Topaz Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Eight year MP Tory Brad Trost from Sask. questions the iron-clad rule of always voting by the party line and has said so publicly. Trost , he not worried about getting cut from the party, like other from the past but he feels MP's should vote by how they feel or by the wished of the voters who elected him. Great Idea! http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/trost+questions+iron+clad+party+discipline/6074831/story.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 The Reform roots are coming back to haunt Harper. "If everyone in a party thinks the same on every issue, not a lot of thinking is going on" Read more: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/trost+questions+iron+clad+party+discipline/6074831/story.html#ixzz1l3Do7UGR Kudos to Frost for speaking out on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 The NDP is the party that almost always whips MPs. Both the Liberals and Tories have allowed MPs to actually vote what they wish on some matters. Ask Bev Desjarlais what happens when you vote your conscience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 The NDP doesn't have its policies dictated by the party leader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 The NDP is the party that almost always whips MPs. Both the Liberals and Tories have allowed MPs to actually vote what they wish on some matters. Ask Bev Desjarlais what happens when you vote your conscience. Well, as far as the Liberals and the Tories go, that's the OFFICIAL line! True, they occasionally allow MPs to break solidarity. However, it only happens when the whip has carefully counted noses and sees that it makes no difference! So it's all just smoke and mirrors! An MP can make a pleasing pose to his constituents, the party's Bill has no chance of being defeated and everyone pretends that democracy was served! It's all a sham and nothing more. This has nothing to be compared to the Reform principle that MPs were supposed to vote according to their constituents' wishes and not just be barking party seals! Just more evidence that we Reformers should never have bothered! The present CPC is no different than the party Mulroney led. The PCs won! The people be damned! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 he feels MP's should vote by how they feel or by the wished of the voters who elected him. Great Idea! I agree, but that's not how a parlaimentary system really works. However, it would be nice to be able to vote for somebody locally and then vote for somebody completely different for PM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battletoads Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I expect more of the reform nut jobs to come out of the wood work over the next four years. Hell I cna only pray James Lunney opens his mouth... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted January 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Here's a better way for the voting. Since this is the age of tech. each MP at their desk should have their own voting pager and all of it is done privately, so if you don't agree with the leader too bad. Let's all remember, ALL the minsiters are civil servants to the tax payers and therefore, the minister should vote the way their voters would want them too. By doing this some of the power is taken away from the PM and back to the people were it belongs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 However, it would be nice to be able to vote for somebody locally and then vote for somebody completely different for PM. That would undermine our system; the prime minister would become akin to the American president, wherein he'd be unaccountable to the elected House of Commons and would be guaranteed his post for the four or five years between elections. Our prime minister has already evolved too much towards absolute monarchy; we need that to be undone, not advanced farther. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I agree, but that's not how a parlaimentary system really works. Even in the UK, party discipline is not as strict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Here's a better way for the voting. Since this is the age of tech. each MP at their desk should have their own voting pager and all of it is done privately, so if you don't agree with the leader too bad. Let's all remember, ALL the minsiters are civil servants to the tax payers and therefore, the minister should vote the way their voters would want them too. By doing this some of the power is taken away from the PM and back to the people were it belongs. How, then, would consitutents know which way their MP (who may or may not be a minister) was going to vote or had voted on a particular bill? What would be the point of party platforms if members could simply vote as they personally pleased? There's a relatively simple way to increase prime ministerial accountability that doesn't involve changing the constitution or parliamentary procedure: Have the caucus choose the party leader; or, at least, make it far more influential in the selection. Because the party leaders are presently selected by the party membership