Federal Political System Essay

Canada 's ineffective federal political system has gradually transformed into such a troubled political environment, becoming one of the most deadly threats to the very existence of Canada. Many citizens assume that the system in place is the best approach to democratic principles. However, a deeper analysis of the system says otherwise. In particular, the unjust first-past-the-post electoral system negatively impacts the representation of diverse populations in Canada. Moreover, the purpose and accountability of the Senate is questionable, for it misrepresents Canadian regions and minorities, as well as rewards loyalty, rather than knowledge through the patronage system. In addition, another one of Canada’s unfortunate realities is the appointment

Within the Canadian federal political system, federal judges are appointed after much consideration, with final appointments officially made by the Governor General, acting on the advice of cabinet. However, the process of making appointments to the bench has sometimes been seen as an opportunity to hand out plum jobs to political friends, even though they may not have the required expertises and knowledge. For instance, in April 2010, Quebec Premier Jean Charest ordered a public inquiry after his former justice minister alleged he was pressured to name certain judges to the bench based on the recommendations of major Liberal Party fundraisers. This, along with several other similar suspicious cases, have raised many eyebrows and questions. When federal judges are appointed due to loyalty and ideology, instead of capability and knowledge, harmful judicial decisions are made, resulting in injustice and a faulty justice system, and thus a faulty federal political system. While some might be of the opinion that judges are accountable to "the law", they are not for they are able to change the law by reinterpreting it, creatively applying it, or even nullifying it, and thus the appointment of judges requires great consideration, a political process that can be easily ruined by political favours and rewards. Hence, elected judges rather than appointed

According to this system, the governing political party does not have to receive the majority of seats, to win a federal election. They only have to win the most seats. As a result, for the majority of the time governing political parties do not always represent the views of the majority of the citizens, while other political parties that did recieve a sizable amount of votes, may not receive adequate representation. Moreover, the first-past-the-post electoral system wastes huge numbers of votes, as votes cast in a constituency for losing candidates, count for nothing. For instance, presume a man named Mark Salke is running against two men named Eric Rale and Johnson Kerrington in an MP election. Mark received 40% of the votes. However, he received more votes than Eric, 25% of the votes and Johnson, 35% of the votes. Consequently, Mark would win the MP seat, while the votes that counted towards Eric and Johnson would go to waste. Finally, the first-past-the-post system is dependent on the drawing of electoral boundaries. With relatively small constituency sizes, the way boundaries are drawn can have important effects on the election result, which encourages attempts at gerrymandering and malapportionment. The Canadian first-past-the-post electoral system, which is the least representative and arguably most unjust elections