More handpicked essays just for you.
History of party discipline in Canadian politics
History of party discipline in Canadian politics
Essay on political parties in canada
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Across the political landscape, there are countless different ways that political systems operate. These systems do not have all their conventions enshrined by law, and are often the result of institutional frameworks. One of these institutional frameworks that influence Canada’s political system is the idea of party discipline within the House of Commons. The strict nature that parties operate in has lead to many aspects of Canada’s political system being affected. This essay will take an in depth look into the workings of party discipline as it exists in Canada. It will be argued that party discipline has formed and created many parts of the Canadian political system as it currently exists. This will be shown by examining the aspects of the system that have been influenced. These include the regional conflicts that go on throughout the country, the rise in popularity of third parties and the increased attention that the Prime Minister gets during elections. Following this, it will be examined the benefits and drawbacks of strict party discipline. With this setup, it will be shown the importance of party discipline and the effects it causes. In an attempt to narrow the focus, politics at the national level will be focused on and any reference to legislatures or other institutions should be viewed nationally unless otherwise noted. Before an in depth look at how party discipline influences Canada can happen though, its history and definition must be examined.
Whether a country has a parliamentary or presidential system, whether it is democratic or autocratic, political parties exist and flourish all over the world. One of the major ways that parties in various countries differ is by the way that the leadership enforces the rest...
... middle of paper ...
...he way of their party. The second impact was the rise of smaller, regional parties, particularly in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. The third influence discussed was having many Canadians vote based on party, and not based on the local MP. After looking at the influences that strict party discipline has had, the discussion over whether to relax party discipline was examined. Each side of the discussion was explained, and their side of the argument displayed. As has been shown by this essay, party discipline is a very important part of the development of Canadian politics. It has controversially influenced many aspects of the Canadian political system, as the argument over its strictness demonstrates. Overall, for better or worse Canada’s political parties system of strict discipline will continue to influence the country’s direction for the foreseeable future.
Canada is a parliamentary system with single member districts. That means Canada works on a voting system called first past the post, representatives can get elected even on small amounts of public support as long they receive more votes than other candidates. Ultimately, this system of government has its pros and cons. Harper called an earlier election because he presumed this electoral system would favour his party to win. Plurality systems tend to underrepresent small parties in parliament. Typically, why voters lean towards voting for candidates that they know would win rather than the candidate they want to win (Blais, 2002). This is because first past the post allocates seats in geographical areas. Smaller parties have the short end of the stick because it works in favour of parties with centralized support, which show why it might have been more likely Conservatives would have won. In addition, smaller constituencies boundaries have important effects on how an election would result encouraging gerrymandering. Eric McGhee describes gerrymandering as “a process of packing one’s opponents into as few districts as possible and seeking to win the remaining districts by the barest of margins” (McGhee, 2014). However, strategic voting made it less likely Harper would become elected. Since a bare amount of plurality votes is required to win seats, other parties votes are deemed ‘wasted’ votes thus voters manipulate votes to other
Canada’s parliamentary system is designed to preclude the formation of absolute power. Critics and followers of Canadian politics argue that the Prime Minister of Canada stands alone from the rest of the government. The powers vested in the prime minister, along with the persistent media attention given to the position, reinforce the Prime Minister of Canada’s superior role both in the House of Commons and in the public. The result has led to concerns regarding the power of the prime minister. Hugh Mellon argues that the prime minister of Canada is indeed too powerful. Mellon refers to the prime minister’s control over Canada a prime-ministerial government, where the prime minister encounters few constraints on the usage of his powers. Contrary to Mellon’s view, Paul Barker disagrees with the idea of a prime-ministerial government in Canada. Both perspectives bring up solid points, but the idea of a prime-ministerial government leading to too much power in the hands of the prime minister is an exaggeration. Canada is a country that is too large and complex to be dominated by a single individual. The reality is, the Prime Minister of Canada has limitations from several venues. The Canadian Prime Minister is restricted internally by his other ministers, externally by the other levels of government, the media and globalization.
For a democratic country to thrive, they must have a proper electoral system in producing the party to oversee our government. Since its inception in 1867, Canada has been using the first past the post system during elections to decide their leading party. Although we have been using this system for an extended duration of time, the FPTP system is flawed and should be changed. The goal of this paper is to prove the effectiveness of shifting to more of a proportional system, while also exposing the ineptness of Canada’s current system. With other methods advancing and little change of the first past the post system, this system is becoming predated. A variation of the proportional electoral system is key because it empowers voters, increases voter turnout, and creates a more diverse environment. Canada should adopt a more proportionate electoral system at the federal level if we wish to expand democracy.
Stevenson, Garth. "Canadian Federalism: The Myth of the Status Quo." Reinventing Canada: Politics of the 21st Century. Ed. M. Janine Brodie and Linda Trimble. Toronto: Prentice Hall, 2003. 204-14. Print.
The electoral system in Canada has been utilized for over a century, and although it has various strengths which have helped preserve the current system, it also has glaringly obvious weaknesses. In recent years, citizens and experts alike have questioned whether Canada’s current electoral system, known as First Past the Post (FPTP) or plurality, is the most effective system. Although FPTP is a relatively simple and easy to understand electoral system, it has been criticized for not representing the popular vote and favouring regions which are supportive of a particular party. FPTP does have many strengths such as simplicity and easy formation of majority governments, however, its biggest drawback is that it does not proportionally represent
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
In our Canadian parliamentary system there are many ideologies and practices which aid in the successful running of our country. One of the more important ideologies and practices in our political system is the notion of strict party discipline. Party discipline refers to the notion of members of a political party “voting together, according to the goals and doctrines of the party, on issues that are pertinent to the government” or opposition in the House of Commons. In this paper, I will be discussing the practice of party discipline in the Canadian parliamentary system as well as the ways in which a change in the practice of strict party discipline to weaker party discipline would result in more positive effects on the practice of Canadian politics rather than more negative ones.
