Floor crossing—a benefit to Canada’s democracy

Justin Trudeau and Andrew Scheer both project Canada’s 2019 election to be “nasty,” but I predict it will be exciting due to Maxime Bernier’s floor crossing. The creation of the People’s Party of Canada will undoubtedly introduce a new political offering on the Canadian political marketplace.

Vile, conflicting, fear, division, negativity, and nasty—all words both Conservative and Liberal leaders have used to describe the coming electoral campaign. Despite Canadians’ famed politeness, I believe both leaders are partly correct, given a global trend in political polarization.

Anchored in the historic dualism of Canadian politics, each leader blames his opponent for poisoning the political atmosphere. Meanwhile, Trudeau speaks of his own team striking a “positive tone” and Scheer introduces the concept of “positive conservatism.” Each views his own as the country’s natural governing party.

The threat of division

There is a factor causing them both angst?—especially Andrew Scheer?—and that’s the threat of division within their ranks.

Maxime Bernier left Scheer’s team during the 2018 Conservative convention to form his own party, thereby “splitting the vote” on the so-called right side of the political spectrum. True, the People’s Party holds many conservative values, but it also draws from classical liberalism, splitting the Liberal vote.

Pundits argue that Maxime Bernier should have done more to change the Conservative Party from the inside. He claims the Conservative party refused all his ideas. Bernier crossed the floor as a last resort; his attempts to change things from the inside having miserably failed.

In a recent opinion piece in The Post Millennial, Anthony Daoud makes an argument for coalitions within parties as a vector for change. He specifically criticizes Maxime Bernier’s and Leona Alleslev’s floor crossings. In Daoud’s opinion, internal coalitions would theoretically discourage floor crossing, which he views as “unhealthy for democracy.”

This is my response to his opinion piece.

Floor crossing is democratic

Canada is a representative democracy. This gives citizens the right to elect representatives at each layer of government. Candidates most often run as a slate with others, but voters choose between candidates in each riding?— not parties.

As such, members of Parliament serve their constituents, not their parties. Furthermore, MP’s have an obligation towards all their constituents, not just those who voted for them according to party lines.

Those elected representatives who feel hampered by their party in their ability to represent all constituents must leave in order to fulfill their mandate.

Making floor crossings illegal and compelling Members of Parliament to resign (as Daoud suggests) in order to call by elections would temporarily remove the voice of tens of thousands of Canadians.

Floor crossing reflects real changes

Parties change over time. Representatives are under no obligation to keep faith with shifting ideologies and political orientations. Parliamentarians must be loyal to their conscience before their party.

Politicians change, too, although voters frown upon radical changes. Maria Mourani was aptly described with the derogatory term turncoat when she left the separatist Bloc Québécois to become a federalist under the NDP banner.

There is however an undeniable a range of political beliefs within each party. Sometimes party lines get fuzzy. A “blue Liberal” may become a “red Tory” and vice-versa … without risking public outcry.

In addition, voters change their minds?—this explains why voting results change at each election. The people they elect are (hopefully) in their image. Given this constant evolution, one may wonder why floor crossings happen so seldom.

Crossing the floor sends a strong message to both party and constituents when something is going dreadfully wrong. For example, Leona Alleslev’s main reason for crossing the floor to the Conservatives was that Justin Trudeau was moving “increasingly to the left and away from the centre.” Maxime Bernier left to make a new party, stating that the Conservative Party was “too intellectually and morally corrupt to be reformed.”

Floor crossings are wake-up calls. They keep the big parties in check and force them to rectify their shortcomings, real or perceived.

Floor crossing creates choice

There is another factor to consider: Canadian culture and society are pluralistic, not dualistic. Crossing the floor to create new parties has actually contributed to the political diversity currently visible in Parliament. In this manner, Parliament is a reflection of a Canadian reality.

I’m referring to a diversity of political worldviews?—opposing economics, national sovereignty, and economic worldviews?—not the racial, religious, or sexual diversities which only interest the lobbies that profit from them.

This is about having options and ideas Canadians can connect with.

Federalists may hate the independence movement, but they can’t deny the Bloc Québécois gave a voice to many Canadian citizens who felt left out. This could not have happened without two Liberals and four Conservatives crossing the floor?—leaving their respective parties?—and creating a movement together which eventually became the Official Opposition.