In the realm of Canadian politics, the act of MPs switching party allegiances has a long and storied history. While terms like “traitor,” “shameful,” “brave,” and “principled” are commonly used to describe such actions, the term “re-electable” doesn’t always apply.
Recently in Ottawa, there was surprise when long-time Conservative member Chris d’Entremont announced his move to join the federal Liberal caucus. This decision, hinted at by Prime Minister Mark Carney, could potentially pave the way for others to follow suit.
Although floor-crossing has been a political practice since Confederation, a closer examination of historical records reveals a shift in its electoral outcomes. According to Semra Sevi, an assistant professor in the University of Toronto’s political science department, switching parties has become increasingly risky and detrimental to politicians’ chances of being re-elected.
Sevi’s research, tracking party switches from Confederation to 2015, indicates that while floor-crossers used to maintain similar levels of electoral support post-switch in earlier years, the trend has shifted since the 1970s. The institutionalization of political parties has significantly raised the electoral costs of switching, making it challenging for politicians to survive outside their original party.
While there have been instances of successful party switches, the overall trend suggests that political survival outside one’s party has become less likely. The decision to switch parties is often viewed as opportunistic and can damage a politician’s credibility among voters who must decide whether to support the new affiliation based on the reasons provided.
In the case of Chris d’Entremont, his departure from the Conservative party was motivated by a perceived lack of representation under Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s leadership style. As a more progressive conservative, d’Entremont may be able to justify his move to constituents in Acadie-Annapolis, a riding that has historically supported both red and blue parties.
Despite potential political repercussions and criticism, changing party affiliations remains a legal option for MPs. Attempts to enforce re-election under a new party banner through by-elections have been unsuccessful in becoming law.
Over the years, numerous MPs have switched affiliations, some opting for independence or forming new parties, while others have joined rival parties. Notable cases include Jenica Atwin, Leona Alleslev, Eve Adams, and the mass exodus from the Canadian Alliance in the early 2000s.
By examining the complex history of party switches in Canadian politics, it becomes evident that such decisions have significant implications for both the individuals involved and the broader political landscape.