at large, they owe nothing to, and thus fear nothing from, their caucuses. Compare that to the UK and Australia, where multiple prime ministers have been brought down by MPs from their own parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LultyLymn Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Poszukujesz prostego i korzystnego wyjœcia, aby powiêkszyæ profity prywatnej jednostki biznesowej? Mam z tej przyczyny dla Ciebie bystre rozwi¹zanie. Reklama. Rozumiem, mia³o byæ oszczêdnie, niemniej jednak zapewniam Ciê, i¿ tak bêdzie. Najprostsz¹ i w najwiêkszym stopniu œwiatow¹, choæ naraz w najwy¿szym stopniu obrotn¹ jakoœci¹ reklamy jest witryna internetowa. Dzisiaj, pod warunkiem, ¿e Twojej jednostki biznesowej nie ma w Internecie to mo¿esz zapomnieæ o znacznych zyskach. Ka¿dy szuka najpierw w sieci, dopiero dalej wzglêdnie siêga po gazetê, czy pyta przyjació³. Popatrzmy¿ prawdzie w oczy, witryna jest tak naprawdê przydatna. Jeœliby nie jesteœ zaznajomiony w sytuacjach domen i Internetu nie martw siê. Nasza firma zaistnia³a wskutek tego specjalnie dla Ciebie. Oferujemy us³ugi z zasiêgu hosting od zainicjowania do kresu. Nasi profesjonaliœci odpowiedz¹ na Twoje wszelkie zapytania i pomog¹ dostroiæ najbardziej optymaln¹ propozycjê dla Ciebie. Dziêki nam mo¿esz zwiêkszyæ dochody swojej jednostki biznesowej przy rzeczywiœcie niewielkim nak³adzie pieniê¿nym. Jakim sposobem? Z przyczyny us³ugi hosting. Wytrawny hosting jest tym czego szukasz. Orzeknij na w³asnej skórze jak¿e przy naszej asysty podwy¿szysz dochody swojej jednostki biznesowej. Hosting hosting hosting hosting hosting hosting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 The NDP doesn't have its policies dictated by the party leader. Only four posts in and we have our first strawman. Well played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) The NDP is the party that almost always whips MPs. Both the Liberals and Tories have allowed MPs to actually vote what they wish on some matters. Ask Bev Desjarlais what happens when you vote your conscience. The NDP is actually only party that has NEVER EVER whipped a private members vote. Sorry I know facts lean left and all but you are dead wrong. Bev Desjarlais yes I know that name. That is the NDP MP who voted against same sex marriage received no punishment stayed as an NDP MP UNTIL the next election when the MEMBERS OF HER RIDDING thought it better to nominate Niki Ashton. Please tell me more about how much you hate democracy. It is like you know nothing about Canadian politics when you speak. Edited January 31, 2012 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Eight year MP Tory Brad Trost from Sask. questions the iron-clad rule of always voting by the party line and has said so publicly. Trost , he not worried about getting cut from the party, like other from the past but he feels MP's should vote by how they feel or by the wished of the voters who elected him. Great Idea! http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/trost+questions+iron+clad+party+discipline/6074831/story.html Perhaps he can choose to sit as an independent of the Conservative Party of Brad Trost. I honestly applaud the Man for doing his job and voting on his conscience and what he thinks is best. That is what you call a real man, unlike the feminine canines that surround him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 why do you hate freedm punked? Why do you fear the truth. Desjarlais was run out of the party for actually voting against Laytons wishes in the same sex marriage vote. Fact. You can pretend otherwise, but that is the truth. Of course in that same vote, the Liberal cabinet was whipped, the rest of the caucus could vote as they wished. The Tories had a fee vote. Another porky pie from you on the gun registration bill too, where Saint Jacques did the whipping before the vote and armtwisted some MPs into line. Did you conveniently forget that one too? The NDP always votes in block. Just a coincidence, or are you pretending otherwise. Don't bother with the old blarney about NDP MPs having a member crafted and certified policy on everything in advance, they make it up as they go just as often as everybody else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 why do you hate freedm punked? Why do you fear the truth. Desjarlais was run out of the party for actually voting against Laytons wishes in the same sex marriage vote. Fact. You can pretend otherwise, but that is the truth. Of course in that same vote, the Liberal cabinet was whipped, the rest of the caucus could vote as they wished. The Tories had a fee vote. Another porky pie from you on the gun registration bill too, where Saint Jacques did the whipping before the vote and armtwisted some MPs into line. Did you conveniently forget that one too? The NDP always votes in block. They didn't vote in bloc on the gun registry. (IIRC, the Grits did whip the vote on that bill.) And punked is right: Desjarlais lost her critic position but she wasn't kicked out of caucus or anything. There's nothing that says her riding association has to choose her as a candidate again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 why do you hate freedm punked? Why do you fear