在采用英国议会制度的国家里，议员叛党，投入另一个政党里去，有个专门的词是“Crossing the floor”。这是因为，在这种被称为Westminster制度下，执政党和反对党在议会里的席位面对面排着的，所以投票时各走一个方向，如果从一个阵 营投向另一个阵营的话，等于是要跨过两党相隔的地板去投票，才有此一说。
虽然政党之分不如阶级斗争这么严酷，但一般政治家还是比较忌讳直接投到另一个党派的，他们经常会采用的方法是先脱离政党成为独立议员，过一阵子后才加入别的党派。所以纵观加拿大政治史，这种例子并不多。参照这个网页，可以看出，直接跳党的国会议员在1990年至今没有超过10个。最近的例子就是前保守党副党首的施当娜和前自由党部长的艾民信了。
2005年5月17日，在自由党马田少数政府摇摇欲坠的时候，施当娜突然宣布跳党，并获部长职位，为马田政府延命半年做出了巨大贡献。当时加西评论上义正 词严的批评者占了多数，比如现在已经销声匿迹的CAO政委连转贴带原创的，指斥她如鸡。更有人说需要让选民教训这个只是投机的政治家。于是屡屡以主流代表 自居的保守党员史蒂夫登场，先是说施当娜一点也不漂亮和聪明，然后又说她不过是仗着有钱的老爹，最后以大义来教导大家：一定要做些使得大家能够恢复对政治 家信心的事来！
接下来是著名的蛤蜊窝先生的录音风波，他声称自由党要收 买他让他夫妻俩跳党，且有录音为证。这其实是涉及到一个问题：这类政党的幕后交易，什么是合法的，什么是非法的？关键在于，跳党和封官，孰先孰后？如果封 官在后，就是合法；反之非法。因此蛤蜊窝才搞出一盘录音来要摸黑对手，可惜他自己问题多多，变成了一只“走地丑闻鸡”。
这两件事，给反对自由党的舆论提供了新的武器。的确，自由党在道义上是占不住理，给人们带来了保守党在道德上占优的印象。而且，保守党还提出跳党者必须马上辞职回到选区再选举的法案，可惜因为自由党政府的垮台而作废。
2006年选举，自由党下台，成立了保守党少数政府。这下大家准备好好看看保守党会做些什么让大家恢复对政治家的信心了。不料2月6日新政府就任的第一天 就让大家大跌眼镜。先是下巴任命Michael Fortier为参议员，有违他大选时反对参议院任命的表态；然后就是这个艾民信跳党了。
2004年艾民信经过当时总理马田的钦点，接过原华人自由党议员梁陈明任的地盘，在她的协助下，以华人女婿的面目出现，也得到多数倾向于自由党选民们的支 持，获选并得到连任。这次他的跳党，在我看来，有两点是很特别的：一，时间之短，在新一届议员宣誓就职的同一天宣布跳党，这是创下了新低，看那个跳党政治 家的全名单也找不出比他转换的还快的；二，违背选民的意愿，他所在的Vancouver-Kingsway选区，只有18.8%的选民投了保守党的票，可 见他转投保守党是如何的不顾他选区的选民了。
对于他的跳党，加拿大媒体的主要声调是谴责和失望的。这可以理解，因为要遵循严格要求政治家操守的原则，道理上是讲得通的。施女士的时候要骂，艾女婿的场 合也要骂。但奇怪的是，加西评论里却出现了很多同情艾女婿的言论。有人说：艾女婿是为了加拿大，牺牲自己名誉也要发挥才干，为人民服务。这倒是让我纳闷半 天，早知如此，为什么要把那么会搞经济的马田选下去呢？或者，下巴应该请老马再来做财神？屡屡以主流代表自居的保守党员史蒂夫又一次登场，赞扬艾女婿的选 择，与先前一本正经的痛骂施女士时截然不同，判若两人，还要向他的党首致敬！这实在让我有些看不下去，因为，我在史大叔的教育下，已经开始重视价值，重视 信用，这么一来，叫我以后怎么能再相信史大叔的主流意见？
骂施女士为鸡的人们这次不应该沉默，不要持双重标准，应该骂艾女婿为鸭才对！把政客当作一笼子鸡和鸭就行了。否则，我听到那些赞扬艾女婿的话都会变了味道，成了：
艾民信是多么伟大的鸭！
艾民信是让人感动的鸭！
艾民信是真了不起的鸭！
06-02-27
1 条评论:
评论源自: 容若
Emerson's double-cross strictly about ethics, integrity
Barbara Yaffe, Vancouver Sun
· Published: Friday, February 24, 2006
It would be easy to emit a big harrumph over David Emerson's party switch, turn the page and move on to other matters.
