"Mr. Emerson has to explain his decision to constituents. I don't think he'll have any difficulty doing that,"
No difficulty? When Stronach bailed, her riding was marginally Conservative and thus didn't represent a seismic shift. However, 80% of Emerson's constituents voted for parties other than the Conservatives. I agree with Harper, that Emerson must explain his decision and in the spirit of democracy, anything less than another election is a complete snub.
If this is good for B.C, as Harper and Gordon Campbell argue, than the Conservatives should have no trouble convincing voters of the merits. Anything less than another vote, translates into a manipulation of the democratic process. As Harper stated, Emerson is accountable to his constituents, with the logical extension another election. Ethics, transparent government and restoring the faith of a cynical electorate are the cornerstones of Harper's platform. The media must mirror the public outrage and force Harper to follow through on his words in a meaningful way. There is no partisan bias on this matter, criticism is coming from all quarters, so the noise of spin should be muted.
2 comments:
Steve,
I love that quote from Harper because this is what he said when Stronach jumped:
But he said it is Stronach who will now have problems – when she faces the voters in her riding of Newmarket-Aurora.
"This will ultimately negatively affect Belinda Stronach's chances of being re-elected," he said.
"This will ultimately negatively affect Belinda Stronach's chances of being re-elected," he said.
Imagine how it will affect an MP from a riding that overwhelmingly voted against the Conservative agenda two weeks ago.
Post a Comment