Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
History of party discipline in Canadian politics
History of party discipline in Canadian politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: History of party discipline in Canadian politics
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. Therefore, the only way to have a better understanding of present-day Canadian politics, it is necessary to look towards Canada’s political systems of parties, the definition and structure of it, how each party system grew over the years, as well as its functions for the answers that could possibly be valid to this. This paper will seek to discuss the historical aspect of the Party Systems of Canada. Moreover, explain how each one of the five parties functioned, how they sought to serve Canada to get Canadians to vote. It will go into deep detail about the parties to get a clear understand of what was going on within Canadian politics when it comes to the Party Systems as well as its structure. This paper asserts that the political realm of Canada went through a major transition in the beginning of 2003 and the rise of a new period of Canadian politics which is the fifth party system. When looking at and understanding the historical aspect of the party systems, it is important to note that there are some number of definitions of party systems. To some degree, a party system simply can be defined as the competition between parties in the political realm in efforts to gain the support for their give... ... middle of paper ... ...-line at: http://www.liberal.ca/familypack (accessed on 11 November 2013). New Democratic Party. Jack Layton and the New Democrats: A Prime Minister on Your Family's Side, for a change. New Democratic Party, 2008. Small, Tamara A. “The Facebook Effect: Online Campaigning in the 2008 Canadian and US Elections.” Policy Options (October 2008): 85-87. Whitaker, Reg. The Government Party: Organizing and Financing the Liberal Party of Canada, 1958-1980. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977. Whitaker, Reg. “Virtual Political Parties and the Decline of Democracy.” Policy Options (June 2001): 16-22. Young, Lisa, Anthony Sayers, and Harold Jansen. “Altering the Political Landscape: State Funding and Party Finance.” Canadian Parties in Transition, 3rd edition, eds. Alain-G. Gagnon and A. Brian Tanguay. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press, 2007: 335-54.
For a democratic country to thrive, they must have a proper electoral system in producing the party to oversee our government. Since its inception in 1867, Canada has been using the first past the post system during elections to decide their leading party. Although we have been using this system for an extended duration of time, the FPTP system is flawed and should be changed. The goal of this paper is to prove the effectiveness of shifting to more of a proportional system, while also exposing the ineptness of Canada’s current system. With other methods advancing and little change of the first past the post system, this system is becoming predated. A variation of the proportional electoral system is key because it empowers voters, increases voter turnout, and creates a more diverse environment. Canada should adopt a more proportionate electoral system at the federal level if we wish to expand democracy.
Although Quebec is in Canada, a majority of Quebecers do not identify with the national identity of Canada. Both societies create a sense of identity as well as nationalism (Hiller, 295). Hiller mentions two approaches to assessing Canadian identity; the unitary approach and the segmentalist approach (Hiller, 277). The unitary approach suggests that society consists of people who regardless of their ethnic back ground, identify as belonging to the national society, while the segmentalist approach concentrates on groups and communities that share racial, linguistic, occupational, or cultural similarities (Hiller, 28). While most Anglophones are more unitary or pan-Canadian, Quebec heavily identifies with the segmentalist approach. This dissimilarity of identity perspective may be problematic for the country, at the same time however, it can also be viewed as a struggle where contradictory parties find a way to compromise and reshape Canadian society together (Hiller, 277). Canada’s former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau made it his objective to unite Quebec with the rest of Canada. In 1969 Trudeau’s government implemented Bill C-120, otherwise known as the Official Language act, which made French an...
Charles-Émile Trudeau was a Conservative, and several of his friends belonged to the Liberal Party. When his father’s friends were visiting at their Lac Tremblant cottage, Pierre was exposed to political debates and rivalries at an early age. He found politics interesting, but could not understand much of it. His father invested in successful several companies at the beginning of the...
Stevenson, Garth. "Canadian Federalism: The Myth of the Status Quo." Reinventing Canada: Politics of the 21st Century. Ed. M. Janine Brodie and Linda Trimble. Toronto: Prentice Hall, 2003. 204-14. Print.
Furthermore, the issues of representation in the House of Commons are even more evident in terms of the alienation of certain provinces. Western Canada has experienced political alienation due to the dominance and influence of Ontario and Quebec over policy-making as both provinces contain the founding Cultures of Canada (Miljan, 2012, p. 53) Also, the fact that Ontario and Quebec make up more than 60 percent of Canada’s population attracts policymakers to those provinces while marginalizing the interests of westerners (Miljan, 2012, p. 53). Thus, policymakers will favor Ontario and Quebec as these provinces harbor the most ridings as well as the bigger electors’ base. In fact, Western Canada is also underrepresented in both the House of Commons and the Senate when compared to the Maritime provinces as the Maritime provinces are overrepresented compared to their population. Also, many western Canadians are turned off by the federal government as they have been alienated from major political action and discussion due to low representation (Canada and the World Backgrounder, 2002). In other words, Ottawa does not address the needs and hopes of Western Canada
Workman, T. (2010). Renewing the left in Canada. Canadian Dimension, 44(3), 49-52. Retrieved from the Canadian Reference Centre.
Canada has been claimed to be a country of democracy and fairness, where majority rules and everyone gets a say. Though this is evident in some areas of Canada, in The House of Commons and in the political background it is not. Members of Parliament are not as powerful as they are said to be and due to party discipline, the amount of power they actually have is very limited. Party discipline has taken Members of Parliament and trained them to obey whatever the leader of the Party and their whips say, just like seals. There are several arguments supporting this issue, such as Members of Parliament are forced to vote in whatever way their Political Party wants them to, even if they do not agree with the decision. This is seen in plenty examples of Members of Parliament complaining about decisions made and not being informed about certain legislation. Another argument would be the contrast of power between the Prime Minister and Members of Parliament. The amount of power the Prime Minister and his or her leaders supresses Members of Parliament to do what they wants regardless of what power each Member of Parliament has. Also, Members of Parliament cannot make any significant change by themselves. There are many Members of Parliament that want to make personal changes in society, but cannot because party discipline makes sure they stay focused on the main party’s agenda. These arguments will prove that Members of Parliament are called to do what the parties ask and obey without hesitation. Party discipline has taken over democracy in the Political realm and has made Members of Parliament have no power or control over the decision made. Politics in Canada trains Members of Parliament to be seals.
