Why Is The Prime Minister Have Held To Much Power

1096 Words3 Pages

Since the ministry of Pierre Elliot Trudeau, Canadians and political scientists have questioned whether the Prime Minister of Canada has held to much power, this has been considered a fundamental problem in Canada’s parliamentary system. This essay will examine the role of the prime minister, the effects of party discipline, the centralization of power to the prime minister, and assert that power has been concentrated into the hands of the prime minister, further weakening the role of parliament as a source of democratic input.
The Prime Minister of Canada is a position that is appointed by the Governor General of Canada. In most cases, the leader of the party with the most seats in parliament is invited to form a government. Although not …show more content…

In the Canadian parliamentary system, Members of Parliament are elected to represent their regional constituencies and advocate for the needs, wants and views of their constituents. Lamentably, party discipline has limited this role for many individual MP’s since they are given little independence when voting on bills introduced to parliament. Usually, MP’s vote the way the prime minister or party leader advises them to. This generates a problem for those MP’s who help to form a government as their right to hold the government to account is diminished. If an MP decides to break the status quo and does not act upon the prime minister’s wishes, their reputation within the government could be seriously affected. Party discipline allows the prime minister to further their agenda and most bills presented to parliament will only pass if the prime minister has a hand in creating the bill . The influence the prime minister has on the decision making of individual members of their caucus undermines the fundamental role MP’s have in representing the views of their constituents, ultimately centralizing legislative power into the hands of the prime minister while deteriorating the representation of a true …show more content…

The basis of this argument relies on the existence of inter-governmental and party competition. A prime example of this was the tensions between Prime Minister Jean Chretien, Finance Minister Paul Martin, and Liberal backbenchers. It was inherent that after 3 terms in office many members of the Liberal Party were tired of the prime minister’s hands-off approach in the dealings of ministerial departments and government. The party realized that this was not working, and a united cabinet was non-existent. His biggest opposer, Paul Martin, was able to gather the support of Liberal backbenchers and replace Chretien as leader of the party. Martin also won a minority government in the 2004 election. Chretien’s loss of power over the years was due to his lack of real organization in confronting his competitors . Although this opposing view is valid, it fails to mention that fact that if Chretien took advantage of the principle of party discipline over his government he could have avoided losing the confidence of his own party. By taking a hands-off approach to the way the government was run, Chretien disrupted what prime ministers had been doing in government for the past 35 years. Unfortunately, this contributed to his

More about Why Is The Prime Minister Have Held To Much Power

Open Document