Results by province and territory
The Canadian parliament after the 1993 election
Prime Minister before election Kim Campbell Progressive Conservative Prime Minister after election Jean Chrétien Liberal

The1993 Canadian federal election was held on October 25, 1993, to elect members to theHouse of Commons of the35th Parliament of Canada. Considered to be a majorpolitical realignment, it was one of the most eventful elections in Canada's history. Two newregionalist parties emerged, finishing second and third in seat count. Most notably, the election marked the worst defeat for a governing party at the federal level and one of the worst ever suffered by a governing party in the Western democratic world. TheLiberal Party, led byJean Chrétien, won amajority government, defeating the governingProgressive Conservative Party in alandslide. The 22.6% gap between the Liberals and the newly formedReform Party is the largest difference between the top-two popular vote parties inCanadian federal election history.^[2]

The election was called on September 8, 1993, by the new Progressive Conservative (PC) leader,Prime MinisterKim Campbell, near the end of her party's five year mandate. When shesucceeded longtime Prime MinisterBrian Mulroney and assumed office on 25 June, the party was deeply unpopular due to the failure of theMeech Lake andCharlottetown Accords in 1990 and 1992, respectively, the introduction of theGoods and Services Tax in 1991, and theearly 1990s recession. The PCs were further weakened by the emergence of new parties that were competing for its core supporters, including the western-basedReform Party of Canada and theBloc Québécois advocating for Quebecois sovereignty and separatism, both of which ended up heavily splitting the PC vote.

Campbell's initial efforts helped the party recover somewhat in pre-election polls before thewrits were issued on 8 September. However, this momentum did not last. The Progressive Conservatives launcheda controversial attack ad during the campaign in hopes of staunching the bleeding. It did not work; the Progressive Conservatives suffered the most lopsided defeat for a Canadian governing party at the federal level, losing 154 seats and official party status in theHouse of Commons and more than half of their vote from1988.

TheWestern-basedReform Party won over many traditional PC voters, particularlysocial conservatives,alienated Western Canadians, andfiscal conservatives who opposed the Mulroney government's deficit spending and tax increases. The popularity ofPreston Manning, and profound Western discontent with the PCs, led the Reform Party to replace the PCs as the majorright-wing party in the Commons, although it won only one seat east ofManitoba. Though the Progressive Conservatives recovered slightly in the1997 election, they lost seats in2000 and would never be a major force in Canadian politics again. In 2003, the Progressive Conservative Party ceased to exist when it merged with the largerCanadian Alliance (the successor of the Reform Party) to create the newConservative Party of Canada.

ThesovereigntistBloc Québécois won almost half of the popular vote inQuebec and became theOfficial Opposition despite finishing fourth in the popular vote. To date, this is the only time that a party committed to the political secession of a region of Canada has become the Official Opposition of Canada, and the only time a party not first or second in the popular vote would form Opposition. (TheProgressives won the second-most seatsin 1921 with the third-most votes, but declined to form Opposition, and the second-placeConservatives did in lieu). The traditional third party, theNew Democratic Party (NDP), collapsed to nine seats only one election after having what was then its best performance. It remained the NDP's worst result until the2025 federal election. The turnover of MPs was stark and unprecedented for Canadian politics, with132 MPs losing their seats. In total, 194 out of 295ridings changed hands. Having been defeated in herVancouver Centre riding, Campbell became the first incumbent prime minister sinceWilliam Lyon Mackenzie King in1945 to lose a House of Commons seat in a bid for re-election. This was the only election in Canadian history in which a governing party failed to win enough seats to attainofficial party status.

The Liberal Party had dominated Canadian politics for much of the 20th century. The party had been in office for all but 22 years between1896 and1984, with the Conservatives/Progressive Conservatives only forming government seven times during this period: in1911,1917, 1921 and 1926 (both underArthur Meighen, without election),1930,1957, and1979.

