When politicians change parties, voters lose their voice
Floor crossing is a breach of trust, a betrayal.
When you cast a ballot in British Columbia, you are not voting for convenience, ambition, or political maneuvering. You are voting for values. You are voting for your future.
You are lending your voice, your trust, and your consent to a candidate who stood before you and said, “this is what I believe, this is how I will govern, and this is the banner under which I will serve you.”
Your vote is your tool to speak. It’s your tool to influence governance and change. It’s one of the most valuable and sacred tools you are given in a democracy.
That is why floor crossing troubles me.
This is why I am deeply disturbed by the number of floor crossings in 2025 alone in BC and in Canada – and many, very shortly after an election. In my opinion, politicians are treating this far too lightly.
Crossing the floor is often defended as an act of conscience. We are told it reflects personal growth, new information, or a desire to “better serve constituents.” But that framing ignores a central truth: voters did not elect an individual in isolation. They elected a candidate as presented, on a platform, under a party name, and with a set of commitments that were clear at the time of the election.
A vote is not transferable property.
It is not a blank cheque.
It does not belong to the politician once the ballots are counted.
In British Columbia, where party affiliation often signals fundamental positions on taxation, healthcare delivery, resource development, parental rights, and public safety – party labels matter. They are shorthand for values. When a politician crosses the floor mid-mandate and retains their seat and status, the voter is effectively told: Your voice didn’t count.
That should be unacceptable in a healthy democracy.
Across Canada, we have seen floor crossings defended as routine political strategy. Federally and provincially, politicians have changed parties and kept their seats, sometimes even gaining cabinet positions or influence as a result.
In British Columbia, where public confidence in institutions is already strained, this matters deeply. To me, floor crossing is a breach of trust. It tells voters that what you voted for doesn’t matter. It is ultimately a betrayal.
That is why I am writing today. I am calling for more robust debate, comments and discussion from the electorate. Your thoughts matter to me and I want to see how you feel when your politicians change their stripes.
Do recall votes or automatic by-elections for floor crossings deserve serious consideration in British Columbia? Not as retribution, but as respect. Respect for the electorate. Respect for democratic consent. Respect for the idea that legitimacy flows upward from voters, not downward from political opportunity.
A recall or by-election says: you may have changed your position, but the voters deserve the final say. It restores agency to the people whose voices were lent, not surrendered.
This is about the sanctity of the vote.
A ballot represents a family’s priorities, a worker’s hopes, a parent’s concerns, and a community’s future. It should be treated with gravity and with reverence – a sense of civic divinity.
British Columbians are supposed to be able to trust their elected representatives to lead with the values they ran on. That trust is foundational.
The vote is the citizen’s voice. It is their values made visible. And no politician has the right to treat it as something that can be casually reinterpreted once power is secured.
Democracy demands better. Voters deserve better.
Politicians are public servants and you, the people, should get to decide whether that change deserves a renewed mandate.
You can email me at Kristina.loewen.mla@leg.bc.ca
Source: Kelowna Now
