Step Across This Line
Bryan Peeler Volunteer Staff
The swirl of controversy surrounding MP David Emerson’s departure from the Liberal party to sit as a Conservative cabinet minister has brought to the forefront a vitally important question for Canadian democracy. Just what are you getting when you vote for an MP?
In response to Emerson’s actions, the NDP would have the government pass legislation prohibiting MPs from crossing the floor. In a statement released on February 16, Jack Layton said he would introduce an anti-floor crossing bill in the House. The bill would require any MP who intended to cross the floor to submit to the voters of his riding in a by-election.
Can the NPD, however, consistently maintain their support of free votes for MPs while insisting that whenever an MP wants to cross the floor she/he win a by-election? After all, what is the essential difference between crossing the floor and free votes in Parliament?
This question assumes that MPs either vote the party line or their conscience. As Andrew Coyne, national affairs columnist for the National Post, has argued, this is a false dichotomy. Coyne believes voters want MPs to do both. Though they may be elected mainly because of their party affiliation, they are also chosen for their individual judgement.
The upshot of Coyne’s argument is that crossing the floor and free votes are not analogous. When an MP crosses the floor, she/he does not become a “free-agent” but instead gives up one party’s whip for another’s. Though exercising particular judgement on certain issues may be part of the understanding on which an MP is elected, agreeing to a different party’s platform is not, and therefore crossing the floor should not be permitted.
The problem with Coyne’s argument is that election studies have found that people do not want their MPs to vote their conscience. The vast majority of people vote for the party first and the candidate second. And this is no good for Canadian democracy. It reduces the role of our elected representatives, in the words of John Diefenbaker, to that of “trained seals.”
So what is an MP to do if she/he does not want to be “whipped” into line? Well, all that is left, given the way our parliamentary system functions, is for the MP to cross the floor. But if this were to be banned we would be restricting the ability of MPs to use their judgement even more. What would be the point of electing MPs other than to decide which party would form government? Once that had been decided we could get rid of all of them except those chosen to be in cabinet.
What David Emerson did was exactly what he should have done. When approached by Stephen Harper to join cabinet, he exercised his judgement. He decided he could do more for Vancouver as a member of government and cabinet than as a Liberal MP.
Bryan Peeler is a pre-master’s political studies student and an instructor in the department of philosophy.