In 1984,Brian Mulroney led the Progressive Conservatives to a majority government with the most seats in Canadian history, winning a majority of the seats in every province and a majority of votes cast. The Liberals lost 95 seats in the worst defeat for a governing party at the federal level at the time.

The PCs made a strong showing in Quebec, a province where they had held few seats for much of the century. Between 1896 and 1984, they had only taken a majority of seats in that province once, in their1958 landslide—the only other time besides 1984 that a party won more than 200 seats in an election. After winning only one seat in Quebec (out of 75) in1980, the Tories won 58 seats in 1984, leaving the Liberals with almost no seats outside ofMontreal.

Mulroney's government was based on a coalition of socially conservative populists fromthe West, fiscal conservatives fromAtlantic Canada andOntario, andQuebec nationalists. This coalition helped him win reelection in1988 (an election almost wholly focused on the proposedCanada–United States Free Trade Agreement) but with only a plurality of the votes cast this time. Over the next five years, the popularity of Mulroney and his party declined further. Thelate 1980s recession severely harmed the Canadian economy, as bothunemployment and thepublic debt grew. Despite the government's pledges to reduce the annual federal deficit, it grew from $34.5 billion in 1984, when Mulroney took power, to more than $40 billion by the time Mulroney stepped down in 1993. The federal debt was at $500 billion in 1993.^[3] Mulroney brought in the unpopularGoods and Services Tax (GST) in 1991 and his governing policies were broadly unpopular by early 1993.^[4][5]

While Mulroney had railed againstPierre Trudeau's patronage appointments in 1984, he permitted a series of patronage appointments just as he left the PM's office in 1993.^[6]

Mulroney had also promised to change the constitutional status quo in favour of increasing provincial autonomy; this was one of the most important reasons for his party's support in Quebec. He attempted to amend the constitution twice, but both reform proposals failed. TheMeech Lake Accord collapsed in 1990 when the provincial legislatures ofNewfoundland andManitoba adjourned without bringing the issue to a vote; all 10 provincial legislatures had to ratify the accord for it to become law. TheCharlottetown Accord was defeated by the Canadian people in an October 1992 referendum. In the case of the Charlottetown Accord, the majority of Canada's population voted against an agreement endorsed by every First Minister and most other political groups. This stinging rebuke against the "political class" in Canada was a preview of things to come, as the upcoming election would be held on October 25, 1993, a year less a day after the Charlottetown referendum. Additional polls in January 1993 concerning the cost-of-living crisis in the country showed that public opinion was broadly against the unpopular PCs.^[7]

These factors combined to make Mulroney the least popular leader since opinion polling began in the 1940s.^[8] The Progressive Conservative Party's popularity reached a low of just over 15% in 1991.^[9] With polls showing him facing almost certain defeat in the next election, Mulroney announced his retirement from politics (which had been speculated since early February)^[10] on 24 February 1993.^[11][12] While several senior Cabinet members had passed over contesting the leadership,Minister of DefenceKim Campbell^[13] quickly emerged as the leading candidate to replace Mulroney as party leader and prime minister. Despite a vigorous challenge fromEnvironment MinisterJean Charest, Campbell emerged victorious in theJune leadership election and became Canada's first femaleprime minister.

Campbell enjoyed a brief period of high popularity upon being sworn in, becoming the eponym of "Campbellmania", just asPierre Trudeau had been the subject of late-1960sTrudeaumania.^[14] She was polling favorably by mid-March of that year.^[15] Campbell campaigned extensively during the summer, touring the nation and attending barbecues and other events.

The other traditional parties were also not faring well. WhileJohn Turner and the Liberal leadership supported the Meech Lake Accord, there was significant internal disagreement, with Trudeau returning from retirement to speak out against it. After the Liberals' disappointing showing in the 1988 election, Turnerstayed on for a couple of years before resigning. The party then selected veteran politicianJean Chrétien overPaul Martin as party leader after adivisive battle, but Chrétien was unpopular, especially in his native Quebec, after declaring his opposition to the Meech Lake Accord, being rocked by caucus defections. The federal Liberals were disorganized, near bankruptcy, and dropped in the polls from 50 to 32 per cent, so Chrétien appointedJean Pelletier as chief of staff to reinvigorate his leadership and reorganize his office.^[16] As the ruling Tories suffered the most backlash from the unsuccessful constitutional amendments in 1990 and 1992, the Liberals rapidly picked up support and surged to a wide lead in opinion polling.

