NDP MP Looks to ban MP floor crossing


Retired_Can_Soldier
#1
Quote:

A stalwart New Democrat is hoping to ban his colleagues from crossing the floor of the House of Commons without asking voters if they can change parties first.

Peter Stoffer, the New Democrat critic for Veterans Affairs, tabled his private member's bill Monday.
"If I pick up the phone right now and call Mr. Harper's office and if they're in agreement, within an hour I can become a Conservative member of Parliament," Stoffer said Monday. "I don't have to go to my constituents, I don't have to tell my party, I could just sit tomorrow as a Conservative MP.


That's wrong on every count."


His bill, if passed, would prohibit MPs from crossing the floor. Instead, if an MP wanted to change parties, they'd have to quit and run for the new party in a by-election, assuming they won the nomination. Read more

I wholeheartedly agree with Peter Stoffer. If you are voted in as a specific party member and decide you want to change party's you should have to step down and run a new election campaign.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#2
Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_SoldierView Post

I wholeheartedly agree with Peter Stoffer. If you are voted in as a specific party member and decide you want to change party's you should have to step down and run a new election campaign.

Yep.

I don't disagree.....although this is another way to entrench the concept of party into Parliament.......

A by-election if you wish to cross......
 
petros
#3
That is one of things that was proof to me that both left and right one in the same. Last election I think it was Strahl who went from Libs to Cons strictly becaue of his work with SPP and NAFTA.
 
Durry
-3
#4
Nah, the NDP are just scared sh^tless that many of their members will leave them.
They are using this method as a way to prevent losing members.

Floor crossing is not a problem, it happens only very seldom and really does no harm to anyone. In the end, the voter makes the final decision .
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+2
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

Nah, the NDP are just scared sh^tless that many of their members will leave them.
They are using this method as a way to prevent losing members.

Floor crossing is not a problem, it happens only very seldom and really does no harm to anyone. In the end, the voter makes the final decision .

It flies in the face of the will of the voter.
 
TenPenny
#6
Nope. MPs should be free to leave the party if they wish.

We vote for the person, not the party.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+3
#7  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

Nope. MPs should be free to leave the party if they wish.

We vote for the person, not the party.

Horse hockey! If they want to leave the party they are welcome to go, but they should sit as an independent until the next election or relinquish their seat.
 
TenPenny
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_SoldierView Post

Horse hockey! If they want to leave the party they are welcome to go, but they should sit as an independent until the next election or relinquish their seat.

why? we vote for the person, not the party.

If they join a different party, they're still the same person that we voted for.
 
wulfie68
No Party Affiliation
+1
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

Nah, the NDP are just scared sh^tless that many of their members will leave them.
They are using this method as a way to prevent losing members.

Floor crossing is not a problem, it happens only very seldom and really does no harm to anyone. In the end, the voter makes the final decision .

I agree that in the big picture, it usually doesn't mean much, but in a minority parliament, it can be significant as Belinda Stronach proved a few years back when she crossed the floor (and then cast independent Chuck Cadman in the spotlight as the man to save or kill Martin's gov't).

I don't have an issue with someone who is expelled from a caucus joining another one. I don't have an issue with an MP who is unhappy within a party, leaving a party and sitting out the balance of their term as an independent. Crossing the floor however, seems like spitting in the face of your constituents to me.

(ps to Petros, it was David Anderson, not Strahl... and yes that pissed me off to no end that on Harper's first day as PM, he appointed more senators and enticed a floor-crossing with a cabinet post. I heard the Who singing "We won't get fooled again" in my head when that happened...)

Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

why? we vote for the person, not the party.

If they join a different party, they're still the same person that we voted for.

Actually we don't. We vote for the combination, or it wouldn't list parties on ballots. Many voters put more emphasis on party than individual, and denying that is willful ignorance.
 
Liberalman
+2
#10
An MP should quit the party and be an independent orjust get kicked out of the party
 
Durry
-1
#11
However you slice it, the voters are not complaining. They may get pissed off on occasion but there is no ground swell for a change in present policy.

