Is Helena Guergis Ready To Cross The Floor

[Machjo]

Machjo, our Westminster system of governance would function questionably at best without the use of legally-recognised political parties. For one, how would we ever know who forms the Government of the day? Would everyone except for the ministry be the Opposition? How could someone be a prime minister if there is no ‘largest party’ in the House of Commons? Jurisdictions without political parties are rare, and those that do exist do not function in a way that a legislature should; the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut comes to mind.

What? Could Parliament not elect a Cabinet? Essentially, it's assumed that the party members are voting in favour of their leader to be PM. Without a party, that assumption cannot be made of anyone and so an actual vote would have to occur. My guess is that better-known MPs are likely to win since they'd be... better known. This could also provide stability, and also an MP who's won a few times is likely doing something right at least.

And as for 'opposition', the problem with the current system is that we send the message that those who are not members of the governing party have opposition as their mission statement. Oppose, just oppose, oppose anything even if you agree with it, but just oppose. And those who are members of the governing party are to defend, defend, even if they disagree, just defend, and blindly defend. It's like kids in a the schoolyard playground.

Instead, without parties, those who agree with the government on a particular policy proposal would defend it, and those who don't, wouldn't. Nobody would support or oppose like blind bats just because that's their job. They'd support or oppose with an understanding of what the hell they're supposed to be supporting or opposing. As a result, any support or opposition would be genuine and purpose-driven rather than to score brownie points for the party. Politicians are not to be equated with hockey players for cryin' out loud.

 

[Machjo]

If she crosses the floor then she is a turncoat and not to be trusted with anything.
I would postulate that is true of any member of government, but crossing the floor just publicly announces their disloyalty. If their political views changed that fast then maybe they don't have the faculties to be a member????
To all the turncoat floor crossovers, I spit on you.:angry3: You should consider your moral and ethical stance before you commit to a political doctrine.

Sorry M. Five but this is what the politicos do to themselves. :canada:

You see, this is the problem with a party system. Why the hell would crossing the floor make her a turncoat? By saying that, you're saying that she's supposed to be there to promote the best interests not of her fellow-man, but of her party. Crossing the floor does not make her a turn coat. She could join whatever party she wants, even the Rhino Party if it' still around, and it should make no difference as long as she's serving the best interests of her fellow-man. Your statement just shows how partisanship has so corrupted our system that we now even expect, not just tolerate but expect, our MPs to be as stinkingly partisan as is humanly possible.

And what about political 'doctrine'. We need a Parliament ful of 'doctrinaires' now. What, how about a civil war to purge the undesirables while we're at it:

YouTube - USSR Anthem

 

[Machjo]

Election to public office does not suddenly suspend someone’s freedom of association. Let us remember that our vote, as much as the political party may weigh in our decision-making, is for a single and individual member of the House of Commons. It is the responsibility of every registered voter to know who they are voting for; it shouldn’t come as a surprise if someone who you voted for is on the left-hand-side of the Conservative Party, and then suddenly decides after a tumultuous session in the legislature to cross to the Liberal Party (then on the right-hand-side of that group). The member hasn’t changed at all in crossing the floor of the Commons; only the coloured bar under their name changes.

I fully agree. One's religion, party association, etc. are his business.