The New Democratic Party (NDP) had won a record 43 seats in 1988 underEd Broadbent, who retired the next year. In the following few years, their support continued to grow, at one point leading in the opinion polls. This helped the NDP win a series of victories at the provincial level. In a surprise victory in 1990,Bob Rae led the party to office inOntario–the first time the NDP had formed a provincial government east ofManitoba. That same year, the NDP won aby-election in Quebec to take its first-ever seat in that province. The next year, underMike Harcourt, the New Democrats were elected inBritish Columbia. Within a few years, however, the NDP provincial ministries in both Ontario and British Columbia became deeply unpopular, and support for the federal NDP also began to fall. In a deviation from their traditional position as staunchfederalists, the NDP chose to align itself with the Liberals and PCs on the "yes" side of the 1992Charlottetown Accord. As well, new leaderAudrey McLaughlin made efforts to expand party support into Quebec instead of focusing onWestern alienation, having defeatedDave Barrett, who had campaigned for the opposite policies. These positions gained the NDP little headway in Quebec and hurt the party's standing as the traditional voice of Western protest.

The greatest difference from 1988 was the rise of two new parties that cut into the Progressive Conservatives' support and caused Mulroney's "grand coalition" to implode.

After the failure of theMeech Lake Accord,Lucien Bouchard led a group of Progressive Conservative and Liberal MPs to form theBloc Québécois. This party quickly gained the support ofQuebec sovereigntists and access to the networks of the provincialParti Québécois.Gilles Duceppe won a 1990 by-election, and throughout the period leading up to the election, the Bloc polled as the most popular party in Quebec.

TheReform Party of Canada was aWestern-basedpopulist party led byPreston Manning, the son of formerAlberta PremierErnest Manning. Originally broadly focused on Western Canadian interests, it had quickly moved far to the right after its formation. It originally campaigned under the slogan "the West wants in". Reform had nominated candidates in the 1988 election, but had failed to win any seats, and garnered only 2.5 per cent of the popular vote. Many Western voters had never forgiven the Liberals for theNational Energy Program in the 1980s, and Mulroney's attempt to pacify Quebec caused them to rethink their support for the Tories. In early 1989,Deborah Grey won aby-election in a north-central Alberta riding to become the first Reform MP. This came as a considerable shock to Tories, who had dominated Alberta's federal politics for a quarter-century, as Grey had finished a distant fourth in the general election held a few months earlier.

As Conservative support collapsed over the next four years, Reform party support increased. Reform also picked up support from many longtime NDP voters. The NDP (and its predecessor, theCo-operative Commonwealth Federation) had been the traditional Western protest party for most of the previous 40 years, but since the 1990s, the NDP had attempted to make inroads in Quebec and had joined the Progressive Conservatives and Liberals in supporting the Charlottetown Accord. Despite sharp ideological differences, Reform's populism struck a responsive chord in some disaffected NDP supporters.

An election had to be called in the fall of 1993, since Parliament's term would expire some time in September. By the end of the summer, Campbell's personal popularity was far ahead of that of Chrétien.^[17] Support for the Progressive Conservative Party had also increased after Campbell won the leadership, and their polling numbers were roughly equal to the Liberals, while Reform had been reduced to single digits. It was nevertheless thought likely that Reform would hold the balance of power in the event of neither the Progressive Conservatives nor Liberals winning a majority, as the NDP were polling even worse than Reform, while the Bloc were considered unlikely to enter into aconfidence and supply agreement with either of the two largest parties. Campbell was therefore seen as having a good chance of remaining in power if the Progressive Conservatives could at least finish with a similar number of seats to the Liberals, and that Reform would support a continuation of her government (likely in return for some concessions on fiscal policy) over one led by Chrétien.

