Virtually every single Member of Parliament
in Canada arrives under the banner of a political
party; rarely are “independent” MPs elected. The
Parliamentarians we interviewed came to Ottawa
from a wide variety of backgrounds and brought
a diverse set of experiences and perspectives,
usually shaped by a long history of active involvement
in their communities.
Once they decided to run, however, their identity
became closely tied to the brand and leader
of their chosen political party. While clearly
there are differences between selling coffee and
representing constituents, the daily life of an MP
involves many of the same struggles that confront
the local owner of a national franchise.
Franchisees are successful, in part, because
they know their community and serve it well.
In return, they’re granted a monopoly over that
particular geography and have latitude to make
significant daily decisions.
But their success is also due to the fact that
they operate under a wider brand with standards
and rules to which they must adhere, and with
obligations they must carry out. If the wider
brand is not well-regarded, the local franchisee
is unlikely to stay in business for long. And he or
she knows this.
Such is the life of an MP. As sole proprietor
in his or her riding, an MP is largely free to hire
staff, determine an area of focus, establish their
travel and meeting schedules, and advance causes
or support constituents as they see fit.
But once the MPs left their riding to work in
the House of Commons, they were subsumed
under the “national brand” of the party. The MPs
quickly began to rub up against the demands of
modern party politics that dominated their lives
in Ottawa: the need to work with party members
to advance policy, vote with party priorities and
support the party leader in sometimes controversial
situations.