Mayo-Tatchun MLA Eric Fairclough has served in the legislative assembly for more than a decade. He has also spent six years as the chief of the Little Salmon-Carmacks First Nation.

But in his 16 years as an elected representative in the Yukon, he said, the debate he witnessed on the floor of the assembly on Wednesday was one of the ugliest he has ever seen.

'It was just ugly,' Fairclough told the Star this morning. 'Everybody was touchy.'

The NDP's Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly Act passed through its second reading debate and into the committee of the whole for further discussion.

The piece of legislation indicates if an MLA elected under a party's banner in an election ceases to be member of its caucus, he or she is required to sit as an independent for the remainder of their term.

The debate resulted in hard questions, suggestions of bribery, and ridicule and sarcastic comments in the background of the house.

Speaker Ted Staffen had to interrupt the debate several times to remind the various MLAs of what they were and were not allowed to say. There were also several gaps in the debate as the speaking member stopped and waited for the off-mic comments to quiet down before continuing.

Upset body language, slapping of desks and sighs from the members were also apparent through the afternoon that saw more than four hours of discussion on the bill.

Instead of focusing on the merits of the legislation, however, the debate quickly degenerated into a defence game of who crossed the floor and joined another party, when and why.

'Simply put, this is a sour grapes bill,' said Kluane MLA Gary McRobb.

He and Fairclough were removed from the NDP's caucus in March after party leader Todd Hardy learned they were consulting with their constituents about leaving the NDP and presenting the possibility of joining another party.

It was also revealed they had been in discussions with Liberal Leader Arthur Mitchell about the possibility of joining his party.

McRobb said the legislation is simply 'wrong' for five reasons: it's undemocratic; Hardy, the mover of the bill, hasn't even been able to abide by it; it forces someone to sit as an independent, thus forcing that person to represent his or her constituents less effectively; it unfairly restricts the options of an MLA; and, it doesn't allow for consultations with constituents.

McRobb went into great detail regarding the events that led to his removal from the caucus. He listed off eight points, highlighting the events to his recollection.

The actions of himself and Fairclough were honourable, fair, open and honest, said McRobb.

'There is nothing to be ashamed of and nothing to make us want to wind back the hands of time and redo,' he said.

'If this Assembly wants to consider changing the rules to reflect the public interest, the members' time may be better spent examining the existing unrestricted powers of a leader to expel members, even when their actions are so honourable.'

Mitchell defended the two MLAs' actions and his own in welcoming the former NDP members to his caucus.

'The members for Kluane and Mayo-Tatchun did not cross the floor,' said Mitchell. 'They were in opposition to the Yukon Party government, and they remain in opposition to it.

'They moved from official Opposition status to independent status, and then each in turn made their own decisions about whether or not to join the Liberal caucus. And our caucus made its decision whether or not to welcome them.'

Mitchell also spent a considerable amount of time on the floor of the assembly stating his version of events surrounding the Liberals becoming the official Opposition earlier this week.

'Comments have been made about inducements, offers, bribes and recruitment, which I find quite offensive,' said Mitchell.

'Now, we all know that the real reason behind our debating this legislation today is because the leader of the third party (Hardy) wants to chastise his former colleagues. He wants to say some strong things to me, and he wants to chastise the Member for Kluane and Member for Mayo-Tatchun, because they asked their constituents to provide direction about their political future in advance of the general election.'

Porter Creek South MLA Pat Duncan said there had been quite enough of the 'he said, she said' debate on the floor of the house, but took the time to lay out her experience and political past.

Duncan previously worked for former Conservative MP Erik Nielsen and worked on the campaigns of Peter Jenkins, now the independent MLA for Klondike.

'I do not believe this amendment is an appropriate way to reflect our strong beliefs about the ethics and the conduct of members,' said Duncan, adding the behaviour of members can't be legislated.

'We all answer to our own constituents and our conscience and a greater authority a higher power, if that is what each of us so believes. We're individuals, and we're also members of parties,' she said.

Hardy argued, though, the legislation is about representing people.

'That's all it's about protecting the voters' rights, their trust and where they place their vote. It's about protecting your colleagues. It's about protecting people in here. It's about challenging leaders on how they act,' said Hardy.

If MLAs are no longer in support of their party, they have an obligation to return to their constituents in a byelection and see if the riding will support them again under a different party, said Hardy.

He added McRobb and Fairclough were flattering themselves by thinking the legislation is all about them.

It is a problem across Canada, said Hardy, and the Yukon has an opportunity to be a leader in instating the legislation.

Manitoba is considering similar legislation.

Mitchell told the Star this morning he believes the Yukon Party and the NDP had come to some agreement on how to approach the legislation.

'I felt in effect a stunt was being pulled by the government,' said Mitchell.

Only Premier Dennis Fentie spoke on the government side during the bill's second reading.

He argued the bill may call into question a need for a greater examination of the recruiting practices of the Liberal party.

'Was there recruitment or enticement, were there offers, or are there IOUs out there to create a scenario where members of this House have made a decision to defect or join another party?' Fentie asked.

There is a distinct difference between an individual member of the house making a moral choice and the recruitment process, Fentie told the Star this morning.

Fentie said he has personally experienced the Liberals trying to recruit him. As a backbencher, the premier crossed the floor, leaving the NDP and joining the Yukon Party in 2002.

He added the evolving stories on what transpired between the Liberals and NDP earlier this year are illustrating contradictions.

Both the assembly and the public needs to have a better understanding of what occurred around the recent movement in the legislative assembly if the merits of the legislation are to truly be discussed, said Fentie.

For the first time in his Yukon Party government, Fentie permitted his caucus to vote on the bill in a free vote of conscience.

Mitchell had stated on the floor of the house he was ideologically and philosophically opposed to the bill.

He told the Star this morning he told his caucus, however, he would be voting in favour of the bill to go to committee of the whole to hear the comments of the rest of Fentie's MLAs.

The entire Liberal caucus had expressed opposition to the legislation during the debate. They all voted in favour of the bill at the second reading.

Duncan sighed and paused before shaking her head and stating her agreement to pass the bill on.

McRobb threw his hands in the air and blurted, 'Agree.'

Mitchell said it was also a free vote in his caucus.

Only Riverdale South MLA Glenn Hart opposed the legislation at second reading.

He told the Star he felt it's too restrictive to MLAs' ability to represent their constituents by forcing them to sit as an independent, which can limit the number of questions they are able to ask and ability to fully participate in the debate.

The current legislation also provides too much power to a party leader, he said, enabling them to hold a possible ousting over an MLA's head.