Bad Idea
The NDP and others want to prevent MPs from crossing the floor by forcing them to run in a byelection.
This will have the effect of making MPs even more subject to the party leadership in the House of Commons. An MP will not want to risk voting against his party, for fear of being kicked out of the caucus and losing his seat. The party leaders already hold enough power over the votes of their members... This will be one more tool to force MPs to tow the line.
Every once in a while, you hire someone who sounded great in the job interview but just isn't doing the job. Sometimes, you've been had by a con artist. Other times, you just showed plain bad judgement. And sometimes, you just have to live four years before you get another chance to fire the guy.
As much as betrayal and opportunism are unbecoming in members of Parliament, betrayal is not the only reason why members leave parties and join others. Imagine if you, Joe and Jane Citizen, had to quit your job every time you voted for a different party. The point is, people change, change their minds, and change their parties. Leaders are people. At the same time, parties change too. Parties change names, they amalgamate, they choose new leaders, they adopt new policies. Forced marriages between members and their parties will have far worse consequences than seeing the odd opportunist leave one pack to become a top dog in the other. In the end, voters will always have the final say. Patience may not be common, but then again, but it is a virtue. Besides, revenge is a dish best served cold.
This will have the effect of making MPs even more subject to the party leadership in the House of Commons. An MP will not want to risk voting against his party, for fear of being kicked out of the caucus and losing his seat. The party leaders already hold enough power over the votes of their members... This will be one more tool to force MPs to tow the line.
Every once in a while, you hire someone who sounded great in the job interview but just isn't doing the job. Sometimes, you've been had by a con artist. Other times, you just showed plain bad judgement. And sometimes, you just have to live four years before you get another chance to fire the guy.
As much as betrayal and opportunism are unbecoming in members of Parliament, betrayal is not the only reason why members leave parties and join others. Imagine if you, Joe and Jane Citizen, had to quit your job every time you voted for a different party. The point is, people change, change their minds, and change their parties. Leaders are people. At the same time, parties change too. Parties change names, they amalgamate, they choose new leaders, they adopt new policies. Forced marriages between members and their parties will have far worse consequences than seeing the odd opportunist leave one pack to become a top dog in the other. In the end, voters will always have the final say. Patience may not be common, but then again, but it is a virtue. Besides, revenge is a dish best served cold.
posted by Lt Smash at 5:01 PM
3 Comments:
I couldn't agree more.
I don't think this is a real policy debate, I think this is an NDP proposal that sells well politically: it is simple, easy to communicate, and resonates well with a Canadian public tired of opportunism and having their MP change their minds on them.
I think the Canadian voting public should think long and hard about the character of the man or woman they are voting for before casting that ballot.
However, a part of me does wish it was convention in Canada to run in a by-election after switching parties, because I think the price of a decision that large should be high. The by-election also becomes a referendum on the issue the MP resigned over. But that's only a part of me.
At the end of the day, I'm happy with the status quo, just unhappy with Stronach and Emerson.
I agree with the by-election point. It seriously detracts from the legitimacy of a member to change parties in such a bald fashion without seeking a renewed mandate.
It goes to show how some people have no personal pride.
All too often votes are cast not for the desired local politician but for the local representative of the party which the voter would like to have governing. When that local representative takes it upon himself to switch parties it undermines the intent of the voter. This is why the NDP proposal has some appeal to many voters.
I would rather see a solution that involves a better way for voters to express their will and the sometimes conflicting choice between governing party and local representative. So much for incrementalism, huh?
Post a Comment
<< Home