But that would be wrong. The Vancouver-Kingsway MP has disenfranchised a large group of citizens and such a moral misdemeanour cannot be permitted to stand.
Of those now actively opposing Emerson's new job in cabinet, a good many probably are politically motivated -- angry Liberals and New Democrats. More than 19,000 have signed a recall petition and a campaign to "de-elect" him is under way.
But the significance of Emerson's double-cross is less political than it is ethical.
It was unethical for Emerson, pre-election, to pledge to represent a group of citizens in Parliament a certain way, then to breach it post-election without reasonable justification.
What good is his planned letter of apology to constituents when he intends to go right on offending them?
Sure, Scott Brison and Belinda Stronach switched parties. But they did it over matters of conscience.
Brison, gay himself, couldn't tolerate the Conservative position on gay marriage and other social policies. Stronach lost faith in Harper's leadership. No doubt, she was also an opportunist, thrilled to grab the cabinet post being dangled.
But what was Emerson's issue? He had none. He wanted to be in cabinet, even if that meant betraying those who voted for him.
His switch has robbed him of integrity, not just in Vancouver. More than 60 per cent of Canadians disapprove of his action.
He can exercise his business smarts and whatever else he has to offer in the Harper cabinet. That's his choice. But he's no longer endowed with the moral authority that derives from obtaining a mandate from The People.
Conservative Senator Pat Carney this week noted Emerson owes his position as an MP to the voters in his riding, and thus it's incumbent upon him to make peace with them.
If you want to know how meaningless Emerson's current Conservative partisanship is, you can review a videotape the Liberals are only too keen to circulate, featuring Emerson speaking at Vancouver's Floata Restaurant a week before the vote.
Just read what he told Liberal dinner guests:
"Let's just ask ourselves whether Canadians want the Conservative kind of change: Every man for himself, the strong survive, the weak die. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Taxation to benefit the rich, to take from the poor. Elimination of a child-care program that'll help young Canadians become productive members of our work force in 10 or 20 years, regardless of their economic or social status.
"Get rid of that, say the Conservatives. Turn your back on first nations, Metis and Inuit. That's what the Conservatives are saying.
"Let's have another look at the Charter. Let's restrict some people's rights under the Charter, but let's have property rights under the Charter.
"My goodness, is that what Canadians want? Property rights and restrictions on people's rights? Restriction of Kyoto? A George Bush approach to the environment?"
Emerson spoke from experience as a former deputy finance minister: "I know the game they're on to ... once they're in office [they] start to cut social programs, start to run a deficit, start to raise taxes. I've seen that with every Conservative regime that I've ever encountered, and I've been in public service --involved in public policy -- for over 30 years.
"It's a platform which is fraudulent. It's a platform that is a recipe for deficits, taxes and the decimation of social programs that have become part of the Canadian social fabric."
So, do we believe the Emerson who spoke a week before the election? Or do we believe the Emerson who two weeks after the election, swore on a Bible to serve a Conservative government?
Which one is real? When Emerson next pronounces on anything, how seriously
终于看到你的“时评”了。这回史大叔肯定不能大言不惭地说：他相信most of Canadians都会向哈帕致敬。上周温哥华太阳报的专栏作家Barbara Yaffe写了一篇题为：Emerson's double-cross strictly about ethics, integrity的评论文，非常全面深刻地反映了百分之六十二以上加拿大民众对艾同学转党的反感动因。她在引用了大量艾同学在竞选中义愤攻击保守党政纲的语句后，写道：“So, do we believe the Emerson who spoke a week before the election? Or do we believe the Emerson who two weeks after the election, swore on a Bible to serve a Conservative government?
