Respectful disagreement is central to a healthy democracy and to healthy political parties.

No political party represents our views perfectly. We find the party that best represents our views and values, and we engage, debate and organize to bring both our party and country closer to those objectives.

I am a Liberal member of parliament and I continue to support our Liberal government. But that does not mean that I support every government action taken, or that I ought to refrain from public disagreement.

In 2015, our Liberal platform acknowledged the need for strong local representation by noting that “millions of Canadians who elected good people to be their communities’ voice in Ottawa have watched those same people become Stephen Harper’s voice in their communities.”

In contrast to blind partisan loyalty, we promised to empower MPs and their communities through more free votes in the House of Commons.

Specifically, we promised that “for members of the Liberal Caucus, all votes will be free votes with the exception of those that implement the Liberal electoral platform; traditional confidence matters, like the budget; and those that address our shared values and the protections guaranteed by the Charter.”

Opposing view: Should dissident Liberals stay in caucus? No

We should all abide by that promise.

First, while we may not agree with every discrete policy proposal in our electoral platform, a member of the Liberal caucus should believe that our overall plan is best for the country and should be committed to its implementation.

Second, without confidence in the House of Commons from our Liberal caucus, we would not have a Liberal government. One need not support every government decision or show the same solidarity expected of cabinet colleagues, but a member of the Liberal caucus should have confidence in the Liberal government to continue to govern.

Third, our Liberal Party is committed to defending our shared values and Charter rights and a member of the Liberal caucus should uphold that commitment through their voting record and public advocacy.

The Big Debate

Outside of these three categories of “whipped” votes, a member of parliament should be free to register their disagreement with the Liberal government on matters of policy and principle, and to remain in the Liberal caucus.

A more active and engaged representative democracy can help to rebuild citizens’ trust and to strengthen our public debates. At its best, it means strong local representation in place of undue centralization, thoughtful answers in place of canned talking points, and a politics of ideas in place of partisan bickering.

As Liberals, we should defend the right to disagree as Liberals, and defend our commitment to empower MPs and their communities through free votes and public disagreement.

So long as that disagreement is respectful, reasonable, and focused on ideas, there is no reason to limit it to a private conversation with a minister or the confines of our caucus walls.

As Liberal members of parliament, our responsibility is not only to raise issues forcefully in caucus but to participate in, and hopefully help shape, a broader public debate. Our responsibility is to ensure that our legislative decisions are reflective of our collective obligations to the Liberal Party, to our constituents, to the evidence, and to the public interest.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

THE BIG DEBATE: For more opposing view columns from Toronto Star contributors, click here.

Principally, our responsibility is to our country. Our shared belief that our country is best governed by the Liberal Party does not absolve us of our responsibility to take action, voice concerns, and vote in the public interest. South of the border, we can see the ongoing damage wrought when representatives put party before country, and we should work to avoid similar outcomes here at home. In the end, elected officials are trustees in the public interest.

If a member of parliament actively intends to undermine our Liberal government and leadership, acts out of personal gain rather than principle, and no longer supports most of the work we have undertaken, then they should no longer sit as a member of our Liberal caucus.

But if a member of parliament is committed to liberal values, and to upholding their obligations honestly, in good faith, and with integrity, then they should be welcomed as members of our Liberal caucus, regardless of any public disagreement. Our party and our democracy are better for it.

Nathaniel Erskine-Smith is the Liberal MP for Beaches-East York.

Read more about: