As it stands, the Governor General is chosen by the Prime Minister, to be appointed by the Queen, where as before the Governor General was chosen by a council of Canadian citizens. The Governor General cannot remain impartial in a system where they are chosen by a prime minister: “The Governor General is appointed by The Queen upon the recommendation of the Prime Minister” (Monarch And Commonwealth, n.d, para 6). The Governor General's duty is to ensure that Canada always has a prime minister and acts as a fail safe in the case that the prime minister loses the support of parliament. The continued procedure of appointment in this way may corrupt the role. The would-be-Governor General may act in way to enforce a prime minister's wishes rather …show more content…
than for the good of the people. The possible corruption of this role plus the incredible theoretic power the Governor General holds could be devastating to the Canadian people. The Governor General is the English Monarch's Visroy of Canada, meaning that they hold all the powers of a monarch in the monarch's stead: in theory.
Despite this, in Canada the true purpose the Governor General serves is to make sure Canada always has a prime minister. While the Governor General does not typically interfere with Canadian parliament, it is well within their power. Canada does not need a non-intrusive monarch figure, it does however need a Governor General but only for the purpose it serves not the purpose it could theoretically serve. For this reason the Governor General's power should be limited to that which allows them to provide Canada with a prime minister:
In representing the Sovereign in Canada, the Governor General and Lieutenant Governors have duties that cover a broad range of responsibility; among them are: the summoning and dissolution of Parliament / Legislature, the swearing in of the Ministry, the reading of the Speech from the Throne, the granting of Royal Assent and the use of reserve powers (Monarch And Commonwealth, n.d, para 2).
To avoid the corruption of this role, the Governor General powers should be limited to that which aids the fulfillment of their duty to ensure that Canada has a Prime Minister. Even though their power is theoretical and rarely exercised, the Governor General holds to much power for an unelected member of parliament:
Laws do not get
…show more content…
past Parliament does not sit Elections cannot be called We cannot even go to war unless she says so (Mercer, 2009) The right to veto or refuse the passing of a law should not belong to an unelected member of parliament. Canada, however, needs the Governor General for a vital purpose that should not be overlooked or undermined. The King-Byng affair, also known as the King-Byng Thing or the King-Byng Wing Ding, in Canada changed the political landscape and the way people think about the Governor General: The king- byng affair of 1926 was a complicated constitutional maneuver by Prime Minister Mackenzie king which involved the Governor General , Julian Byng. Byng had been the British General in charge of the Canadians at Vimy Ridge during the first world war. During the twenties he was sent over by Britain to be the Governor General of Canada.When scandal and a vote of non-confidence threatened King's minority government early in its term, King wanted to dissolve the government and call another election, but the Governor General, operating within his constitutional rights, denied King's request. King resigned over the issue, and Byng called on the opposition leader, Arthur Meighan, to form a government. This government lasted only three days, however, before it lost a vote in the House of Commons and an election had to be called after all (King-Byng, n.d, para 2-3). The Conservative party lead by Arthur Mieghen had won the 1925 election with a minority government, the seats were as follows: Conservative - 116 (47%) Liberal - 99 (40%) Progressive - (9%) Labour - 2 (1%) United Farmers of Alberta - 2 (1%) Other - 4 (2%) (cpac, n.d) King, however, refused to resign as Prime Minister and instead gained the support of the progressive party, he now had the support of the majority.
This allowed him to continue to act as Prime Minister. After a series of scandals, King lost the progressive party’s support. Because the Prime Minister was worried the would lose his position in a vote of non-confidence he asked Julian Byng to call an election so that he would have a chance at remaining the Prime Minister . The Governor General refused, instead giving the position of Prime Minister to Arthur Meighen, the Conservative leader that had won the election. King says that the actions of Julian Byng were undemocratic and uses the situation to gain the support of the voters in the 1926 election: “King took advantage of the situation to argue that he, the elected Prime Minister of Canada, had been overruled by the representative of the Crown. Britain was interfering in the affairs of a country”(King-Byng, n.d, para 4). If a situation like this were to happen again, it would end differently. If Canada had another prime minister that desperately grasped at power despite the fact that he didn't actually have a seat in parliament or the support of parliament but this time had the full support of the Governor General, they could be in power for a very long
time. The Governor General is necessary for Canada. As it stands, the Governor General is chosen by the Prime Minister, this cannot continue to be the case. The Governor General cannot remain impartial in a system where they are chosen by a prime minister, as the role would easily become corrupted. The chance of corruption coupled with the large amount of power the Governor General holds is a dangerous mix. For the reasons stated the powers of the Governor General need to be limited, and the Governor General must be selected by a council of Canadian citizens so as to ensure the Governor General acts for the people and not the Prime Minister.
