Crossing the Floor – Conflict, Politics, Power and Politicians Case Questions
Where are the power issues in this case? What is your assessment of the relative power of the key individuals and groups (Stephen Harper, David Emerson, the riding association, the voters)?
The newley elected prime minister Stephen Harper had legitimate power in that he was elected to the post of prime minister. His party had genuine power in that they won the election. Harper is entrusted in a very powerful position. In his role as the prime minister one would assume that he naturally has Referent power as he would have to be somewhat charasmatic to win the postion. Expert power would also lend to his referent power. Harper then went on to assert his legitimate power in electing David Emerson. It seems as though Emerson was in pursuit of personalized power in that he was striving for self gratification and trying to increase his own personal gain in having a seat in government.
The riding association does not seem to have much power in that they don’t seem to be able to control the outcome of the situation that has developed. At the very bottom of the power scale in my mind would be the voters. They have a great ammount of power in that they are the ones who choose the government collevtively, but after that they are seemingly not able to influence the decisions that take place. Even though they are very unhappy with what had occurred in the case, they are at a stale mate because they have no abiity to change what had transpired.
What is your assessment of the ethics of this entire episode Ethics are a huge part of any political campgain and can define a party or politician by demonstrating what they stand for. It is my belief that once in power, both Harper and Emerson displayed unethical behavior – Haper by allowing the move across the floor by Emerson to happen, and by Emerson backstabbing his supporters and completely jumping the fence from a liberal to...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document