Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Prime minister's powers and limitations
Importance of good governance
Prime minister's powers and limitations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Prime minister's powers and limitations
There are many countervailing such as the House of Commons, the Senate, the public service, opposition parties are many of the powers and processes that help to limit the powers of the Prime Minister during his mandate and allows for check and balances throughout the government.
The Prime Ministers and his government, must work under the principle of good governance. There are three core principles that allow for good governance, first, the Members of Parliament are elected by the Canadian public. If the public is dissatisfied with their Members of Parliament they “will remove them from office at the next election.” Second, the members of the cabinet who are selected by the Prime Minister. They introduce legislation in Parliament such as taxes,
…show more content…
One of the main responsibilities of the Senate is review bills presented in the House of Commons and to present recommendations to bills and send them back to House of Commons. While reviewing bills, the senate has different committees that are represented by the different political parties in Canada and are from various backgrounds. These Senate reviews and committees help to be “obstructionist and slow down the work of the democratically elected house.” In essence, the Senate was constructed to be “a check on the lower house” and to help the government “reflect carefully on the policies and legislation it is pursuing.” The Senate has also been able to provide detailed investigations through Senate committees that have “produced thoughtful and detailed reports” on many subjects. Like previously mentioned, the Senate is comprised of a larger diversity of Canadians who in turn are able to represent different groups in Canada such as women and first nations peoples “than elected …show more content…
According to David C. Docherty MP’s have main responsibilities that are essential to limiting the Prime Minister’s power. First is to hold cabinet minister accountable, this is done by the opposition parties arranging “their causes in a manner that tries to facilitate this role” They arrange this by having a least one opposition critic for each Cabinet Minister and each critic is expected to know extensively the department they are critiquing. Second, Members of Parliament “help shape public policies” and are there to represent their constituency in Ottawa. Members of Parliament are able to influence policy that reflects the public in their respective riding through “committee work, private member’s business, questions in the House, or with cabinet ministers’ and government officials.” Third, they are expected to research proposed government legislation thoroughly. Committees are a great way for backbenchers to implement changes in legislation and to “strengthen and modify government initiatives” and they often can be seen as “ unsung heroes of the House of Commons.” Fourth, during committees, Members of Parliament are able to hear from the public on proposed legislation, mostly during the second reading. This is a great tool for MP’s to illustrate “a critical link between the public and the all-too-faceless machinery of
The types of things that this proposal calls for are great because it would strengthen the portion of Parliament that has had many problems since it was created in the 1867 Confederation, however when all three ideas are put together would be very difficult to implement. Senate reform itself presents a very daunting task that has been proposed many times over the years, with little actual change because both implementation and operation of new changes would be very difficult for the federal government to pass. Despite the optimism of the idea of Triple E Senate, there are problems in the powers it wants to bring to the Senate, as well as the idea of equal representation per province. I also think that this senate reform will not be passed on the simple idea that the two biggest provinces, Ontario and Quebec, do not want to lose any of their power and autonomy to be added into equal representation of all provinces. They would have over 60 percent of Canada’s population but would only account for 20 percent of the senators. I feel that the way in which the seating of the Senate is wrong, but the ideas in this reform are only a stepping stone to how we can actually fix the representation issues in parliament while still noting the provinces with the biggest parts of the
Canada runs on a democratic model of governing based on the British parliamentary system. Its parliament is thus divided into two chambers: the House of Commons and the Senate. Elected politicians are seated within The House of Commons while the Senate occupies qualified citizens which are appointed by the Prime Minister. Parliament’s purpose is to hold responsibility for passing legislations and the choosing of government, referring to the political party with the largest amount of seats. Depending on the results of the election, Canada has the potential of having either a majority, minority or in the rare case a coalition government. Customarily, an election in Canada usually ends up forming a majority government. The party with more than
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 the MPs in Canada, party discipline is the core for their actions. For them, collective responsibility plays a big part in their agenda. As a party, they are held responsible for any decision that their party makes, and are expected to defend it at any given point of time. For a majority government, party discipline becomes an even more important issue as it is directly related to the term of the Prime Minister (PM). Under the rule of maintaining the confidence of the House, the PM must gain the support of the House in order to stay in his role. This is where high party discipline comes into place. With it, the PM will not have to worry about being dismissed by the Governor General. Should the high party discipline deteriorate and gives away into a low one, such as the one in the States, the government will be in a constant potential risk of collapsing into paralysis. Once the leader of the cabine...
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.
The Canadian Senate was originally created in the Constitution Act of 1867 with 72 seats but as Canada expanded more seats were added and it currently has 105 seats. (Government of Canada, About the Senate) The Senate was originally formed in order to allow the Canadian elite to have a say against the House of Commons, which represented the general population. The Senate was to also provide representation to minority groups, women, and Aboriginal peoples who
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.
I will start by explaining a little bit more about the practice of party discipline in the Canadian parliamentary system. As stated earlier party discipline is an important practice in Canadian politics, this is due to its ability to allow for bills to be passed in the House of Commons by the government and as well can help to solidify a strongly cohesive opposition for the parties who are not the main government in power. For the most part party discipline in the House of Commons is very strict in making sure that the members of the political parties vote on issues according to the ideologies and doctrines of their respected parties no matter what they believe individually. This is not the case in every aspect of the House of Commons, however; with things such as “the speech from the throne, the budget, the Estimates, and explicit nonconfidence motions” as well as private members’ bills, there seems to be a little bit more fle...
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.
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.
The Canadian constitution is bereft of democratic legitimacy; an alluring term for political democratic deficit. Over the past years, the unsuccessful attempts to reform its laws have made passing new bills and regulations almost an unreachable goal for every newly elected prime minister. This inflexibility in adapting new laws made the fundamental principles of the Canadian constitution known only by few reforms. The lack of democratic accountability in the Canadian parliamentary democracy is demonstrated not only in its electoral system, but also in its national parliament and at the federal level of its politics. Many reforms must be addressed in order to make the Canadian democracy healthier.
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.
The Prime Minister of Canada has an integral role within the Canadian parliament. In the political Parliamentary system of Canada, the Prime Minister wields the executive responsibility. He is accountable for an assortment of administrative, managerial, and supervisory decisions in effect across the country. The executive role is the branch of government that is generally responsible for creating laws, and enforcing the regulations to ensure these laws are observed.
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.
2. Mormon men who still practice polygamy today refer to Joseph Smith’s (founder of Mormonism) ideas and believe that if they have at least three wives, that they will become “Gods” in Heaven. And women who refuse to join polygamist families will be denied entree into Heaven. (Layton, 2004).