With this in mind, Campbell askedGovernor GeneralRay Hnatyshyn todissolve parliament on September 8, only a few weeks before Parliament was due to expire. The election date was set for October 25. Under theCanadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, this was the last day that the election could legally be held with the then-current enumeration still valid. In accordance with Canadian constitutional practice, Hnatyshyn granted the dissolution, beginning the seven-week campaign.

At the ceremony atRideau Hall, Campbell made the first of a series of remarks that would dog the Conservative campaign. When she was running for the party leadership, Campbell's frank honesty was seen as an important asset and a sharp contrast from Mulroney's highly polished style (Mulroney was criticized for waiting until the last year of his mandate before resigning, leaving office only2+1⁄2 months before the Tories' five-year term ended, as well as for his international farewell tour devoid of any official business). During the campaign, however, Campbell repeatedly made statements that caused problems for the party. At the Rideau Hall event, she told reporters that it was unlikely that the deficit or unemployment would be much reduced before the "end of the century". Later in the campaign, a reporter claimed she stated "an election is no time to discuss serious issues." Campbell denied the report and declared her sentence was distorted; her actual quote meant that 47 days were not enough to discuss the overhaul in social policy that she thought Canada needed.^[18]

The PC campaign was headed by chairJohn Tory and chief strategistAllan Gregg, both experienced Mulroney loyalists. It was the best-funded campaign, but it quickly ran into organizational problems. The party failed to get literature distributed to the local campaigns, forcing all the PC candidates to print their own material and thus preventing the party from putting forth a unified message.^[19] The Progressive Conservative campaign was focused on three issues: job creation, deficit reduction, and improving quality of life; the party, however, had little credibility on the first two, as over their time in office both unemployment and the deficit had increased dramatically. The party was also reluctant to propose new fiscal or social programs, as in Quebec they had to appeal to nationalists who opposed federal government intervention, and in the West had to appeal to Reform supporters who opposed government intervention in general.

In addition, what remained of the initial euphoria over Campbell quickly wore off as the campaign progressed. Her style was initially seen as frank and honest, but as her numbers dropped she was seen as condescending and pretentious. The Tories also continued to be dogged by the long shadow of the unpopular Mulroney.

The Liberals had long prepared for the campaign. They had amassed a substantial campaign war chest, almost as large as that of the Tories. On September 19, the Liberals released their entire platform, which the media quickly named theRed Book. This document gave a detailed account of exactly what a Liberal government would do in power. Several years of effort had gone into the creation of the document, which was unprecedented for a Canadian party.^[20] Several days later, the Progressive Conservatives released the hastily assembledA Taxpayer's Agenda, but the Liberals had captured the reputation of being the party with ideas. The Liberals were also consistently well organized and on message, in contrast to the PC campaign, which theGlobe and Mail on September 25 stated was "shaping up to be the most incompetent campaign in modern political history."^[21]

The New Democratic Party suffered badly in the election. With the rising unpopularity of the Ontario NDP government ofBob Rae, many traditional NDP voters were disenchanted and moved to the Liberal Party. InWestern Canada, a portion of the NDP vote was attracted to the right-wing Reform party as a protest vote, as that party's populism struck a chord despite the sharp ideological differences between the two parties (as the centre-left NDP and right-wing Reform were on completely opposite sides of the political spectrum), and some went to the Liberals as well. Nationally, frustration with the PC party was also so high that some traditional NDP voters moved to the Liberals as astrategic vote. Although McLaughlin was returned in her own seat (Yukon), elsewhere the NDP was only truly competitive in Saskatchewan - even there, they finished third place in the popular vote although it was still enough to tie the Liberals for a plurality of seats at five (one more than the Reform Party).

