The systems of government in Canada and China are very different. In each country the political party system varies. In China there is a One-party system and Canada has a multiparty system. Canada has a parliamentary form of government and China has a Dictatorship. The two countries have different forms of government in which political parties play different roles.
A multiparty system is a system in which several major political parties and many lesser parties exist. Each party in a multiparty system has some specific platform or interest. Since that each party would represent a different specific idea and with many to chose from the system would provide the people with a wide range of choices for the people and better represent them in the government. A multiparty system does tend to lead to instability in the government. With the many parties in the elections, it is difficult for one party to win a majority in an election.
Without a majority the power to govern the nation must be shared by a coalition of parties. Which is where the trouble lies. Multiparty systems exist in most European democratic countries today and in parts of the world were Europe has had a large impact on the area. Canada is one such nation with a multiparty system. In contrast to the multiparty system is the one party system. The one party system exists at the national level today in dictatorships.
In the dictatorship there is one leader, the dictator, in power over the nation and the party that has sole control over the nation is the party that the dictator belongs to. In this system the people have no real choices with only one party to chose from. China is an example of a country that is governed with a one party system. In Canada there are many parties as is true of all multiparty systems.
Some of the more important parties are Canada's New Democratic Party, The Liberal Party of Canada, the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada, the Reform Party, The Libertarian Party, the Green Party of Canada, the Natural Law Party of Canada, and the Canadian Action Party, to name a few. Each of these parties has a specific platform that they represent. The Progressive Conservative Party for example is very much like the Conservative Party here in the U.S. This party believes in low taxes to stimulate the economy and less governmental programs to get things going.
Firstly, the bicameral system started in the 17th century and has been set up in many countries since. This system is justified on its standard of checks and balances on the governing party. The members of the two houses are elected or appointed to their positions depending on what method the country decides on. Canada is one of the countries with a bicameral parliamentary democracy, which was modeled off of England’s House of Lords. (Supreme Court 2014, pg. 720) One of the important factors of the bicameral system is the upper house of Parliament called the Senate, which has a long history and distinctive structure within Canada.
However, the proposed systems must be thoroughly examined for their compatibility with Canada’s needs and their ability to resolve the issues outlined in this paper. From distortion in representation to Western alienation and to making the voices of minorities heard, the new system must also ensure that Parliament fulfills its role in representing, legislating, and holding the government. More importantly, after the current government abandoned its promise on electoral reform, it is important for researchers and future governments to build on the knowledge acquired by the Special Committee on Electoral Reform as well as previous experiences of the provinces with electoral
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.
The issue of electoral reform has become more important than ever in Canada in recent years as the general public has come to realize that our current first-past-the-post, winner-take-all system, formally known as single-member plurality (SMP) has produced majority governments of questionable legitimacy. Of the major democracies in the world, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom are the only countries that still have SMP systems in place. Interestingly enough, there has been enormous political tension and division in the last few years in these countries, culminating with the election results in Canada and the USA this year that polarized both countries. In the last year we have seen unprecedented progress towards electoral reform, with PEI establishing an electoral reform commissioner and New Brunswick appointing a nine-member Commission on Legislative Democracy in December 2003 to the groundbreaking decision by the British Columbia Citizen’s Assembly on October 24, 2004 that the province will have a referendum on May 17, 2005 to decide whether or not they will switch to a system of proportional representation. This kind of reform is only expected to continue, as Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty decided to take BC’s lead and form an independent Citizen’s Assembly with the power to determine whether or not Ontario will have a referendum regarding a change to a more proportional system. There is still much work to do however, and we will examine the inherent problems with Canada’s first-past-the-post system and why we should move into the 21st century and switch to a form of proportional representation.
A two-party system is a political system in which only two parties have a realistic opportunity to compete effectively for control. As a result, all, or nearly all, elected officials end up being a member in one of the two major parties. In a two-party system, one of the parties usually holds a majority in the legislature hence, being referred to as the majority party while the other party is the minority party. The United States of America is considered to be a two-party system. A two-party system emerged early in the history of the new Republic. Beginning with the Federalists and the Jeffersonian Republicans in the late 1780s, two major parties have dominated national politics, although which particular two parties has changed with the times and issues. During the nineteenth century, the Democrats and Republicans emerged as the two dominant parties in American politics. As the American party system evolved, many third parties emerged, but few of them remained in existence for very long. Today the Democrats and Republican still remain as the dominant parties. These two parties hav...
Proportional representation is almost always acknowledged as the fairest electoral system. With this in mind, many still reject a mixed member proportional system. Critics argue that the current method has produced a stable and effective government, while MMP would create an ineffective government. Wiseman feels that since Canada has been consistently stable, our electoral system does not need to be changed. Hiemstra and Jansen disagree with the plurality system that is currently in place for it does not produce fair representation and devalues citizen’s votes. Canadians must make a choice between the value of effectiveness and the values of justice and equity. Although a switch is not anticipated in the near future, Canadian citizens can hope that it is at least in the minds of many voters and on the discussion list of the government.
