Subject:
|
Re: An interesting North American Election (was Re: Cdn Election Day)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 3 Dec 2000 06:00:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1755 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Steve Chapple writes:
> > > That's why the Alliance policies of referendum and recall
> > > (if an elected member doesn't vote according to the wishes of
> > > his constituents they can force a by-election).
> >
> > I would think this is unnecessary: if someone does the dirty on their
> > party for no good reason they'll usually be kicked out in the next
> > election. It sounds more like a way of maintaining party discipline to me...
>
> You missed the point - If a member doesn't vote according to
> the wishes OF HIS CONSTITUENTS, THEY can force a
> by-election. It's the opposite of party discipline - making
> the members accountable to those that elected them on
> an ongoing basis, not just during an election.
Thanks for the clarification Steve, but how could it work? How would you
determine the "wishes" of the constituents (who are presumably a diverse
bunch of people who would disagree on what they wanted their MP to say and
do on their behalf). Is it that they would be able to vote "no-confidence"
in their member if there was sufficient support for such a referendum?
Wouldn't that sort of public outcry be sufficient to cause the member to
resign anyway?
--DaveL
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
13 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
