Introduction
A democratic government has long been favoured as the most fair and representative government for a country to have. This essay will explore the advantages and disadvantages of both minority and majority government (for example efficiency, compromise, and power) and argue that in fact neither offers a fair representation of Canadian’s due to lack of both transparency and accountability.
Parliamentary Government
In Canada there are three branches of government: the executive branch which enforces Canadian laws and carries out government business; the legislative branch which debates and passes laws; and the judicial branch which interprets the laws and dictates how punishment should be carried out. In parliamentary government the executive branch is drawn from the legislative branch and is responsible to it. The responsibility lies in the fact that the government must have the confidence (or majority support) of the House of Commons in order to remain in power and this confidence is assured through party discipline; in other words, the party expects their Members of Parliament (MP’s) to vote the way the party votes.
Minority Government
The composition of the ministry and cabinet also depends on how many seats the government controls in the House of Commons. A minority government is created when one single party has less than half the seats in the House of Commons yet more than the other parties when they stand alone. One of the main advantages in having a minority government is that the government must work with the other parties to come to a consensus regarding bills and policies; in doing this, there is broader representation of Canadian interests. While this is a benefit for Canadian citizens, it is a drawbac...
... middle of paper ...
...r votes elect individuals who will represent their values and interests. While many will argue between whether a minority or majority government better represents Canadians, this essay has shown that regardless of the type of government, the Prime Minister is able to use his power to control his MP’s, media, and opposition members in order to fulfill a personal or hidden agenda. The sheer manipulation that is possible by a Prime Minister completely undermines the transparency and accountability of true democracy.
References
Jackson, D., & Jackson, R.J. (2002). Canadian government in transition (3rd ed.). Toronto: Pearson Education Canada Inc.
Kendall, D., Linden, R., & Murray, J. L. (2008). Sociology in our times: The essentials (4th Cdn ed.). Toronto: Nelson Education Inc.
Martin, L. (2010). Harperland: The politics of control. Toronto, ON: Penguin Group.
Malcolmson, P., & Myers, R. (2009). The Canadian Regime: An Introduction to Parliamentary Government in Canada (4th ed.). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is attempting to further decentralize Canadian government with, what he calls, open federalism. This essay will begin with a discourse on the evolution of Canadian federalism, then exclusively compare Harper’s approach to the proceeding Liberal governments approach, and ultimately explain why Stephen Harper’s “open federalism” methodology is the most controversial form of Canadian federalism yet.
Firstly, the bicameral system started in the 17th century and has been set up in many countries since. This system is justified on its standard of checks and balances on the governing party. The members of the two houses are elected or appointed to their positions depending on what method the country decides on. Canada is one of the countries with a bicameral parliamentary democracy, which was modeled off of England’s House of Lords. (Supreme Court 2014, pg. 720) One of the important factors of the bicameral system is the upper house of Parliament called the Senate, which has a long history and distinctive structure within Canada.
One may be surprised to learn that the turnout rate of individuals voting in Canada's federal elections has never reached 80% (Elections Canada). In fact, it has been decreasing since the middle of the twentieth century, as shown by an increase in voter apathy. An electoral system is designed to provide those who live in democratic governments with the opportunity to vote – in an election – for the candidate whose platform coincides with their political beliefs. This can be achieved through a direct democracy, where citizens are directly involved in the decision-making process, or through an indirect democracy, where citizens elect a delegate to act on their behalf. In a direct democracy, all citizens would be present during governmental meetings and have the opportunity to give verbal input. As one may expect, this would be extremely difficult to coordinate with Canada's population of 34.88 billion (Statistics Canada). Canada uses an indirect democracy, which allows for two basic forms of electoral systems in which representatives are elected. In the simple plurality electoral system, the candidate who receives the greatest number of votes is elected, regardless of a majority or not. It is commonly known as the “first-past-the-post” system, which alludes to a horse race; the winner passes the post with the highest number of votes, and only need to garner more votes than their opponents. The successful candidate wins all the seats in their riding or constituency while the candidates who places second or third will receive no seats, regardless of how many votes they lose by. Proportional representation is the second form of electoral system used in Canada; the percentage of the votes received by a party is proportionate to the numb...
