|
| Candidate | Brief Response | Full Response |
|---|
| Bob Green Innes |
No |
Our party is a young party which recognizes both regional and economic disparities which the present whip system cannot. The above parliamentary reforms give voice, not only to dissenting party members, but to all House members in drafting legislation. Thus, I intend to vote in the best interest of both Hamilton and Canada. |
| David Hart Dyke |
No |
The Green Party does not favour whipped votes, except on matters relating to our core values. It's very unlikely that anybody would be a Green Party member without believing in those, so I can honestly say that my conscience comes first, but that's easy for a Green Party candidate. I can't think of a situation where I'd have to oppose the party on an issue that would force me into the situation you describe. There are certainly issues where I disagree with the Green Party and would vote my conscience, but I wouldn't have to leave the party to do so. |
| Gord Hill |
No |
If I felt the matter to be of Great importance to me I would vote my own way. On subjects that I was indifferent to I would go with the Party. |
| Greg Pattinson |
No |
I joined the Libertarian party because the party's views are almost identical to my own. That is the only reason I joined the party instead of running as an independent. As a member of a small party I have a bigger influence on the party's policies than a Conservative or Liberal candidate would, making them even closer to my own. That being said, I feel that the idea of a whipped vote is ludicrous. Politicians should always vote their conscience. The parliamentary practice of having an official party whip is something that needs reform. It adds unnecessary cost to the taxpayer in paying for the appointment and also is an infringement of freedom of expression. |
| Wayne Marston |
No |
While my values are very much in accord with the animating principles of the NDP, I will definitely vote my conscience when circumstances require it. For example, I voted against my caucus on Bill C-429, (M. Asselin, Bloc) use of wood. This bill seemed to me to unfairly single out wood for preferential treatment, when I believe the government should be pushing hard to promote and protect Canadian steel. |
| Wendell Fields |
No |
We believe that people should vote based on the decision of their local constituents after a process of collective discussion to establish the line forward. Our program for democratic renewal aims to end the domination of the electoral system by the political parties. |
