The first is called political asymmetry; this encompasses the various attitudes of the different provinces such as the culture, economic, social and political conditions and how it shapes the relationship between the provincial and federal governments (Brock 2008, 4). This can create a problem for the federal government because it means that they may ha... ... middle of paper ... ...ratic process but it at least protects the rights of Canadians and prevents all out domination the majority. 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.
Canadian politics has a tendency to be defined by the respective political parties and the different patterns of the party's competition. Carty et. al says, in order to make sense of Canada, you must first make sense of its party politics. At the same time, though, Jane Jenson and her colleague Janine Brodie have stated that the political parties are known to be the main actors when it comes to Canadian politics. Of course, there is some sort of doubt that these political parties of Canada run a central role when it comes to discourse.
Every Minister is ultimately accountable for their portfolio to Parliament and therefore in turn responsible to the Canadian electorate. The realization of this responsibility is undertaken upon the assumption of office. Accountability within government is a measure that is used to control the abuse of power by those elected as government representatives. "The government must be able to control and protect its own membership to be able meaningfully to accept responsibility for its direction and impact as a government." Without accountability we are left with a powerful political structure that has the ability to act without conscience or redress and this does not represent a modern democracy.
Does Canada have a unique political culture? Introduction The Canadian political culture is multifaceted, and the debate as to its uniqueness can take different approaches depending on the aspect of analysis. Canada, as one the biggest countries in North America, has one of the strongest political orientation in the region. Most of what she does is influenced by other countries within the region and abroad. To some extent, the political culture of Canada has some similarities to those of countries in North America and Europe.
Due to the fact that “when Ottawa went against the grain and launched the Millennium Scholarship programs, provincial feathers, especially Quebec’s, were immediately ruffled,” provinces such as Quebec and British Columbia, among others, were motivated to “set up their own research funding agencies with the view to [maximize] the likelihood of obtaining funds from Ottawa,” (Bakvis 216). As for the legitimacy of cooperative federalism in Canada today, it seems as though executive federalism itself is turning largely paternalistic – at least in the sense of PSE. More often than not, in PSE funding, the federal government has taken the initiative while “one set of executives – those from provincial governments – was largely absent,” (Bakvis 218).
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. In Mellon’s article, several aspects are mentioned supporting the belief that the prime minister is too powerful. One significant tool the prime minister possesses is “… the power to make a multitude of senior governmental and public service appointments both at home and abroad,” (Mellon 164).
There are however a number of alter... ... middle of paper ... ...re necessary to ensure a more proportional representation and regain the confidence of the voters in the electoral system. Works Cited Boyer, J, Patrick. Political Rights: The Legal Framework of Elections in Canada, Toronto: Butterworths, 1981. Print Boyer, J., Patrick. “The Case for Election Law Reform,” Parliamentary Government, 8.2 (1989): 13-16.
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. I will start by explaining a little bit more about the practice of party discipline in the Canadian parliamentary system.
Regionalism is a political ideology based on a collective sense of place or attachment, and is discussed in terms of Canadian society, culture, economy and politics (Westfall, 3). Canada is known internationally as a nation incorporating several multiregional interests and identities into its unification of culture. Its diverse population is comprised of numerous ethnicities, religions, sexual orientations and traditions; and all resides under one federal government. Ever since the founding of Canada, it has developed into regional cleavages and identities, based on various geographical topologies, lifestyles and economic interests (Westfall, 6). It is these characteristics which make it problematic for the federal government to represent all demands of its people on a national level.
Can Canadians ever come to agreement upon the values they hold to be important? The debates of these questions continue to plague Canadian parliaments, especially when examining the differences between Canada and the province Quebec. Even though many argue and hope for Canada’s unity in the future, the differences in political socialization and culture present throughout the country creates a blurry vision of Canadian harmony and makes it extremely difficult to realistically vision Canadian unification. Is that, however, a bad thing? The differences in values and opinions among Canadians are illustrated through political socialization agents and variables that exist within different regions of Canada.