Why not hold a by-election?

Commenter Bob asks in the comments to one of my previous posts why Emerson should not stand by re-election in a snap by-election.

I answered in the comments, but I'm posting my answer in a new post as well:

Our system of government is tricky. The fusion of the Legislative and Executive branches makes it tricky.

Traditionally, Prime Ministers have only selected cabinet members from among their own party's ranks. Considering that almost all real power in Ottawa lies within the cabinet and considering that the management or our national government is carried out exclusively by cabinet ministers and their staffs, it is unfortunate that those called upon to be Prime Minister only have a few dozen realistic choices for cabinet.

Personally, I favour the American-style seperation of the executive and legislature.

Considering we don't have that, I think poaching opposition talent is completely legitimate.

It's true that Emerson would probably lose in a by-election, but that's besides the point. By-elections should not be automatically held everytime there's been some form of deception, intentional or not (in this case it wasn't even intentional).

When promises are broken by governments, general elections are not automatically called. Similarly, in this situation, the breaking of Emerson's implicit promise to his constituents (the promise of him being a Liberal member in the house) does not warrant a by-election. Accountability can and will always occur at the time of the next general election.

This is also why I oppose recall elections.