TheBloc Québécois benefited from a surge in support forQuebec nationalism after the failure of theMeech Lake Accord in 1990, which resulted in a number of Liberal and Progressive Conservative Members of Parliament (MPs) organizing the Bloc. The Bloc's leader,Lucien Bouchard, campaigned on promising that the Bloc would represent Quebec's interests at the federal level, with the party running candidates exclusively in Quebec while endorsing and supporting Quebec sovereignty (political independence from Canada).

The Reform Party developed an extensive grassroots network in much of western Canada and Ontario. Reform's support forpopulist policies, such as a democratically elected and regionally equal Senate and more plebiscites and referendums in the political process, was very popular in Western Canada. In addition, Reform's backing of smaller government, lower taxes, theNorth American Free Trade Agreement, andsocial conservative policies as well as its opposition to theGoods and Services Tax won over many conservatives in the West and Ontario.

Small-"c" conservatives in the West and Ontario who traditionally supported the Progressive Conservatives were drawn to Reform for several reasons. These conservative voters were disenchanted with the PCs for imposing the Goods and Services Tax and failing to reduce Canada's growing deficit and national debt. There was also the PC government's failure to deliver a democratically elected Senate as it had promised (while appointing unelected Senators in 1990, as it was obligated to do), itssocially progressive policies, and its repeated failed attempts to officially bring Quebec into the Constitution, a focus that was seen as coming at the expense of attention to the concerns of other regions, especially the West.

Reform had little money and few resources, with its candidates and campaign staff flying economy class, staying in cheap hotels, and relying on pre-packaged lunches, all which helped endear them to money-conscious fiscal conservatives.^[22] The campaign was managed by seasoned political strategistRick Anderson. Some Reformers had been annoyed that a moderate former Liberal and Ottawa insider had been made campaign manager, but he soon proved his political ability.^[23]

Reform found itself embroiled in controversy when Toronto-area candidate John Beck made a series of anti-immigrant remarks in an interview with Excalibur, theYork University student paper. York students confronted Manning with the remarks, who immediately denounced them. Within an hour, Beck was forced to withdraw his candidacy.^[24]

Over the course of the campaign, Progressive Conservative support steadily bled away to the other parties. Theleaders debates were held October 3 and 4, and were generally regarded as inconclusive, with no party gaining a boost from them. The most memorable moment involvedLucien Bouchard continuously questioning Campbell about the real deficit in the 1993 budget and Campbell dodging the question. TheFrench debates were held on the first night. Manning, who did not speak French, read prepared opening and closing remarks, but did not participate in the debate itself.

By October, the Progressive Conservatives were considerably behind the Liberals in the polls, and it was obvious that they would not be reelected. The consensus was that the Liberals were on their way to at least aminority government, and would probably win a majority without dramatic measures. Despite this, Campbell was still far more personally popular than Chrétien. Polling found that a considerable number of potential Liberal voters held negative opinions about Chrétien.

Believing they had no other way to keep the Liberals from winning a majority, Gregg and Tory decided to launch aseries of commercials attacking Chrétien. While the ad's creators claim they had meant for the line "I would be very embarrassed if he became Prime Minister of Canada" to refer to Chrétien's policies and ethics, the intercutting with images of his face and its facial deformity (caused byBell's palsy) were interpreted by many as an attack on Chrétien's appearance. The ad quickly received widespread attention as the Liberal war room underRoméo LeBlanc immediately contacted media outlets. This generated a severe backlash from all sides of the spectrum, including some PC candidates, and Campbell ordered them off the air.^[27]

Chrétien turned the situation to his advantage, comparing his opponents to the children who teased him when he was a boy. "When I was a kid people were laughing at me. But I accepted that because God gave me other qualities and I'm grateful." Chrétien's approval ratings shot up, nullifying the only advantage the Progressive Conservatives still had over him.^[27] The Tories also pointed out that Chrétien himself had used his half-paralyzed face in the campaign, with Liberal signs in Quebec that translated as "Strange-looking face, but reflect on what's inside." Furthermore, most newspapers and magazines had used similar photos that highlighted Chrétien's facial deformity.^[27]

Aside from raising Chrétien's personal popularity, it is unclear what effect the ad had on the election. Prior to the controversy, the Campbell Tories were already beset by many problems; notably the recession, the unpopular GST, and their support bases moving to Reform and the Bloc. Nonetheless, the negative backlash over the television spot proved to be the final nail in the Tories' coffin. Their support plummeted into the teens, all but assuring that the Liberals would win a majority government.

