Layton: You May Not Leave The Party
– but we can sure as hell still kick you out.
An NDP government would outlaw floor-crossing, leader Jack Layton told an audience in Foreign Affairs Minister David Emerson’s riding on Monday.
[ ..... ]
“A lot has been said about his betrayal of the people who voted for him. People are angry – you’re angry – and you’re right to be,” Layton said of Emerson. “I’ll ensure that what Mr. Harper and Mr. Emerson did to you – the voters of Vancouver Kingsway – never happens again here or to any voter in Canada.”
Did you notice Layton didn’t say anything about outlawing his whip?
Or that he didn’t say anything about abolishing the practice of whipping his MP’s?
Or taking away his right to eject MP’s from the party who chose not to do what they are told, when they are told to do it?
….. not gonna happen is it?
In your zeal to attack Jack Layton, your lack of reseach is obvious! Layton is merely articulating convention policy of the New Democratic Party. Case in point was the election of Buckley Belanger, Liberal Member of the Saskatchewan Legislature for Athatbasca constituency in 1995. Mr. Belanger, approached NDP Premier Roy Romanow to cross the floor and sit as a New Democrat. Premier Romanow INSISTED that for Belanger to join the NDP government caucus, he would have to resign his seat as a Liberal MLA and run in a by-election as a New Democrat. Belanger could have sat as an independent in the House, but he chose to follow Romanow’s policy. He resigned as a Liberal MLA and was elected as a New Democrat … where he served with distinction as a cabinet minister in both Romanow and Calvert’s cabinet.
Layton is the only leader showing some ethics when it comes to elected Members jumping ship.
And here you are ….. lacking in priciples and ethics condemning him for it!!!
Liberals!!! Sheeeeeeesh!!!
Hmmmmm… leftdog? stageleft a Liberal?
Liberals!!! Sheeeeeeesh!!!
Ouch! SL, yer bein’ slandered. You’ve been called a Green.
Regarding Layton’s ethics, I like what veteran NDP strategist Gerald Caplan had to say:
Layton is up on his hindlegs today trying to defend the indefensible. He ain’t interested in ethics. He’s interested in power.
JB
It’s (to use a word I saw somewhere recently) partisan zeal Dr. Fink, if you don’t agree with a specific party ideology then you need to be labeled with some other party ideology — because we all know that everyone supports one party or another…. that’s the way the system works…. right?
(What does that tell you about the party mindset?)
Here’s how partisan logic works
* leftdog is a Dipper
* stageleft is crapping on the Dipper leader
* leftdog knows stageleft is not a Dipper
* leftdog knows stageleft is not a Conservative
* therefore stageleft must be a Liberal, it’s the only logical answer
Simple partisan logic in action…. and just like the party system itself, it is flawed. It is flawed because (as we should all know by now) stageleft belongs to no party, stageleft supports no party, and stageleft advocates direct democracy, which none of the parties are even slightly interested in entertaining because it would erode the power of the party.
Do notice that leftdog mentioned absolutely nothing about the party whip, whipped votes, or the power of the party leader to expel MP’s from their party seats for refusing to vote when and how ordered by the party…. in favour of labeling me unprincipled and unethical.
Testify brother stageleft!
(insert party name here, any party) über alles
Dysfunctional democracy.
I am trying to come up with a question that I can put to the candidates in my riding at an all candidate meeting to test their resolve to actually represent us.
Who will promise to make every effort to find out what the majority will is on an issue and vote accordingly, even if faced with expulsion from their party.
I thought I would give this a try first rather than just not voting or spoiling my ballot (which is illegal bye the bye)
Any suggestions. It has to be brief but cover the main points.
I’m also thinking about accepting my ballot (name crossed off the list) and after a suitable pause at the voting station I will return the ballot unmarked with some explanation about not being able to decide. All ballots must be accounted for, so I wonder how mine would be handled in this case. Is there a declined vote category?
It does not matter how you phrase the question Doug, they will all answer that they will always vote with the best interests of the riding in mind.
– and then when they vote how and when they are told to vote and are asked about it they will reply that it was in the best interests of the riding to vote the way they did.
If you ask them if they are willing to be whipped they will all give ambiguous answers about the “situation” and the “circumstances” and (of course) “the best interests of the riding“.
In other words doug, you will be lied to.
The answer to your other question is that it will be marked as spoiled, although the recommendation has been on the books for years no party that has achieved power will consider giving a voter the option to decline their ballot at the federal level… why do you suppose that is?
stageleft
I’m reluctant to not vote at all. I haven’t done that in the 40 odd years that I’ve been eligible and I feel that I have to make some sort of effort short of running myself as an independent.
Anyway, I want them all to lie to me and the assembled voters face to face. I intent to become as big a nuisance as I can on the issue in this election and the next one and so on.
I can make a point of excluding the incumbent Liberal with my question as he has demonstrated his position on this subject repeatedly in the last parliament.