I can appreciate the frustration about being forced to toe the party line, although such discipline is most evident within the governing party since the defection of members could lead to defeat of the government. Such defections in opposition parties, while potentially embarrassing, are much less significant in terms of political impact.
I am surprised, however, that someone currently serving on a municipal council would not show more awareness of the problems that arise in a governing system without political parties. On such a council, there isn’t any governing group working together to carry out certain policies. Nor is there any opposition group to act as a watchdog over the governing group, to put forth alternatives, and to offer itself as a possible alternative government. There is no clear focus of accountability. With such a council, everyone is responsible for everything, which also means that no one is really responsible for anything. While a Prime Minister or Premier has the backing of a block of votes from members of the same party, a head of council has but one vote like every other councillor.
Worse still, with such a council it is possible to have a situation in which there is an unofficial concentration of power but without any corresponding mechanism of accountability. Over the past half century, I have sat through countless meetings in small municipalities with five member councils and observed the unofficial “head of council party” at work. Items on the agenda are introduced by the chair of the meeting (the head of council), debated by the other members, and then a decision is made. Except that sometimes the Chair would introduce an agenda item, express strong support or grave concerns, and then remark that – of course – the matter was for council to decide. Other councillors who belonged to the informal alliance would pick up this less than subtle cue and would fall in line with their support or opposition. The result was the exercise of power by an informal clique without any corresponding accountability.
Representing the interests of your constituents can also be problematic. What if those interests would not be in the national (or provincial) interest? If your riding has a dominant industry which should be phased out to meet environmental concerns, representing those interests is contrary to the broader interests of the province or the country. This dilemma is similar to the problem with the ward system in municipal government. If councillors focus exclusively, or even primarily, on the interests of their ward, who acts for the interests of the whole municipality?
I would agree that in recent decades the political staff who support the office of Prime Minister and Premier have gained too much power and have added to the centralized control over elected members – control that may often inhibit them from advancing what they feel are concerns of their constituents. In addition, I believe that party discipline could be loosened a little without undermining the functioning of our provincial and federal systems. On some types of issue, the parties could even decide to allow members to vote according to their conscience, having first agreed that such a vote would not be considered a vote of confidence in the governing party. But anyone who wants to see a significant decline in party discipline and widespread free votes is wise to take a pass on participation in federal or provincial politics.
Before closing, I must confess to a long-standing bias, as I used to tell my students over the decades that I was a strong believer in the two party system – one on Friday night and one on Saturday night!