The most important issue of the 1993 election was the economy.^[28] The nation was mired in theearly 1990s recession, andunemployment was especially high. The federal deficit was also extremely high, and both the Reform and Progressive Conservatives focused on cutting it as the path to economic health. Reform proposed deep cuts to federal programs in order to do this, while the Progressive Conservatives were less specific. The Liberals also promised cuts, focusing on the unpopular and expensive plan to buy new military helicopters to replace the agingSea Kings. They also promised new programs such as a limitedpublic works programme and a nationalchild care program. The Reform Party called for a "Zero in Three" plan that would reduce the deficit to zero in three years. The Liberals had a far more modest plan to reduce the deficit to 3% of GDP by the end of their first term. All opposition parties pledged to repeal theGoods and Services Tax. Once elected, however, the Liberals reneged on this pledge to much outcry, stating the Conservatives had understated the size of the deficit. Instead the GST remained. In some provinces it wasHarmonized with theProvincial sales tax, while in other provinces the GST and the Provincial Sales Tax remained separate.

The 1988 election had been almost wholly focused on the issue of the Free Trade Agreement with the United States, and similarly, the 1993 election was preceded by the agreement on theNorth American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).^[29] The Liberals opposed NAFTA and promised to try to renegotiate the FTA, but this was not a central campaign theme. The NDP did focus on opposition to NAFTA, but the Canadian people mostly felt that thefree trade debate was over. When in office, the Liberals signed on to NAFTA with little opposition. Similarly, while constitutional issues had dominated the national debate for several years, two failed reform proposals led most to support giving the issue a rest. Chrétien promised not to reopen the constitution, and that under the Liberals any change would be incremental in nature. In Quebec the election was seen as a prelude to the next Quebec election and thereferendum on secession that was sure to follow.

The Reform Party advanced proposals in a number of areas that challenged the status quo. It proposed extensive reform to Canada's parliamentary system, including morefree votes,recall elections, and change to theSenate. The party also advocated a reduction inimmigration levels and a retreat fromofficial bilingualism.^[9]

The election was held under theElection Expenses Act of 1974. This forced parties to disclose most donations, but put few limits on who could donate and how much could be given. Individual donations up to $1,150 were given atax credit, encouraging such pledges. The Conservatives had the largest budget, spending $10.4 million on their national campaign; the Liberals spent $9.9 million, while the NDP spent $7.4 million. The Bloc and Reform both spent less than $2 million on their national campaigns.^[30] Actual election spending is far larger than these numbers indicate: each candidate raised substantial amounts of money independently of the national campaign. In this era there were also large expenses, such as polling and fundraising costs, that did not need to be disclosed.

In the year of the election, two traditional parties, the Liberals and Conservatives, each received about 60% of their funding from corporations and the rest from individuals. For the NDP half of the funding came from individuals, and a third came fromtrade unions. The Reform Party relied almost wholly on individual donations, with only some 12% coming from corporations. The Bloc relied almost solely on individual donations, as its party charter barred donations from corporations. The NDP had by far the most donors, with over 65,000, but the average donation was only $80. By contrast the 45,000 Conservative donors gave more than $200 on average.^[31]

The NDP and Conservatives had more problems after the vote. The NDP found itself deeply in debt, but recouped some of it by selling their Ottawa headquarters to the newUkrainian Embassy. The Conservatives, despite cutting back on spending late in the campaign, were some $7.5 million in debt by the end of the election, and it took years to clear this burden. The heavy debt load would hamper the party's ability to campaign in subsequent elections, and this would lead to its eventual merger with Reform's successor, theCanadian Alliance.

