Heather Phillips

I'm a political junkie and NDP supporter. How can a party with one, at most two, members in the House talk about "whipping" their members votes? Do people even know what it actually means? Treditionally, the party whip makes sure members are present when the vote is taken. Deciding how to vote on any bill is discussed in caucus, when the party has enough members to form a caucus. Which the Greens have not. So, after discussing how a vote will match the (NDP) party's public position--you know, what they told people when they asked for their votes--the members go and vote. Most will vote to support the party's published platform, as decided by common, ordinary citizens who attend party conventions and choose leaders, etc. So, an NDP member, whose campaign was funded and supported by the NDP, is expected to vote the party platform. There are times when the MP does not agree with or vote with the caucus and his or her reasons will be known ahead because they were aired in caucus. The MP is not "punished" but if an MP turns out to be a maverick on several issues, he or she may feel the heat or the cool. If an MP consistently disagrees with the platform of the party, he or she should have run as an idependent or for a different party. Most cases, it is the individual, not theparty, who misrepresnted himself. It seems the Greens are running as a cause, not a party. Don't be fooled into thinking the Greens can be more effective or have a better understanding of the environment issue than the NDP. Politics is not government. Trying to put over that "whipping" is bad and NDP are most guilty may be good politics but it does not show an understanding of how government works. Every MP works for his or her constituents, based on his or her experience in the area. Local government and provincial government usually have more clout in local issues but the MP can help where the Federal Government has jurisdiction. Much depends on the energy and experience of the staff and you don't get to elect them.