NDP�s expulsion of MLA bad deal for voters

Politically, it might make sense to kick MLA Bob Simpson out of the New Democrat caucus.
But it�s another step away from a functioning democratic system that voters can respect.
NDP leader Carole James gave Simpson the boot this week. His immediate offence was some mild observations about the lack of specifics in her speech to the Union of B.C. Municipalities.
The Cariboo North MLA had also been raising questions internally about the party�s direction, lack of clear policies and failure to grab more voter support as the Liberals stumbled.
Simpson didn�t want to be part of the team, James said, as she showed him the door.
Parties need common policies and some internal discipline. Voters are reluctant to support a party that might lurch off in uncharted directions or implode in internal bickering.
But the current fashion calls for much more than that.
MLAs and MPs often seem to have lost the ability to form independent thoughts, ordered to recite the talking points handed out by the leader�s office or say nothing at all.
The people paid to manage such things believe that is the best way to win power. The messages are tightly scripted so politicians don�t say anything that the other side could attack. (And they don�t consider MLAs and MPs quite bright enough to use their own judgment.)
It might be the best way to win power. Just as it might be astute to avoid any serious talk about policies and spend a lot of time bashing the other side.
But while the parties are fighting perpetual campaigns aimed at victory in the next election, they�re losing a more important battle to rebuild public trust in a battered political system.
Simpson was kicked out of the caucus after his brief report on the UBCM convention speeches by provincial and federal politicians appeared on a couple of websites.
He was sharply critical of speeches by Stockwell Day and Premier Gordon Campbell and offered some praise for a speech by B.C. Green party leader Jane Sterk..
And he was not dazzled by James�s� speech. "The leader of the opposition likewise had little concrete to offer the delegates other than a commitment to be more consultative than the current government and a promise to explore the possibility of revenue sharing with local governments," he wrote. "This is a timely concept which has the potential to address the resource needs of local governments, but the lack of specifics was a disappointment to delegates."
The municipal politicians had real problems grappling with the services they need to provide and the available revenue sources, but didn�t hear anything meaningful from federal and provincial politicians.
"They were simply politicking for the press, not serving the real and immediate needs of UBCM delegates and their constituents," Simpson wrote.
You could expect James would be displeased, even if the comments are accurate. Simpson acknowledged he anticipated a lecture.
Instead, he was given a chance to apologize, declined and was then then kicked out of the caucus. He will sit as an independent.
Simpson�s comments don�t seem that far out of line.
In fact, while that kind of candor might irritate the leader�s office and party brass, it�s useful.
Problems don�t get solved when people are prevented from talking about them. And the best decisions come from a free, informed discussion by all involved.
Maybe those discussions can take place behind closed doors. But there is little evidence they do.
And in any case, it�s also important that citizens see they are taking place. Elected officials are supposed to represent their constituents and raise their concerns - even if the party doesn�t like it.
Instead, the public perception is that they almost always do what they are told. The orders of the leader�s office come before the duty to represent their constituents.
Maybe that�s the way to win elections. But it�s also a sure way to convince voters the system is broken � and that they�re the losers.
Footnote: The issue was a relief to the Liberals, glad the attention was off the HST. It exposed some rifts in the NDP over James�s leadership, but they will likely be short-lived. For all the grumbling, the party�s poll standings have been the best in years. It hardly seems time to get into a leadership debate.