Fourteen registered political parties contested the election, a Canadian record. Jackson and Jackson, in their bookPolitics in Canada, argue that the proliferation of minor parties was an outgrowth of the single-issue political movements that had come to prominence in Canada in the 1980s.^[32] For instance, the environmentalist, anti-abortion, and anti-free trade movements all had closely associated parties. Each candidate required a $1,000 deposit, an increase from $200 in the last election. If the candidate did not win 15% of the vote, which none of the minor parties did, these deposits would be forfeit. Parties that nominated 50 candidates qualified as official parties and, most importantly, received government subsidies for advertising.^[33] The smaller parties were not invited to the main leaders debate,^[34] somethingMel Hurtig of theNational Party complained vehemently about. TheGreen Party of Canada Chief Agent Greg Vezina organized a debate between the leaders of seven of the minor parties on October 5, which was broadcast onCBC Newsworld andCPAC. The National Party did not attend.

Few of these parties were expected to win a seat. One exception was the National Party. Founded by Mel Hurtig, a prominentnationalist, it campaigned on a stronglyeconomically nationalist, broadly centre-left platform focusing on opposition to theNorth American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The party ran 171 candidates, and for a time polling indicated it could potentially have an impact. However, the party failed to make a significant impression and imploded due to internal party turmoil. Some time after the election it applied to Canada's Chief Election officer to de-register the party. Another prominent minor party was theNatural Law Party. Linked toMaharishi Mahesh Yogi, it advocatedyogic flying as the solution to most of Canada's ills. It ran 231 candidates, more than some major parties. Its campaign was also accompanied by several million dollars of advertising, and it was successful in attracting media attention. Some accused its efforts of actually being government-subsidized marketing for yogic flying centres,^[35] which are non-profit, non-religious meditation centres. Other minor parties included theGreen Party of Canada which ran 79 candidates,Libertarian Party of Canada, theMarxist–Leninist Party of Canada and theChristian Heritage Party, which was mainly dedicated to opposingabortion. The election saw three minor parties focused on radical reform to the monetary system: theCanada Party, theAbolitionist Party, and theParty for the Commonwealth of Canada, which was formed by supporters of U.S. fringe politicianLyndon LaRouche.^[33]

This election was also the last time that theSocial Credit Party attempted to run candidates in an election. The party had been in headlong decline since losing its last Member of Parliament in 1980, and was now led byfundamentalist Christian preacherKen Campbell. Campbell briefly changed the party's name to the "Christian Freedom Party" in an attempt to appeal to social conservatives. However, the party failed to nominate the minimum 50 candidates and was deregistered by Elections Canada.

The satiricalRhinoceros Party was likewise deregistered after they declined to contest the election, in protest of new electoral laws that required parties to run 50 candidates at a cost of $1,000 per riding. Unlike the Socreds, however, the Rhinos would eventually reform in 2006, once the 50-candidate requirement had been dropped, and began contesting federal elections again beginning with the2008 election.

Several unrecognized parties also contested the election, including theCanadian Party for Renewal (which was closely aligned with the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist–Leninist)).

This election, like all previous Canadian elections, was conducted under asingle-member plurality (or first past the post) system in which the country was carved into 295 electoral districts, or ridings, with each one electing one representative to the House of Commons. Those eligible to vote cast their ballot for a candidate in their electoral district and the candidate with the most votes in that district became that riding's Member of Parliament. The party that has the confidence of the House (i.e. that can rely on the votes of the most MPs) forms thegovernment. By convention, its leader is appointedPrime Minister and its Members of Parliament to theCabinet of Canada by theGovernor General.

For a complete list of MPs elected in the 1993 election, see35th Canadian parliament.

  = Open seat

  = Turnout is above national average

  = Winning candidate held seat in previous House

  = Incumbent had switched allegiance

  = Previously incumbent in another riding

  = Not incumbent; was previously elected to the House

  = Incumbency arose from byelection gain

  = Other incumbents renominated

  = Previously a member of one of the provincial legislatures

  = Multiple candidates