...ment dissolved after having the head of state pass a vote of non-confidence in Meighen. This time, Byng accepted to dissolve the Parliament and elections were called. Because the Conservatives campaigned the fact that the Liberals were corrupt and the Liberals campaigned on Canadian rights and how the British should not be able to interfere with how Canada wanted to rule itself, King’s Liberals won the next election and went back into power. Though these events are all facts of what happened, King had several options to choose from before asking to dissolve Government.
Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson was a prominent figure in Canada in the 1960s. Pearson was Canada's most significant post WWII prime minister because of his government's many innovations that still benefit Canadians today. He fostered Canadian nationalism, which continues to the present day, promoted equality throughout Canada – equality that now thrives as part of Canada's identity – and he introduced many social services that are still implemented today.
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.
Pierre Trudeau is the greatest Canadian of the twentieth century due to the fact that he declared Canada’s independence from Great Britain, he abolished the death penalty, and he created the Official Languages Act, making our nation entirely bilingual.
Dyck defines responsible government as a “form of government in which the political executive must retain the confidence of the elected legislature and resign or call an election if and when it is defeated on a vote of non-confidence”(432). Essentially this means that the executive branch of government, which is the Prime Minister and his office/staff, along with the
It is cold hard fact that Canadian government is not entirely democratic. The question remains of how to deal with this. Canadian government, as effective as it currently is, has major factors in their system that have a negative effect on Canadians. Our current voting system favors the higher-populated provinces and creates a tyranny of the majority. Our Senate is distinctly undemocratic as it is an assigned position. Our head of State, the Prime Minister, holds too much power. Unless we resolve these issues, our government will remain far from a perfect governing system.
Trying to apply new reforms in the Canadian constitution has been no easy task. The mixture of the parliamentary/monarchy powers denies the citizens’ direct participation in the government’s decision-making process and does not allow the existence of a complete free democratic system. A true democracy simply cannot fully exist with a restricted monarch selecting type of government and any reforms must be applied to make Canadian constitutions’ laws be based on democratic principles.
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.
...ating through the power of another government Canada would have undermined the legitimacy of its governance, which would have a poor starting point. Indeed, a unilateral decision would result in overwhelming disrepute that would come from using them as a “simple rubber stamp” . Indeed, Russell argues that the inherent risk of the Court's decision was that if an agreement was not reached, "the federal government might have exercised its legal option of proceeding unilaterally" which would have been the worst "way for Canada to finally take charge of her own constitutional affairs" .
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.
Minister. The PM is selected by the sovereign. He (or she) chooses a man who
The fundamental power of the prime minister is the “power of patronage”, meaning the capability to appoint and sack, encourage and relegate all ministers in the government. This reinforces the power of the prime minister in two approaches: the prime minister can ensure the appointment and promotion of loyal supporters and “especially of politicians who share his or her political or ideological preference”. This suggests that the rivals, critics or political opponents can be circumscribed from the government and put into lower positions. Also as the prime minister regulators their governmental careers, it ensures that the ministers and back benches cooperate together in order to remain loyal and supportive. As they serve under the prime ministers will, this gives the prime ministe...
In depth of prime minister-Every prime minister can serve for two terms. Each term being 4 years long. The prime minister’s main duty is to keep the legislature in check, and make executive decisions. He shall be the head of negotiations with other countries. He is in command of all military forces, though the legislature will be in control of the use of force. The Prime Minister must represent the whole country with great valor, and equality.
Responsible government is a very reliable thriving supposed obtainable government system; it is a very thought-provoking government organization. Many of the public may be confused on what responsible government is, many people may not have even ever heard of responsible government. But, to assure you, once this passage is concluded, I’m sure countless additional people will be obtained with this material of facts and opinions of what responsible government is. Responsible government has many rules and elements involved with it. Most of these elements in addition with fundamentals will be deliberated through this enlightening stimulating passage. Responsible government is very independent in numerous parts of its organization. It is the Canadian government system, and yet countless individuals aren’t aware of how it originated to be in Canada. There are heaps of benefits to responsible government, and there is an interesting history to it as well.
be necessary to take a brief look at the history of the office of the