This is typical NDP strategy, they want to control all parts of your life, they know what is good for you, they know what you need, they know how you should get what you need, they know etc etc, they would like to control your whole life...bastards !!

Quote: Originally Posted by wulfie68View Post

I agree that in the big picture, it usually doesn't mean much, but in a minority parliament, it can be significant as Belinda Stronach proved a few years back when she crossed the floor (and then cast independent Chuck Cadman in the spotlight as the man to save or kill Martin's gov't).

I don't have an issue with someone who is expelled from a caucus joining another one. I don't have an issue with an MP who is unhappy within a party, leaving a party and sitting out the balance of their term as an independent. Crossing the floor however, seems like spitting in the face of your constituents to me.
e.

The system will never be perfect, but it's pretty good... For now!!!
If things change, then we can change it, but for now there are bigger fish to fry!!
 
Praxius
Free Thinker
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

Nah, the NDP are just scared sh^tless that many of their members will leave them.
They are using this method as a way to prevent losing members.

Nice assumption.... he's not the first person to voice his concern over the matter and thus far, it seems it's Liberals and Conservatives who are doing to party jumping the most.

It's not the NDP who are concerned about losing their members. They're gaining in power & popularity which has been increasing consistently over the last few years. In the last few elections, the NDP hasn't lost any seats, but rather, continued to gain them.

Your above claim holds no substance and appears more to be a troll attempt to get a reaction from other members in here who support the NDP.

Quote:

Floor crossing is not a problem, it happens only very seldom and really does no harm to anyone. In the end, the voter makes the final decision .

Obviously the voter doesn't. The voter picked a specific MP from a specific party with specific ideals & principles to represent them.... then after they're elected, they jump ship & go to another political party.

So hypothetically I voted for one party, but another party ended up with my vote.... which doesn't line up with the ideals & principles I wanted to support.

It doesn't matter if it happens every day or once every 10 years.... it shouldn't happen in the first place, and because it does, it is a problem.

If you want to jump ship and go to another party, quit and run in the next election under your new banner..... in the mean time, citizens of this nation voted you into power based on your current promises, party & principles.... thus you should be bound to uphold what your constituents originally voted for.... otherwise you do not deserve what you gained in the election and don't deserve to represent anybody.

Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

Nope. MPs should be free to leave the party if they wish.

We vote for the person, not the party.

I vote based on both the person and the party they are a part of..... if they jump from the NDP and over to the Liberals, Bloc or Conservatives, they are now representing principles and ideals I don't support.

I can not trust that they can uphold the same ideals, principles & promises they original ran on in the election, because those were supported and tailor-made to the party they were working with at the time, and any of the other parties have no obligation to give a damn about those promises & ideals once they jump to their party.

I voted for the person and I voted for the party they represent..... which means if they jump parties, my vote that got them their job just went to the other party I didn't want to vote for in the first place.

Sorry, but in my view, that's wrong.
 
Durry
#13
As it is now, you as a voter know the rules the guy your electing has at his discrection.
It's your responsiblity to make sure the guy your electing carries out your expectations.

Don't have the Government make a bunch of silly laws just so you don't have to take any responsibility.
 
Corduroy
+1
#14
Now this just turns every complain I've ever seen about party politics on its head. Political parties don't have enough control over their MPs now? When MPs exercise independence that means they aren't listening to constituents?
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

why? we vote for the person, not the party.

If they join a different party, they're still the same person that we voted for.

No we don't. That may be what the school books say but in reality many people vote party or the leader, not person. Even the parties promote this in their election advertising.
 
Durry
-1
#16
Hey, it's NOT a problem!!

How many MP's have crossed the floor in the last 4 yrs.???

NDP want a law to a problem that does not exist!!

Typical NDP!
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

why? we vote for the person, not the party.

If they join a different party, they're still the same person that we voted for.

What's this "we" crap TenPenny? You got worms or something?

I, like most voters, vote for an MP because they represent my political views in my riding, but I also consider their party status. Floor crossing is all about opportunism, whether the turncoat swaggering over to the other side is a conservative, a liberal or an new democrat..

The voter is taken completely out of the process and that is utter bull crap. This is something I vehemently oppose whether it is done by the opposition or the party I support.
 
