this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2025
65 points (98.5% liked)

Canada

10757 readers
511 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The voters chose a minority government and expected the parties to work together, and I don’t think it’s right for Carney and his team to try to undermine that,” said Kofman. “But then I think of Poilievre’s stupid little face being told about one floor crossing after another and I giggle for about 10 minutes.”

But also:

Kofman went on to acknowledge his concerns that a Carney Liberal majority could force through a Western pipeline without any environmental or Indigenous consultation, before dissolving back into giggles picturing Pierre Poilievre’s sad face becoming a popular reaction gif used to denote “whiny pouting” across the internet.

top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 30 points 2 days ago (4 children)

How is it undemocratic? You vote for your MP, not the party.

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The way whipped votes are standard in Canada means that in practice you are voting for a party.

[–] TomatoPotato69@lemmy.ca 16 points 2 days ago

That still doesn't make it undemocratic. If anything, whipped votes are the undemocratic part. Crossing the floor is a feature of our democracy, not a bug.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's not how many understand it. I'm pretty sure my extended family have no idea. Especially given they come from a country with proportional representation.

[–] fourish@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Ignorance is no excuse.

[–] veeesix@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah this is the only part of the reaction that I’m not aligned with.

As you’ve mentioned the MP is elected as your representative, regardless of party, but a lot of people tend to vote with the understanding that their representative will tow the party line.

[–] FreeBooteR69@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I expect my MP to have a brain in their heads who can make decisions that benefit their constituents. While i appreciate what a party can do for organization, if that party stops acting in the benefit of it's constituents then fuck that party. Let's be realistic, most Canadians are too smart for the kind of indoctrination that exists to the south of us. That guy crossed the floor because pp smol doesn't have the moral character, intelligence, experience, or vision to lead his party let alone Canada.

[–] veeesix@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago
[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

To the best of my understanding, when an MP runs under the banner of a party, they're required by the party to vote in the same way as everyone else in that party unless otherwise specified (e.g. when we voted to recognize gay marriage). So when we vote on an MP, we don't care what the MP thinks because it has no bearing on how they vote in parliament. All that matters is what the party leader decides on.

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No, they are not required to do that.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I guess I don't understand the system then.

Would you happen to know what it means when they say that the party allows a free vote?

The government of Prime Minister Paul Martin supported the bill but allowed a free vote by its backbench MPs in the House of Commons.

[source]

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Usually the party leader will demand their MPs follow party lines, but there is no law/rule to do so. Breaking party lines is a quick way to ensure they will forever be a back bencher however.

It would be like throwing your boss under the bus in a group meeting. You may not get fired, but it’s career suicide.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago

Right, that's more or less how I understood it. I guess I didn't communicate it well.

In any case, given that the voters understand that this is what they're working with, the most sensible thing to do (and what everyone probably does) is to vote for MPs based on party position. Even if we wanted to vote based on their personal positions, there's rarely enough information to make that possible.

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago

You are right that the way you laid it out in your previous comment is the way it is in practice. Almost all votes are whipped. Local representation (federally) is mostly in name only.