Which one is real? When Emerson next pronounces on anything, how seriously should Canadians take him?
06-02-27 @ 18:04
评论源自: WANGHU
艾女婿的算计还是很精的，他肯定不会重新参选，因为在他选区保守党支持率不到20%，他又不是如卡德曼般有个人魅力的，所以可以推想的另一个交易就是让下巴钦点他为下一届参议员了。
我不是对这样的行为大惊小怪，而是对有些人的言论表示厌恶。一方面高调宣称Man does not belong to his language or to his race, he belongs to himself alone, for he is a free being, a moral being.
另一方面又让人看到一个人是怎样从属于他的政党，局限于他的意识形态的。 :D
06-02-27 @ 18:26
评论源自: 病毒
呀,王老糊此篇正是偶所期待滴.:)
06-02-27 @ 21:49
评论源自: 逸立
老马会搞经济？王糊真是糊咧···
06-02-27 @ 22:39
评论源自: 萧十一
要做好鸡或者鸭也不容易，也得讲究个童叟无欺、职业道德什么的。。。
06-02-27 @ 22:50
评论源自: 崴跛司机
对大家拿的政治俺是七窍通六窍，剩下就是看热闹，其实热闹也不会看的说，，，，这不眼见要可以申请西铁城的资格乐，可就是啥也不懂捏
06-02-27 @ 23:24
评论源自: 广播体操
史蒂夫: 说施当娜一点也不漂亮和聪明
----------------------------------------------------------
那是不对滴。加上猛攻人家说是出自有钱人家庭。怎滴？有钱人家庭出身也是缺点之一？咱要象大陆电影里那样责问他：“你还算是个保守党员吗？？！”:P
人家气质、容貌都不错。
对气质、容貌都不错的女子要更加怜香惜玉一些才对。我发现史老哥有时也太讲政治了，应该向咱江前老板学学，既讲政治、又有情趣，那就对了:D
06-02-28 @ 05:59
评论源自: WANGHU
病毒：此篇正是偶所期待滴
-------------------------
期待虾米？唯恐天下不乱？
06-02-28 @ 16:32
评论源自: WANGHU
逸立：老马会搞经济？
------------------------
嗯，如果艾女婿能得到主流戴表的一句表扬：He has a proven record as a government official and business executive，那么老马怎么夸他也不算过分了。
06-02-28 @ 16:35
评论源自: WANGHU
萧十一：要做好鸡或者鸭也不容易，也得讲究个童叟无欺、职业道德什么的。。
-------------------------------------------------------------------
不就是面子上放不下吗？不过北美主流文化的一个特征是：绝不能说俺错了，要说俺如何为了国家银民理想而如此的慷慨激昂牺牲自己云云……
06-02-28 @ 16:38
评论源自: WANGHU
崴跛司机：这不眼见要可以申请西铁城的资格乐，可就是啥也不懂捏
-------------------------------------------------------------
不要紧，有保守党的中流砥柱，灵龟斯特大叔给你灌输主流价值哪。 :>
06-02-28 @ 16:39
评论源自: WANGHU
广播体操：我发现史老哥有时也太讲政治了……
-------------------------------------------
正是，以至于他的信用度大大下降。 :D
其实看这段白石的MP Hiebert的讲话，就圆滑得多：
Hiebert skirts issue of floor-crossing……The Conservative Party does not have a position on this particular topic. It was the prime minister's decision and I support him.
相比之下，大爷叔显得肉麻了一点。
06-02-28 @ 16:46
评论源自: 悟饭
嘿嘿。骂得很爽。
对人对己两套标准不是太大的事，但是到处嚷嚷还怕人不知道就是原罪了。
不过，听说这也是主流？
06-03-02 @ 12:02
评论源自: WANGHU
小孙说得对，偶融入主流做得还不够。
06-03-02 @ 14:31
发表评论