Praxius
Free Thinker
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

However you slice it, the voters are not complaining. They may get pissed off on occasion but there is no ground swell for a change in present policy.

Says you.

Quote:

This is typical NDP strategy, they want to control all parts of your life, they know what is good for you, they know what you need, they know how you should get what you need, they know etc etc, they would like to control your whole life...bastards !!

Oh grow up.... the NDP wouldn't be controlling anybody's lives with this proposal..... as it stands now, these MP's get to control what party your vote goes to after the fact.... without any approval or say from the voters who gave them their vote.

By the way, looking at the list of MP's who have crossed the floor over the history of our government, the two parties that seem to do it the most are the Liberals & Conservatives:

List of Canadian politicians who have crossed the floor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In fact, based on the above, there have been more floor crossings in the last 10 years then there was during WWI. (22 in the 1910's vs. 53 in the 2000's)

All other decades pale in comparison.... and it seems as though floor crossings are happening more often now then ever before..... thus it is a problem.

Quote:

The system will never be perfect, but it's pretty good... For now!!!

You're correct, it probably will never be perfect, but the above proposal will improve the current system and ensure the MP's we elected stay where they are to fullfill their election promises.

Funny how Con supporters cry foul over Coalitions being formed after an election, thus directly avoiding the people determining if they want a Coalition..... but when it comes to individual MP's jumping to another party without the consent of those who voted for them..... it's perfectly fine.

Quote:

If things change, then we can change it, but for now there are bigger fish to fry!!

Jeez, you make it sound like this is something complicated & time consuming to deal with..... he presents his proposal, other MP's vote on it..... and then they move onto to your other "bigger fish"

Just because there are more concerning issues that need to be dealt with from time to time, that doesn't mean you ignore other issues...... otherwise those issues would never be addressed and they would eventually grow into a larger problem that could have been easily fixed from the get-go.
 
Durry
#19
Like I said, it's not a problem and typical of small people to get all wrapped up in minior issues that have no consquences.

This will never become law anytime soon and anybody who thinks it should does not understand politics let alone how our country operates !!
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
+1
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

why? we vote for the person, not the party.

If they join a different party, they're still the same person that we voted for.

I don't think that is true. I don't see a con voting for a Liberal candidate (or vose versa) because he/she is a better person. In Canada and the US the Party is who people vote for more often than not.
 
Praxius
Free Thinker
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

As it is now, you as a voter know the rules the guy your electing has at his discrection.
It's your responsiblity to make sure the guy your electing carries out your expectations.

Don't have the Government make a bunch of silly laws just so you don't have to take any responsibility.

Beyond voting and moaning, how would you suggest someone accomplish this?

In this limited democracy we live in, the only say we have as citizens of this nation is our vote during elections... everything else is out of our hands and we can only hope those we voted for do what we expect them to do..... thus even when the MP we voted for jumps ship and goes to another party.... how do we stop them from doing this? How do we prevent our vote suddenly going to another political party we do not support??

And hoping those we elected do what we expected of them & doesn't cross the floor isn't much of an assurance that they will.... you make this wonderful claim about us voters being responsible in making sure the guy we're electing carries out our expectations, yet unless you can tell me how we can read their minds, predict the future and actually have some level of control over our MP's in that we ourselves can force our MP's to stay where they are and do the job we expected of them, we can't.

And if your answer is "hoping" the person you elected is honest and sticks to their election promises & ideals, then that's not good enough.

Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

Hey, it's NOT a problem!!

How many MP's have crossed the floor in the last 4 yrs.???

NDP want a law to a problem that does not exist!!

Typical NDP!

How many?

Take a look at the link I previously provided...... how many?

A hell of a lot actually.

57 from 2000 - 2011..... 14 have crossed the floor in the last 4 years.

You asked.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+1
#22
I don't understand why anyone would endorse floor crossing. It serves only one individual, the politician.
 
Praxius
Free Thinker
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

Like I said, it's not a problem and typical of small people to get all wrapped up in minior issues that have no consquences.

Small? Please tell me what you mean by small.