The Two Party System of UK It has often been said that the United Kingdom possesses a two party political system. However, any balanced argument on this issue must take into account both the differing perspectives from which this subject can be viewed and the time period which is being evaluated. The two party theory is not universally accepted and many people argue that the UK can best be described as a multi party, dominant party or even a two and a half or three party system, depending on how the subject is approached. The most commonly held view is that Britain is a two party system.
Democracy is 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 (Democracy, n.d.). Canadians generally pride themselves in being able to call this democratic nation home, however is our electoral system reflective of this belief? Canada is a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary democracy that has been adopted from the British system. Few amendments have been made since its creation, which has left our modern nation with an archaic system that fails to represent the opinions of citizens. Canada’s current “first-past-the-post” (FPTP) system continues to elect “false majorities” which are not representative of the actual percentage of votes cast. Upon closer examination of the current system, it appears that there are a number of discrepancies between our electoral system and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Other nations provide Canada with excellent examples of electoral systems that more accurately represent the opinions of voters, such as proportional representation. This is a system of voting that allocates seats to a political party based on the percentage of votes cast for that party nationwide. Canada’s current system of voting is undemocratic because it fails to accurately translate the percentage of votes cast to the number of seats won by each party, therefore we should adopt a mixed member proportional representation system to ensure our elections remain democratic.
The authors describe some of the advantages of a MMP system: “Mixed electoral systems provide fairly proportional outcomes, maintain the geographic link between constituents and members, provide for greater choice, and allow the opportunity for smaller parties to represented in Parliament” (p. 11). This system works better than the current FPTP or plurality system, because it allows citizen’s a second opportunity to have a voice. This is important because it would allow our minority groups to have a greater political influence. As mentioned earlier, in the current system all votes for candidates who lost, were insignificant to the election outcome. The authors explain: “Only those votes that go to the eventual winner count towards electing a representative, which may discourage people from voting or promote disaffection with the system” (p. 3). Alternatively, the MMP system allows citizen’s a second opportunity to elect party members in order to proportionally represent the popular
Despite being the constant underdog and loser in major elections third parties make some significant contribution to the political spectrum in the United States. Third Party Agendas are taken serious by the Democratic and Republican Parties and specific pieces of the Third Party Agendas are sometimes adopted by the two major parties. Third parties give discontented voters other alternatives. The Republican and Democratic Parties have been known to operate in similar styles and third parties give the voter the opportunity to express their discontent. The third parties in the United States are policy advocates and often are more specific about were they stand ideologically. Often the Republican and Democratic Parties try and take a moderate approach to political issues, and third parties are more conservative or liberal when it comes to political issues. Also, third parties tend to do exactly the opposite when their agenda concerns social issues. Then there is the ?spoiler factor? a Third Party Candidate can collect enough votes to change the outcome of a Presidential Election.
According to Hershey (2007), a political party “is a body of men united, for promoting by their joint endeavors the national interest, upon some particular in which they are all agreed” (p. 6). Political parties, in America, produce three interacting parts which is party organization, party in government, and party in the electorate. Party organization includes party leaders and the activists who worked for the causes and candidates. Party in government is made of both the men and women that compete for and hold public office with the party’s name. Party in the electorate is when the citizen show their loyalty to the party. The goals and strategies of a political party are to choose and compete elections; inform the citizens about issues important
Canada and China are very different States and are run by very different forms of government. The basic underlying difference between the two governments is the location of sovereignty in the counties. In China it seems as though the people do play a large part in the government, but after studying it, it is evident that the power really rests with the Communist party and the dictatorship. While in Canada the people popularly elect their representatives who elect their Prime Minister.
The topic of democracy in China is a highly controversial topic. Although China has not democratised, it has done well in the global situation amongst its democratic competitors. Since the path to democracy is different for each country, we cannot expect that China would follow the same path or same model of democracy as the western nations. This essay will look at what democracy is and how it can be placed in a Chinese context as well as looking at the proponents and opponents of democracy in China. It will also look at whether China is democratising by focusing on village elections, globalisation and the emergence of a civil society. These specific topics were chosen because they will help provide good evidence and arguments to the topic of democratisation in China. The main argument in this essay will be that although China is implementing some changes that can be seen as the beginning of a road to democracy, there contribution should not be over estimated. China still has a long way to go before it can be considered that it is democratising. The small changes are good but China still has a long road ahead of itself to achieve democracy.
In a dominant- party system, a single party wins approximately 60 percent or more of the seats in legislature and two or more other parties usually win less than 40 percent of the seat. Opposition parties in dominant-party system are free to contest elections. The dominant parties have to compete for votes to maintain its power or to gain power. This democratic competition imposes a check and balance on the government of the day, promotes transparency and accountability and ensures that service delivery to the people are prioritized or it will be given the boot.
In representative government, parties are often found. Perhaps the most prevalent danger in a party system is a party split, which paralyzes government just as much as a divergence of executive, legislative, and judicial powers in government.