Party Discipline In Canada

In Canada, party discipline is defined as the ability of getting support from its own political party for their leaders by using party policy (2016, Wikipedia). In a social order like ours, it is usually referred as the legislative control of the leaders have over its members. Under the system of responsible government, party discipline is the reason that gives voters ability to vote effectively (1993, Reid). Party discipline is the middle ground in between the opposition and main government; it requires consent in both sides. One is the view point constituency of each party and the other is the responsibility that the members of parliament has in voicing their opinions and votes (2006, Parliament of Canada).

In this short essay, I argue in

favor of relaxing this constitutional convention and propose the ways it can and should be practiced through three main points. First of all, the importance of party discipline is crucial in our society because it plays two important functions: one is distinguishing the difference between the majority government and the oppositions. Being able to differentiate which party or parties is the majority and which ones are the minority will give us a presumed guess and reassurance before any law or decision is passed in the House of the Commons. The other is to provide a consistent idea in which the voters can put their hope in. With a basic idea of who is likely make the final decision or whom you can trust to make the right decision for. (2012, Kilgour) If we effectively administrate party discipline, bills will be pass with almost no interruptions and we won’t be having frequent elections or dissolution of the parliament. For the reason that the government in position won’t lose the confidence of the House after every proposal of bills. Relaxing party discipline does balance and make a more diverse decision. It’ll base more on the population’s wishes not solely on the parties’ decisions. We as citizens of Canada will have more freedom and access to participate in our governance process.

First of all, relaxing party discipline would give the members of parliament more power allowing them to actually vote freely.

It was said that Canada’s MPs’ power is been minimalize completely by the Prime Minister (Kilgour, 2012 p.1). The reason for less restriction of party discipline is to give them the permission to vote according to the public and personal belief rather than under the influence of the party whip, which will result in freedom of vote for general public. The reason that members of parliament are there are that: they are the representatives of the sections; they are the voice of the people. In Canada we do not elect our MPs to be a puppet solely to be govern under the prime minister. Our country is a democratic country where there’s freedom of speech and freedom to vote. In reducing the hold on party discipline allows the governmental personnel to openly state their opinions without sparking an unnecessary controversy. Which will benefit both opposition and government in power to discuss the controversial debates and will speed up the process of decision making.

In order to let our members of parliament to have more power and saying, we will have to cut power from the party whip and the Prime Minister. In this way no one can force anyone to make a predetermined vote according to party lines rather than their personal conviction. In taking away the power from the PM and party whips will allow the riding representatives more freedom in which power is one

of the add on. (Cameron 2016)

Secondly, if we relax party discipline it will result in more of an encouragement for Canadians to have more vivacity to participate in governance process. Not only lowering the standard of the policy will engage more public opinion on daily bases in Canadians ‘lives. It will actually give us a chance to express our true feelings in manners that passes beyond a representation. By opening up access to hear and access more detailed report of less classified information will encourage the public to truly take part in making decision that affects Canada.

To make this effective, we will have to reserve more seats in the House of Commons for the citizens of Canada and all that are interested in knowing how our governmental system works. It would also strengthen civic participation by creating a sense of community to encourage everyone to get involved and allowing them to state their personal opinions. By starting with more accessible public consultation to parties who are concerned and provide more of a direct access to governmental information will surely attract the interest of the public.

Thirdly, relaxing party discipline will calm the pressure in the legislative body because everyone gets a chance to speak of what they believe and give opinion on the topic (2006, Parliament of Canada). It can also be used as a counterpart to overrule the decisions of the party’s senior officials. Also it does make the self-interest based decision less skeptic and think more of an entire group. A strict party discipline may lead to regional disparities within Canada, in another word, electorates cannot represent their ridings, therefore in relaxing party discipline will minimize such issues.

It was said that Canada has the strictest party discipline in the world which explains why the MPs has so small amount of liberty (2013, Globe and Mail).

If the parties in our governmental system would openly discuss about the difference in positions and in point of views within the groups in realizing these controversies will minimize the unnecessary troubles greatly. Another possibility of improvement would be following the great examples of other countries with the Westminster governance system. For example, in countries like Australia and New Zealand have already a well-established party discipline rules that are less strict than the ones in Canada and way more effective than the ones we have. In an article, it was said that” Australian parties are considerably more discipline than those in the UK an even those in Canada, although the degree of discipline in the latter has been the subject of much critical comment. Parliamentary votes in the UK are subject to varying degrees of party discipline, with the most rigid being the so-called” three-line whip’ votes. Neither Australia nor Canada has such gradations. In New Zealand party discipline has increased under its mixed Member proportional (MMP) electoral system and, unless party leaders have agreed to a conscience vote, standing orders require a party vote to be taken rather than individuals casting their votes in the chamber. “(Sawer, Abjorensen and Larkin

2009)

In conclusion, I have presented my personal point of view in which I’m in accord of on the topic of relaxation of party discipline. My three supporting opinions are: giving the members of parliament more freedom to vote and power, getting the general public involved and lastly ease the tension existing in between the parties. I strongly believe in relaxing the party discipline will make Canada a greater country than it is now for the reason of more popularity among the people and less inner tension between the political groups.