Catholic MPs were today given a strong
hint by Gordon Brown that they may be allowed to vote with their
conscience over the controversial Embryology Bill.
The Prime Minister pledged a traditional free vote on a bid to lower
the abortion limit, and for the first time suggested he may also give
way to demands from Catholic ministers not to force them to compromise
their religious beliefs over the rest of the Bill.
It is a pretty wacky world we live in when
an article talks about someone
being “allowed” to vore their conscience and to not be “forced” to vote
against their religious beliefs.
6 comments
That’s what freedom is, Jeff. Didn’t you know?
Brave New World Indeed!
Party discipline is pretty common. It’s the party leader’s decision whether or not to crack the whip and force the party’s vote.
For instance, on the vote on gay marriage here in Canada a few years ago, both the Liberal’s (headed at the time by the self-described “devout Catholic”, Paul Martin) and the NDP forced their own party to vote to uphold gay marriage. The Tories did not force their vote either way. A pretty stupid system.
However, in the early days of Confederation, votes were rarely forced and the splintering effect meant that governments rarely lasted more than a few months.
This is one of the big differences between the U.S. and parliamentary systems — party discipline can be pretty rigorously enforced in a parliamentary system. Should you be forced to leave your party, you lose your seat in parliament.
Conversely, Congress sometimes appears to have no discipline at all. If a member of Congress gets fed up with his party, he can change and still remain in his seat.
Ditto Mrs. Jackie. Nicely put.
And Dminor: “Congress sometimes appears to have no discipline at all.” You’re being much too generous.
Actually, I wouldn’t read too much into that usage in this context.
The terms “conscience vote” and “free vote” are terms of the art in parliamentary systems. As others have already pointed out, Britain has much tighter party discipline than the US, so almost all votes are not “conscience votes” and there is no expectation that they will be.
And to be fair, the voters also know this and so usually vote for the party, not the individual candidate. The parties know it too, so they tend to be less extravagant in their promises because if they actually get a parliamentary majority, they have no excuse for not being able to implement them.
It’s a different way of organizing a democracy than the US does, and it has its upsides and downsides. But they’re known and the system adjusts.
Comments are closed.