After looking at the influences that strict party discipline has had, the discussion over whether to relax party discipline was examined. Each side of the discussion was explained, and their side of the argument displayed. As has been shown by this essay, party discipline is a very important part of the development of Canadian politics. It has controversially influenced many aspects of the Canadian political system, as the argument over its strictness demonstrates. Overall, for better or worse Canada’s political parties system of strict discipline will continue to influence the country’s direction for the foreseeable future.
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). Mellon goes on to state the significance the prime minister has when allowed to appoint the government’s key member... ... middle of paper ... ...n of their cabinet, while others may choose to create a new political path without consulting the views of their party. Mellon thinks that the Canadian government is under dictatorial scrutiny, whereas Barker contradicts this belief. The idea of a prime-ministerial government is certainly an over exaggeration of the current state of Canada. There are too many outside and inside forces that can control the powers the Prime Minister of Canada.
Nationalism with Quebec is a prime example of how distinct regional cultures hinder Canada’s unity, as they want to separate from Canada, while still having the federal Canadian government financially support them. Western Alienation is also a prime political culture that is regionally distinct. This paper will prove how regionalism is a prominent feature of Canadian life, and affects the legislative institutions, especially the Senate, electoral system, and party system as well as the agendas of the political parties the most. This paper will examine the influence of regionalism on Canada’s legislative institutions and agendas of political part... ... middle of paper ... ...-PolicyBook_E.pdf>. Henderson, Ailsa.
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.
Quebec's separation perhaps is inedible and the future of Canada questionable. Canada without Quebec will bring about many complications and whether there is a rest of Canada (ROC) after Quebec a major challenge. Western alienation and the lack of representation in federal affairs will be a factor; moreover, past actions and historical events may have turned Canada into a time bomb, and the deterioration of the provinces the only sulotion. How First Ministers react to Quebec's sovereignty regarding economic factors, political structure, and constitutional issues will be of great importance. Whether emotional issues will play a major role in decision making is subjective; however, it is fair to say that it will be an emotionally charged event and it could either tear apart the ROC or fuse it together.
Since federalism was introduced as an aspect of Canadian political identity, the country has undergone multiple changes as to how federalism works; in other words, over the decades the federal and provincial governments have not always acted in the same way as they do now. Canada, for example, once experienced quasi-federalism, where the provinces are made subordinate to Ottawa. Currently we are in an era of what has been coined “collaborative federalism”. Essentially, as the title would suggest, it implies that the federal and provincial levels of government work together more closely to enact and make policy changes. Unfortunately, this era of collaborative federalism may be ending sooner rather than later – in the past couple decades, the federal and provincial governments have been known to squabble over any and all policy changes in sectors such as health, the environment and fiscal issues.
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.
This journal article talks about Canada’s role as a middle power in the world and the responsibilities that come with said power. It also discusses the relations with NATO and how it has changed Canadian foreign policy from peacekeeping that existed in the late 1900s to peace building, along with discussing the similarities and differences between the two. Paris, Roland. "Are Canadians still liberal internationalists? Foreign policy and public opinion in the Harper era."
Strengthening Canadian Democracy The views of Canadians In the report by Paul Howe and David Northrup titled, “Strengthening Canadian Democracy: the Views of Canadians” Policy Matters 1:5, Canadians attitudes towards government including questions about electoral system reform, representation and the rate of veter turnout. (Howe & Northrup, 2000) After reading, this report it is clear that many Canadians find many issues of their government to be unacceptable. One of the most menacing concerns is in the form that government attains office. The voting process, the form in which Canadians are represented by their Members of Parliament, and the first past the post method of election. The debate about electoral reform is not a new issue it has been discussed for quite some time, but with the recent studies, “Concerns about the relationship between a party’s share of the popular vote in an election and the number of seats it receives”(Howe & Northrup, 2000) has been given more attention.
Canadians would essentially be expressing the desire for Quebec to remain excluded from the constitution. How could the Right-Honorable Mulroney expect anyone to vote on a document that contained so much more than simply the issue of Quebec sovereignty? Ironically, hidden deep within "The Charlottetown Accord," was the opportunity for Canadians to make a difference; to change the way the government ran, giving less power to the politicians and more to the people. This was the issue of Senate Reform. Why is Senate Reform such an important issue?