However, the proposed systems must be thoroughly examined for their compatibility with Canada’s needs and their ability to resolve the issues outlined in this paper. From distortion in representation to Western alienation and to making the voices of minorities heard, the new system must also ensure that Parliament fulfills its role in representing, legislating, and holding the government. More importantly, after the current government abandoned its promise on electoral reform, it is important for researchers and future governments to build on the knowledge acquired by the Special Committee on Electoral Reform as well as previous experiences of the provinces with electoral
It was said that Canada’s MPs’ power is been minimalize completely by the Prime Minister (Kilgour, 2012 p.1). The reason for less restriction of party discipline is to give them the permission to vote according to the public and personal belief rather than under the influence of the party whip, which will result in freedom of vote for general public. The reason that members of parliament are there are that: they are the representatives of the sections; they are the voice of the people. In Canada we do not elect our MPs to be a puppet solely to be govern under the prime minister. Our country is a democratic country where there’s freedom of speech and freedom to vote. In reducing the hold on party discipline allows the governmental personnel to openly state their opinions without sparking an unnecessary controversy. Which will benefit both opposition and government in power to discuss the controversial debates and will speed up the process of decision making.
In 2012, the Canadian Senate became embroiled in a scandal that is still ongoing, and still having an effect on Canadian political life today. At times in the 20th century, there have been calls for the reform, or even the abolition of the Senate completely. The current scandal has resulted a renewal of the frequent calls for reform that have frequently accompanied the many questionable actions of Senators. The structure of the Senate, and its outdated rules of appointment and procedure are also frequently the target of reformers in Canada. It is the contention of this paper that the Canadian Senate be reformed to represent the democracy that is Canada in the 21st Century, as this body is outdated and representative of entrenched party interests, as well as of a system that dates back to the days of aristocratic and upper-class privilege.
This essay has argued that there are many limitations that the Prime Minister is subjected too. The three most important are federalism in Canadian society, the role of the Governor General, and the charter of rights and freedoms. I used two different views of federalism and illustrated how both of them put boundaries on the Prime Minister’s power. Next I explain the powers of the governor general, and explained the ability to dissolve parliament in greater detail. Last I analyzed how the charter of rights of freedoms has limited the Prime Minister’s power with respect to policy-making, interests groups and the courts. The Prime Minister does not have absolute power in Canadian society, there are many infringements on the power that they have to respect.
Milner, Henry. First Past the Post? Progress Report on Electoral Reform Initiatives in Canadian Provinces. Ottawa: Institute for Research and Public Policy, 5(9), 2004.
Canada is a society built on the promise of democracy; democracy being defined as “government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.” In order to operate at full potential, the people of Canada must voice their opinions and participate fully in the political system. This is why it’s shocking to see that people are becoming less engaged in politics and the voter turnout has steadily been declining over the last 20 years. This lack of participation by Canadians is creating a government that is influenced by fewer people, which is detrimental to the democratic system Canada is built on.
Canada has a central government designed to deal with the country as a whole. Things like national defense, banking, currency, and commerce are controlled by the central government. All other matters are left to the provinces to deal with. Such as education, hospitals, and civil rights are responsibilities of the states. The Canadian Parliament consists of two houses. Their Senate is made up of 104 members who serve until the age of seventy-five.
Total control remains with the politicians up to five years at a time. And when voting day finally arrives, issues are drowned out by one big question: which leader/party should be the Government/Premier, or the Government/Prime Minister? Even when issues are ...
Murray, Jane Lothian, Linden, Rick and Kendall, Diane. (2011). SOCIOLOGY IN OUR TIMES, Fifth Canadian Edition by Nelson Education Limited, Published by Thomson Wadsworth, USA.
Another huge weakness of the president is that a president’s party often does not have a congressional majority. A prime minister’s party always has a majority in parliament. Does this really mean anything? Yes it does, it creates a divided government that creates huge conflict and disagreement. Aga...
[10] Kendall, Diana, et al. Sociology in Our Times. ITP Nelson and Co. Toronto, 1997. 126.