On false positives

The CP reports that Garth Turner apparently won't face a nomination battle after all. But in discussing the story the writer, Michael Hammond, seems far too ready to pretend that the Cons alone have a system which allows MPs to be held accountable:

Unlike other political parties, the Conservative party does not guarantee that incumbent MPs will receive the party's nomination.

Now, the first question which comes readily to mind is what "other political parties" are included. Surely somebody writing on Canadian politics should have at least some awareness that one NDP MP actually lost a riding challenge last year, and another recent article which actually appears to have looked into the issue suggests that the Bloc also provides for open nominations.

By my count, that leaves exactly one of the federal parties with any seats to defend which is currently immunizing its members from challenge. And however divided the Libs may be in the midst of their leadership race, describing them alone as "other political parties" is a bit of a stretch.

But Hammond's statement looks all the worse when considering the Cons' record, as that party itself doesn't value such challenges enough to have permitted them before this year. Which stands in stark contrast to the other two non-Lib parties which hold federal seats.

Unfortunately, Hammond does not appear to have looked into either the current reality or the Cons' history. Instead, he outright says that a pluralized set of federal parties allow for less accountability than the Cons - and implies in the process that the Cons are unique in their willingness to force MPs to defend their record, rather than joined to the Libs as the parties who allow internal democracy only when it seems convenient.

Of course, the quoted line forms a relatively small part of an article devoted mostly to other issues. But Hammond's careless assumption allows the Cons to benefit from an unwarranted appearance of principle. And the more undeserved positive press the Cons get now, the more difficult it will be to point out the Cons' actual governing record (which has of course tended toward central control rather than actual grassroots involvement) during the next campaign.