Like you said, it's not a problem..... like I said: says you.

It does have consequences because once an MP crosses the floor, all of their promises during the election are now null & void and there is no assuance that they can or will represent the interests you have that were supposed to be supported by your vote for that individual.

Quote:

This will never become law anytime soon and anybody who thinks it should does not understand politics let alone how our country operates !!

Again, says you...... Peter, whom presented this proposal, knows very well how our government runs, he's been in politics for a number of years and I'd be safe to wager that he knows more about our politics then you do.

We'll soon see whether or not this passes.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
#24
Durry is your opposition to this based on the fact that the NDP is proposing it?
 
Durry
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_SoldierView Post

Durry is your opposition to this based on the fact that the NDP is proposing it?

No, my opposition is based on the fact that the way it is right now is working just fine, not perfect, but acceptable.

Furthermore, there are also some advantages to floor crossings which is not being mentioned here. One of the advantages is that it sends a signal to the party leader that he must listen to his carcass, he cannot rule unilaterally, otherwise he (the leader) will lose his MP's. In some ways it prevents the leaders from becoming mini dictators!

Our system of Government is not perfect, can never perfect, and we must always seek the delicate balances that keeps our system working for all of us !!
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

No, my opposition is based on the fact that the way it is right now is working just fine, not perfect, but acceptable.

Furthermore, there are also some advantages to floor crossings which is not being mentioned here. One of the advantages is that it sends a signal to the party leader that he must listen to his carcass, he cannot rule unilaterally, otherwise he (the leader) will lose his MP's. In some ways it prevents the leaders from becoming mini dictators!

Our system of Government is not perfect, can never perfect, and we must always seek the delicate balances that keeps our system working for all of us !!

What we have is Harper who won't let his people speak without his approval, who acts unilaterally and otherwise, doesn't listen to his "carcass", making him a mini dictator. I wonder what kind of hold he has on his "carcass" that they are afraid to cross the floor?
 
Durry
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

What we have is Harper who won't let his people speak without his approval, who acts unilaterally and otherwise, doesn't listen to his "carcass", making him a mini dictator. I wonder what kind of hold he has on his "carcass" that they are afraid to cross the floor?

Your making my point, whatever hold he has on them, the one option they have if they feel Harpers policies do not reflect theirs ( and the policies they may have run on) is to cross the floor to another party that better reflects his polices.

Hence, keep things as they are now!!
 
petros
#28
Mine the floor. Bouncing bettys or snipers up in the peanut gallery.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

No, my opposition is based on the fact that the way it is right now is working just fine, not perfect, but acceptable.

Furthermore, there are also some advantages to floor crossings which is not being mentioned here. One of the advantages is that it sends a signal to the party leader that he must listen to his carcass, he cannot rule unilaterally, otherwise he (the leader) will lose his MP's. In some ways it prevents the leaders from becoming mini dictators!

Our system of Government is not perfect, can never perfect, and we must always seek the delicate balances that keeps our system working for all of us !!

Nobody is saying that a member can't quit their party and. It most certainly is not working to the advantage of the voter.

If a member feels the need to leave their party and cross the floor they should consult with the people who put them there.
 
Praxius
Free Thinker
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

Your making my point, whatever hold he has on them, the one option they have if they feel Harpers policies do not reflect theirs ( and the policies they may have run on) is to cross the floor to another party that better reflects his polices.

Hence, keep things as they are now!!

It is acceptable if they wish to drop from a party and go independent, but not when they jump to another party because they don't like how their party is doing things.... if they don't like that, then they can leave the party at the next election (or shortly before the next election) and run under a different banner at that time.

Another option is for the MP in question to actually ask their constituents & get a poll going, asking if those who voted for them will accept them going to another party between elections, citing their reasons & justifications why.
 

Similar Threads

42
Is Helena Guergis Ready To Cross The Floor
by Liberalman | Apr 22nd, 2010
1
Manitoba bans MLA's from crossing the floor
by JonB2004 | Apr 10th, 2006
110
Emerson Crosses the Floor!!!
by TenPenny | Mar 6th, 2006
no new posts