The Dominion THURSDAY, JULY 12, 1928. “TIED” MEMBERS

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 241, 12 July 1928, Page 10

The Dominion THURSDAY, JULY 12, 1928. “TIED” MEMBERS

During the Address-in-Reply debate in Parliament on luesday, Mr. LySnar asserted that many members of the House were ‘tied up,” and were not free to act independently. Mr. Lysnar made two points —first, that members should be independent of party; second, that independent men of the Reform Party could be of more assistance to the Prime Minister than “tied men.” _ The first assertion can easily be disputed. The second is deserving of some thought. . The party system appears to be an indispensable factoi in present-day politics. If we. assent to the system of party government, then it is clear that for practical purposes men returned in support of a particular party should be loyal to its policy and its leaders. In the choice of a leader and the shaping of the policy the members of the party can use their influence. Government under the party system implies agreement amongst the governing party as to the policy to be followed and the ends to be striven for. Government by a party at sixes-and-sevens in these matters would be impossible. On the other hand, independence of judgment on legislative questions of a strictly non-party character, such as the Liquor traffic, raises no-difficulties. In any political party there must inevitably occur a division of opinion in regard to matters of conscience and personal conviction. It is not practical politics, nor is it in the best interests of the country, that such questions should be made the shuttle cocks of party strife. ' , . ■ Moreover, it is desirable, in order that sound conclusions may be reached, that members should approach these non-party questions with minds reasonably open to argument and unfettered by pie ges given to outside interests and without a full knowledge, oi even any knowledge at all, of-the particular form the matters upon which they have pledged themselves will take. If Mr. Lysnar means by tied members those who commit themselves to vote blindly on a nonparty question regardless of conditions or circumstances, he will nnd a great many people in hearty agreement with his views. Ceitain incidents of last session served to show how special interests outside the walls of Parliament may tie the hands of members and handicap them in the due consideration of important social questions strictly on their merits. Similar tests of independent judgment will probably recur. I f and when they do, members may be assured that their actions do not escape critical survey throughout the country.