The legislature: Paul Martin proposed a number of changes to the working of the House of Commons in the months before he became Prime Minister. A speech announcing his six priorities is included in your tutorial reading package. If implemented which of Ma
...at the party is legislating as a whole, however, if an MP chooses not to follow party plans, discipline, or policy, he or she bears the heavy consequence of lost of reputation or being “booted from caucus” like Carolyn Parrish, who was expelled from the Liberal party for her “unacceptable” behavior . An MP could cause a no confidence in the House by not voting in-line with the caucus, and that equals the government losing it’s seat of power. This is why this current party discipline is vital for a ruling party to maintain power. The party also has the necessary power to expel a party member who is not in-line, which can ultimately ruin his/her career. Therefore, the MP’s are like “trained seals” under the Prime Minister, whom with advising from his loyal ministers, decides whether or not his party will support legislation through party discipline. In a way, the people’s representatives are blocked from freely voting as representation of each constituency’s will, but instead they must vote accordingly to the will of the party’s main leaders. Paul Martin in his six points of Changes to the House of Commons, stresses the loosening up of party discipline to a Three Line Whip method, in which a more democratic evolution can be achieved. The Three Line Whip will loosen up the tension of Party discipline and promote the liberty for MP’s to vote on the behalf of their constituent and not on Party orders. This would promote debate and discussion because the party in power would have to win votes by explaining how a particular legislation would benefit the MP’s riding and the whole nation. This method outlines three degrees of votes a party can issue. The first degree, is when MP’s are free to vote as they choose, second degree is when there is a strong policy recommendation for MP’s to vote by the government, and the “third degree is for key matters in which the MP’s are expected to vote along party lines as it would be considered an issue of confidence in the government.” If the Three Line Whip were implemented, then governments would be careful in using the Three-line vote degree, as the public would be aware. That is why the government should only exercise this degree only on key matters, which could threaten the party’s confidence in the House. When Party Discipline loosens in parliament, the MP’s would become more flexible to represent the people and their political power would be considerably strengthened. The peoples in their respective constituencies would have a fair say in matters, and not be muted in legislative process. Basically, by giving MP’s their vote, it makes the MP’s more significant because Parties would have to appease them and adjust their legislation for a majority of approval. This would be done through many meetings, discussions, and debates about the pros and cons of a possible legislation. This would result with a stronger democracy, according to Paul Martin. “Ministers sponsoring legislation are unable to take approval for granted” because “they must earn the support and respect of the own benches… through hard work and active engagement” . Yet with giving the MP’s more of the liberty to vote and the right to more debate for the people, there is also the outcome of an inefficient legislation process. The current system of party discipline’s sole purpose was to keep the governing party’s confidence in the House and to pass legislation more easily and efficiently. The Three-line whip can fulfill the former but not the latter for first or second-degree legislation. Since this method increases the amount of debate before legislation is passed and the likelihood of legislation being rejected, governments would no longer be efficient in passing this type of ...