What is the point of this story?

John Ibbitson, You're on Notice

Sigh.

But the demands of a political party are absolute. Certainly, caucuses can accommodate large egos. (When was the last time you stood at the front of a room grinning and waving your arms while hundreds of people cheered and chanted your name?) But those egos must ultimately submit to party discipline.

Especially when in government, whether you are a junior backbencher or a senior cabinet minister, you are entitled to make your views known to the leadership. But once the caucus, the cabinet or the prime minister has decided, then you must support that decision, or leave.

Mr. Turner has a much more American conception of the role of MP. In his view, parliamentarians associate with one party or another but should pass independent judgment on each issue, voting according to their conscience or the will of their constituents.

While there is merit in that approach, it is not our Westminster approach. There's a reason why we say that parliamentary votes are whipped.

Yes? And that reason is...?

I searched the rest of the article in vain for the answer to that question. It's almost as though Roman never left.

Sigh.