Canada needs MPs voting records

[maplesyrup]

During the campaign Michael Hardner initiated a thread in an attempt to find out candidates's viewpoints on social issues, in order to help voters make an informed decision. It was an exercise in futility.

Canada needs a place for citizens to go to view MPs voting records that is in an easy to access, easy to read, easy to uderstand format.

Should this be part of Election Canada's mandate or what, eh?

[Michael Hardner]

Maybe Paul Martin will call a free vote on this.

It might be a moot point, though, if Harper is able to beat down the social conservatives enough to put anti-anti-Charter policies in the CPC's official platform.

[August1991]

In the US, this is done privately. One of the best examples is Michale Barone's Almanac.

There are also private rating agencies. Here's an example.

This is evidence of a real democracy.

[idealisttotheend]

I agree entirely that a tally ought to be kept. I think the best place would be Hansard. It makes little sense to record every word of debate in the HOC but then not make voting records easily available. There should be a seperate webpage after each vote and a central index.

And they should be made available freely to every citizen who is an elector so they can make an informed decision should they choose to. That is democracy.

[Cartman]

Wow...thanx August - an interesting site. BUT, do you think that most average Canadians actually take time to investigate their political choices or do they base it on what their folks have done in the past? I wonder if most people really know what they are voting for in totality.

[August1991]

I agree entirely that a tally ought to be kept. I think the best place would be Hansard.

Hansard does record what it refers to as "divisions". But it is hard to find them in all the verbiage.

Here's a random example and you'll have to search "division" on the page.

The US system with ratings is best though.

do you think that most average Canadians actually take time to investigate their political choices or do they base it on what their folks have done in the past?

In the Maritimes, it used to be a family thing. In Quebec too although the PQ truly changed all that.

In Canada with party whips, the political party becomes the "rating agency" and that's why people vote for the leader. Our MP is at most an ombudsman for us. IOW, a trained seal.

Even in the UK the MPs have more autonomy and frequently vote against their leader. Bear in mind too that in the UK, it is the caucus that chooses the leader. Thatcher was ousted because she lost her caucus support.

The Liberals have over the years made the PM of a majority almost a dictator with support from the PCO. There used to be more checks: for example, a cabinet shuffle used to require a by-election for each newly admitted cabinet member.

Harper's suggestion of a free vote was too radical to be understood, I think. It is contrary to how the Liberals have run the Canadian government. Too bad the idea wasn't discussed during the campaign.