L. Marvin Overby, Raymond Tatalovich and Donley T.
Studlar, "Party and Free Votes in Canada: Abortion in the
House of Commons," Party Politics, 4 (July 1998),
381-392.
First Paragraph:
In recent decades, the traditional scholarly consensus that
Westminster-style parliaments operate merely to rubber
stamp, in partisan lock-step, the decisions of their
cabinets has been called into question, especially in the
UK. Lower levels of party cohesion on important votes
(Rasmussen and McCormick, 1985), more frequent partisan
defections among members of parliament (Norton, 1980), and
accumulating evidence of a 'personal vote' in parliamentary
elections (Cain et al., 1987; Norton and Wood, 1993) have
led some scholars to examine influences other than party on
the legislative behavior of MPs. This research has focused
not only on backbench rebellions against the party whips,
but also on free votes in the British House of Commons,
unwhipped divisions on which party loyalty is not formally
enforced (Moyser, 1979; Marsh and Chambers, 1981; Hibbing
and Marsh, 1987; Marsh and Read, 1988; Pattie et al., 1994;
Read et al., 1994).
Figures and Tables:
Table 1: Factor analysis of 15 votes on Bill C-43
Table 2: Full regression models of three vote groups on Bill
C-43
Table 3: Reduced regression models of three vote groups on
Bill C-43
Last Paragraph:
In conclusion, as in the UK, free votes in Canada do not
result in many MPs abandoning their party majorities.
Although a few do, they constitute a trickle rather than a
flood. Parties are voluntary groups of like-minded people
voting together, and the oft-decried 'bonds' of party unity
are essentially self-imposed. Lifting the party whip, at
least on the limited basis it has been done in Ottawa,
reveals how strong Canadian partisan cohesion is, even on an
issue as divisive as abortion.
|