In the realm of Canadian politics, the act of MPs switching party affiliations has always been a topic of mixed reactions. While terms like traitor, shameful, brave, and principled are often used to describe such actions, one word that doesn’t always stick is “re-electable.”
Recently, the political landscape in Ottawa was stirred when long-serving Conservative member Chris d’Entremont decided to join the federal Liberal caucus, with Prime Minister Mark Carney suggesting that others might follow suit. This act of “floor-crossing” is a historical political phenomenon that dates back to Confederation. However, a historical analysis reveals that switching parties often comes with an electoral cost.
According to Semra Sevi, an assistant professor in the University of Toronto’s political science department, changing party allegiance is a risky move that typically diminishes a politician’s chances of re-election. Sevi’s research, tracking MPs who switched parties from Confederation to 2015, indicates that while in the past, floor-crossers maintained similar vote shares in consecutive elections, the trend has shifted since the 1970s.
She explains that as political parties become more established, the electoral consequences of switching have significantly increased, making it increasingly challenging for politicians to survive outside their original party affiliation. However, there have been a few exceptions to this pattern, and only time will tell if d’Entremont’s move will be one of them.
Over the years, many MPs have changed affiliations, either becoming Independent or forming new parties, with some notable cases involving joining rival parties. The success of an MP’s re-election after switching parties often hinges on whether voters perceive their reasons as genuine.
In d’Entremont’s case, he cited feeling unrepresented in the Conservative Party under Pierre Poilievre’s leadership as his motive for joining the Liberals. However, Sevi notes that such moves are often viewed as opportunistic and can harm a politician’s credibility, particularly when made shortly after an election.
Despite potential political repercussions and criticism, there are no legal barriers preventing MPs from changing party alliances. While unsuccessful attempts have been made to require floor-crossers to seek re-election under a new party banner through a by-election, these efforts have not materialized into law.
The article further discusses notable instances of floor-crossings in Canadian history, highlighting cases like Jenica Atwin, Leona Alleslev, Eve Adams, and Scott Brison, among others. Each example showcases the complexities and implications of political defections in the Canadian landscape.
In conclusion, the act of floor-crossing remains a significant aspect of Canadian political history, with each instance shaping the dynamics of party politics and electoral outcomes.