In a functioning parliamentary democracy, disagreement is inevitable. Conscience matters. Debate matters. But loyalty matters too. Without it, politics collapses into opportunism, and public trust erodes.

Recent decisions, first by Nova Scotia MP Chris d’Entremont, and then on Thursday, by Toronto MP Michael Ma, to cross the floor from the Conservatives to the Liberal party raise legitimate concerns about political responsibility. While each individual may offer personal explanations, the broader implications are unavoidable. Floor crossing, absent a fundamental ideological rupture, is not an act of courage. It is an abdication of duty.

Canadians do not elect free agents. Floor crossing today is rarely about conscience. More often, it reflects impatience, career calculation, or discomfort with the discipline of opposition. When MPs abandon the party that elected them without returning to voters for consent, they place personal interest above democratic legitimacy. That is not statesmanship. It is opportunism dressed up as principle. The democratic contract with voters is broken. Tens of thousands of citizens are effectively told their choice no longer matters.

This is why loyalty is not a sentimental virtue in politics. It is an institutional necessity. Political parties are not social clubs. They are governing instruments. Loyalty allows voters to assign responsibility, governments to act coherently, and opposition parties to present credible alternatives. Without it, politics becomes personal brand management rather than public service.

The claim that floor crossing is a matter of conscience rarely withstands scrutiny in modern Canadian politics. True matters of conscience involve irreconcilable moral disagreement, not shifts in polling, proximity to power, or discomfort with opposition. When political alignment changes without seeking voter consent, the issue is not integrity. It is convenience.

The context matters. Pierre Poilievre’s leadership has been neither accidental nor superficial. The Conservative Party has achieved a level of electoral and intellectual momentum that should not be casually dismissed. In the last federal election, Conservatives earned over 41 per cent of the popular vote, one of the strongest performances in modern party history. That achievement carries moral authority. Loyalty to such leadership is not about personality. It is about respecting the collective judgment of millions of voters. Importantly, the party rebuilt a broad national coalition and forced long-neglected issues back to the centre of public debate.

Housing affordability, inflation, fiscal discipline, public safety, and institutional accountability now dominate political discussion because the Conservative Party insisted they should. These are not abstract talking points. They are the daily realities facing working Canadians. Leadership is not measured solely by winning an election. It is measured by clarity, discipline, and the ability to articulate a serious alternative. By that standard, Poilievre has delivered.

To abandon that project midstream is not a neutral act. It weakens collective effort and rewards cynicism. It signals that commitment is conditional and that political promises are temporary.

There is also a clear democratic remedy available to any MP who believes they can no longer support the party under which they were elected. Resign and seek a new mandate through a by-election. That approach respects voters and preserves legitimacy. Floor crossing without voter approval does neither.

Canada already suffers from deep political disengagement. Trust in institutions is fragile. Each act that reinforces the perception that politics is transactional makes that problem worse. Loyalty, by contrast, signals seriousness. It tells Canadians that commitments matter and that public office carries obligations beyond personal advancement.

The Conservative Party does not require blind obedience. It does require fidelity to voters, respect for institutions, and an understanding that internal debate belongs inside caucus, leadership races, and party conventions, not through opportunistic defection. At a moment when Canada faces real economic and institutional strain, loyalty is not a weakness.

It is a democratic responsibility.