the truth. Desjarlais was run out of the party for actually voting against Laytons wishes in the same sex marriage vote. Fact. You can pretend otherwise, but that is the truth. Of course in that same vote, the Liberal cabinet was whipped, the rest of the caucus could vote as they wished. The Tories had a fee vote. Another porky pie from you on the gun registration bill too, where Saint Jacques did the whipping before the vote and armtwisted some MPs into line. Did you conveniently forget that one too? The NDP always votes in block. Just a coincidence, or are you pretending otherwise. Don't bother with the old blarney about NDP MPs having a member crafted and certified policy on everything in advance, they make it up as they go just as often as everybody else. She wasn't "run" out of the party. She stayed in the party, stayed on as an MP, and was "punished" by the PEOPLE in her ridding who thought she voted the wrong way. They Nominated a new candidate the next election which is their democratic right. That is the truth deal with it, those are the historical facts, she isn't Bill Casey the Conservative kicked out of his party as a sitting MP for voting the wrong way. She stayed on and faced no repercussions until she had to answer the PEOPLE of her ridding who thought she didn't represent them. How democratic of the NDP. There are a number of MPs who voted against the gun registry. Here is a fun fact for you the Lady who took Bev's seat after the people of her ridding kicked her out Niki Ashton voted against it. The people of her ridding wanted it that way and kept her the next time there was a nomination. Again more facts. Stop trying to rewrite history and back up your statements next time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 And punked is right: Desjarlais lost her critic position but she wasn't kicked out of caucus or anything. There's nothing that says her riding association has to choose her as a candidate again. Oh FFS, don't treat yourself like a moron.Are you and your buddy punked now pretending that Saint Jacques did not strongarm several NDP MPs into changing their publicly stated positions on the gun registry just before the vote? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I'm pretty sure the ND whipped the vote for the gun registry and punished two MPs who defied the party’s decision. I'm pretty sure the vote was whipped for SSM also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I'm pretty sure the ND whipped the vote for the gun registry and punished two MPs who defied the party’s decision. I'm pretty sure the vote was whipped for SSM also. The SSM vote was whipped. The gun registry vote was not for the NDP, at least not publicly, and six MPs voted against it the second time as opposed to 12 the first time. We don't really know what happened within the party so it doesn't seem entirely fair to state as fact that MPs were 'strongarmed'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 According to this the gun registry vote was whipped, and two MP punished http://netnewsledger.com/2011/11/11/nycole-turmel-shuts-down-democracy-in-thunder-bay/ The interim leader of the NDP has kicked both Rafferty and Hyer off of their critic roles, tossed the two MPs off of Commons Committees, and taken away their right to deliver Member’s Statements in the House of Commons. The NDP has taken away our two MPs right to travel on anything but the basics. A few weeks back, to better understand the role and work of the Canadian military, our two MPs traveled to spend a week with the Canadian Forces. Such an effort now would be deemed unacceptable by the interim NDP leader. All that for the unforgivable political crime of listening to the people who they represent, and continuing to do so. Turmel has in effect tried to silence the voices of Thunder Bay Superior North and Thunder Bay Rainy River in the federal Parliament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Oh, I was talking about the votes when there was a private member's bill to abolish the registry. Yes, they do whip votes on government bills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Again only party that HAS NEVER whipped a private members vote is the NDP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle 3 dogs Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) How, then, would consitutents know which way their MP (who may or may not be a minister) was going to vote or had voted on a particular bill? What would be the point of party platforms if members could simply vote as they personally pleased? There's a relatively simple way to increase prime ministerial accountability that doesn't involve changing the constitution or parliamentary procedure: Have the caucus choose the party leader; or, at least, make it far more influential in the selection. Because the party leaders are presently selected by the party membership at large, they owe nothing to, and thus fear nothing from, their caucuses. Compare that to the UK and Australia, where multiple prime ministers have been brought down by MPs from their own parties. I agree completely with this. Edited February 1, 2012 by Uncle 3 dogs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.