In Canada, party discipline is defined as the ability of getting support from its own political party for their leaders by using party policy (2016, Wikipedia). In a social order like ours, it is usually referred as the legislative control of the leaders have over its members. Under the system of responsible government, party discipline is the reason that gives voters ability to vote effectively (1993, Reid). Party discipline is the middle ground in between the opposition and main government; it requires consent in both sides. One is the view point constituency of each party and the other is the responsibility that the members of parliament has in voicing their opinions and votes (2006, Parliament of Canada).
The issue of electoral reform has become more important than ever in Canada in recent years as the general public has come to realize that our current first-past-the-post, winner-take-all system, formally known as single-member plurality (SMP) has produced majority governments of questionable legitimacy. Of the major democracies in the world, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom are the only countries that still have SMP systems in place. Interestingly enough, there has been enormous political tension and division in the last few years in these countries, culminating with the election results in Canada and the USA this year that polarized both countries. In the last year we have seen unprecedented progress towards electoral reform, with PEI establishing an electoral reform commissioner and New Brunswick appointing a nine-member Commission on Legislative Democracy in December 2003 to the groundbreaking decision by the British Columbia Citizen’s Assembly on October 24, 2004 that the province will have a referendum on May 17, 2005 to decide whether or not they will switch to a system of proportional representation. This kind of reform is only expected to continue, as Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty decided to take BC’s lead and form an independent Citizen’s Assembly with the power to determine whether or not Ontario will have a referendum regarding a change to a more proportional system. There is still much work to do however, and we will examine the inherent problems with Canada’s first-past-the-post system and why we should move into the 21st century and switch to a form of proportional representation.
Tanguay, Brian . "Electoral Reform in Canada: Addressing the Democratic Deficit | Manitoba Law Journal." Robson Hall Faculty of Law. http://robsonhall.ca/mlj/content/electoral-reform-canada-addressing-democratic-deficit (accessed October 21, 2013).
Proportional representation is almost always acknowledged as the fairest electoral system. With this in mind, many still reject a mixed member proportional system. Critics argue that the current method has produced a stable and effective government, while MMP would create an ineffective government. Wiseman feels that since Canada has been consistently stable, our electoral system does not need to be changed. Hiemstra and Jansen disagree with the plurality system that is currently in place for it does not produce fair representation and devalues citizen’s votes. Canadians must make a choice between the value of effectiveness and the values of justice and equity. Although a switch is not anticipated in the near future, Canadian citizens can hope that it is at least in the minds of many voters and on the discussion list of the government.
This paper will prove how regionalism is a prominent feature of Canadian life, and affects the legislative institutions, especially the Senate, electoral system, and party system as well as the agendas of the political parties the most. This paper will examine the influence of regionalism on Canada’s legislative institutions and agendas of political part...
May, E. (2009). Losing Confidence: Power, politics, and the crisis in Canadian democracy. Toronto, ON: McClelland & Stewart.
In Canada’s democratic government, voting is a powerful way for citizens to communicate their values. The leader who is chosen reflects the power of the Canadians’ values. Thus, to the government, every vote matters, assuring Canadians that their opinions matter. Today, Canada recognizes voting as a fundamental right for all of their citizens. The Canadian Charter of Rights effectively protects this right of all Canadians, even minorities, through section 3. “Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or a large legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein”. This ensures equality for vote to all Canadians. Equality is to allow all Canadians equal opportunity, even if they are of different race, religion, gender and etcetera. However, in the past, this fundamental right has not always been accessible to all. In fact, voting was considered a privilege where citizens had to qualify to have the ability to vote. The rules were so strict that only eleven percent of the past population of Canada could have voted, compared to today’s seventy-eight percent. Many of these rules of who could vote and who could not were very unjust. This was especially seen in minority groups who did not have the franchise, the right to vote.. In this essay, it will be seen that the inequalities to vote made racial exclusions, religious exclusions and gender exclusions more pronounced. It will be seen that the government treated certain races with intentional discrimination creating a lack of an opportunity to vote. As well, the government showed prejudice to certain religious groups, denying these groups their ability to vote. And, finally, it will be seen that views against women aided ...
Since federalism was introduced as an aspect of Canadian political identity, the country has undergone multiple changes as to how federalism works; in other words, over the decades the federal and provincial governments have not always acted in the same way as they do now. Canada, for example, once experienced quasi-federalism, where the provinces are made subordinate to Ottawa. Currently we are in an era of what has been coined “collaborative federalism”. Essentially, as the title would suggest, it implies that the federal and provincial levels of government work together more closely to enact and make policy changes. Unfortunately, this era of collaborative federalism may be ending sooner rather than later – in the past couple decades, the federal and provincial governments have been known to squabble over any and all policy changes in sectors such as health, the environment and fiscal issues. Generally, one would assume that in a regime employing collaborative federalism there would be a certain amount of collaboration. Lately, it seems as though the only time policy changes can take place the federal government is needed to work unilaterally. One area in which collaborative federalism has been nonexistent and unilateral federalism has prevailed and positively affected policy changes is in the Post-Secondary Education (PSE) sector.