In Canada, party discipline is defined as the ability of getting support from its own political party for their leaders by using party policy (2016, Wikipedia). In a social order like ours, it is usually referred as the legislative control of the leaders have over its members. Under the system of responsible government, party discipline is the reason that gives voters ability to vote effectively (1993, Reid). Party discipline is the middle ground in between the opposition and main government; it requires consent in both sides. One is the view point constituency of each party and the other is the responsibility that the members of parliament has in voicing their opinions and votes (2006, Parliament of Canada).
Since party politics began in Canada, the style in which leaders are elected is comparable to a horse race. Using the single member plurality (SMP), more commonly referred to as “first past the post,” method of seat allocation in both the House of Commons and each province's Legislative Assembly, whoever gets the most votes is asked to form the government; this only takes into accounts the number of seats a party wins, not the overall popular vote. In a political system not limited to two parties, like the United States, many times over 50% of Canadians do not want the party that won, to win. In this current electoral system, votes are wasted, smaller parties are terribly misrepresented and, in some cases, a party with a lower percent of the vote has come into power. Already, three provinces have attempted to vote on electoral reform; however, the vote did not pass in any of them. British Columbia (BC) and Prince Edward Island (PEI) both held their first referendum on the subject in 2005, BC's second referendum was held in 2009. Also, Ontario held their referendum in 2007. Because none of the referendums passed, it is clear that Canadians are not quite ready for electoral reform. Regardless, it is evident that a spark has ignited in the brains of citizens nation-wide; with recurring evidence that suggests the current electoral system horribly represents the majority of Canadian citizens, the public is beginning to realize that there is something terribly wrong.
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. Regionalism is thus an issue within regards to political proficiency in the Federal government.
Canada is a society built on the promise of democracy; democracy being 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.” In order to operate at full potential, the people of Canada must voice their opinions and participate fully in the political system. This is why it’s shocking to see that people are becoming less engaged in politics and the voter turnout has steadily been declining over the last 20 years. This lack of participation by Canadians is creating a government that is influenced by fewer people, which is detrimental to the democratic system Canada is built on.
Newman, Garfield et al. Canada A Nation Unfolding. Toronto: Mc Graw – Hill Ryerson Limited, 2000.
In Canada’s democratic government, voting is a powerful way for citizens to communicate their values. The leader who is chosen reflects the power of the Canadians’ values. Thus, to the government, every vote matters, assuring Canadians that their opinions matter. Today, Canada recognizes voting as a fundamental right for all of their citizens. The Canadian Charter of Rights effectively protects this right of all Canadians, even minorities, through section 3. “Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or a large legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein”. This ensures equality for vote to all Canadians. Equality is to allow all Canadians equal opportunity, even if they are of different race, religion, gender and etcetera. However, in the past, this fundamental right has not always been accessible to all. In fact, voting was considered a privilege where citizens had to qualify to have the ability to vote. The rules were so strict that only eleven percent of the past population of Canada could have voted, compared to today’s seventy-eight percent. Many of these rules of who could vote and who could not were very unjust. This was especially seen in minority groups who did not have the franchise, the right to vote.. In this essay, it will be seen that the inequalities to vote made racial exclusions, religious exclusions and gender exclusions more pronounced. It will be seen that the government treated certain races with intentional discrimination creating a lack of an opportunity to vote. As well, the government showed prejudice to certain religious groups, denying these groups their ability to vote. And, finally, it will be seen that views against women aided ...
Although Canadian electoral system has always undergone periodic reforms, new challenges always accompany electoral changes and therefore the system should be consistently reformed to meet new circumstances.The current electoral system in Canada is a product of a series of electoral changes that have always taken place since the foundation of the Canadian confederation in the mid 1880s. During the early years, the rights of individuals to vote were significantly limited as only white males had the right to vote but only after meeting certain requirements. A secret ballot was unheard, and it was only after a number of changes were implemented that all social groups in Canada were given the right to vote. Even after these changes, electoral partisanship, as well as cases of electoral frauds were rampant and further reforms became necessary for the Canadian electoral system to gain legitimacy and support among the citizens. Canadian electoral system is currently based on the federal constituencies each of which is entitled to elect their parliamentary representatives (Lavoie and Lemieux, 3). In this system, candidates who meet the Canadian electoral criteria are free to participate in the process and only the individual who won the biggest number of votes becomes the elected representative.
Canada’s parliamentary system is designed to preclude the formation of absolute power. Critics and followers of Canadian politics argue that the Prime Minister of Canada stands alone from the rest of the government. The powers vested in the prime minister, along with the persistent media attention given to the position, reinforce the Prime Minister of Canada’s superior role both in the House of Commons and in the public. The result has led to concerns regarding the power of the prime minister. Hugh Mellon argues that the prime minister of Canada is indeed too powerful. Mellon refers to the prime minister’s control over Canada a prime-ministerial government, where the prime minister encounters few constraints on the usage of his powers. Contrary to Mellon’s view, Paul Barker disagrees with the idea of a prime-ministerial government in Canada. Both perspectives bring up solid points, but the idea of a prime-ministerial government leading to too much power in the hands of the prime minister is an exaggeration. 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.