The Party Whip in Canada: History, Function, and Democratic Consequences

by Jane Scharf

Origin and Importation into Canada

The party whip system in Canada is not a product of democratic necessity but of imported parliamentary control mechanisms. It originated in 18th-century Britain, where the term "whip" was borrowed from fox hunting, referring to the "whipper-in" who kept the hounds from straying. In political terms, it came to mean the person who keeps party members in line.

After Confederation in 1867, Canada adopted many features of the British Westminster model, including the whip system. Early political parties in Canada, such as John A. Macdonald's Conservatives and Wilfrid Laurier's Liberals, began to centralize control over their members to maintain power and pass legislation efficiently. This solidified the use of a whip to enforce party-line voting.

Reference:

  • C.E.S. Franks, The Parliament of Canada, University of Toronto Press, 1987.

  • David Docherty, Mr. Smith Goes to Ottawa, UBC Press, 1997.

What the Whip Does

The whip is responsible for:

  • Ensuring party members attend parliamentary sessions.

  • Ordering members how to vote on legislation, regardless of their personal views or the will of their constituents.

  • Enforcing “discipline” by threatening MPs with removal from caucus, denial of committee posts, or loss of party nomination.

This is not prescribed in legislation—it is enforced through custom and internal party rules, shielded from public oversight or democratic accountability.

Used by All Major Parties

All major parties in Canada—Liberal, Conservative, NDP, Bloc Québécois, and even the Green Party—use whips. The degree of enforcement may vary slightly, but the expectation to vote as ordered is virtually absolute, especially on so-called confidence motions.

Independent MPs and those from unrecognized parties are the only ones not subject to the whip, but they have little influence within a system dominated by whipped parties.

Consequences for Democracy

The whip system is a direct contradiction of democratic representation. Under Canada's electoral system, Members of Parliament are elected to represent the people of their ridings. However, under the whip, MPs represent the party leader’s agenda, not their constituents.

This:

  • Nullifies representative democracy, reducing elected MPs to agents of the leader.

  • Centralizes power in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) or party headquarters.

  • Destroys meaningful debate in the House of Commons.

  • Eliminates accountability to voters once the election is over.

Political scientists have long noted that Canada has among the strongest party discipline systems in any Westminster-style government.

Reference:

  • Jonathan Malloy, “High Discipline, Low Cohesion?”, The Journal of Legislative Studies, 2003.

  • Donald Savoie, Governing from the Centre, University of Toronto Press, 1999.

Attempts at Reform

There have been minimal and largely symbolic attempts to curb the whip’s power. The most notable is the Reform Act (2014), introduced by MP Michael Chong, which gave caucus some limited power to review party leadership and expel or reinstate members.

However, the whip remains intact. Even “free votes” are rare and often still influenced behind the scenes. In reality, nothing in the Reform Act removed the whip system or restored individual MP autonomy.

Reference:

  • Parliament of Canada. Bill C-586, Reform Act, 2014.

Tool of Authoritarian Control

The whip is not a neutral mechanism—it is a tool of authoritarian control within a system that presents itself as democratic. It ensures that legislation is passed without real scrutiny, that dissent is punished, and that elections become exercises in electing figureheads who will do as they’re told.

It has allowed successive governments—regardless of party—to:

  • Force through unpopular laws.

  • Silence internal criticism.

  • Marginalize the electorate from meaningful decision-making.

This centralization has crippled Canada's democratic institutions, reducing Parliament to a rubber stamp for the executive branch.

Conclusion: Democracy in Name Only

The party whip system is a primary mechanism of democratic erosion in Canada. Though Canada holds elections, the system ensures that once elected, MPs serve their party leadership, not the public. The whip enforces this betrayal of public trust and transforms Parliament into a tightly controlled apparatus of executive power.

Without abolishing the party whip and restoring the independence of Members of Parliament, Canada cannot claim to be a functioning democracy.