Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
The speaker casts the tie-breaking vote, so if the Liberals took that 44th seat, they'd still be able to name a Liberal speaker. As far as making sure everyone else is in the house at all times, that's no more likely to happen than every NDP MLA being in the house at all times. But both sides will definitely be rallying troops for big votes.
|
Pretty minor thing but possible that having 100% attendance is going to be tougher for the BC Liberals based on where their MLAs are from, they dominated in the more rural far flung areas whereas metro vic and vancouver are NDP strongholds after the last election though they do also have 2 or 3 remote ridings. I don't know much about the protocol for non-confidence motions and if they could potentially be caught out.
On the speaker voting, you're right, but that's really not a common occurrence or something that's considered desirable on an ongoing basis in Canada. Speaker as the debate moderator is supposed to be somewhat impartial and has to have the trust of the house that they are not biased... federal house procedurals:
"In theory, the Speaker has the same freedom as any other Member to vote in accordance with his or her conscience; however, the exercise of this responsibility could involve the Speaker in partisan debate, which would adversely affect the confidence of the House in the Speaker’s impartiality. Therefore, certain conventions have developed as a guide to Speakers in the infrequent exercise of the casting vote."
Granted it's federal but I think the speaker has voted to cast a tiebreaking vote 11 times in Canada's 150 year history. I can't see them appointing a liberal speaker and using him as a tiebreaker on an ongoing basis.