Democracy In Canada

Opposing the belief that a dominating leader is running Canada, Barker brings up several key realities of the Canadian government. He gives examples of several “… instances of other ministers taking action that reveal the limits prime-ministerial power,” (Barker 178). Barker conveys the fact that Canada is not bound by a dictatorial government, “…it seems that the prime minister cannot really control his individual ministers. At times, they will pursue agendas that are inconsistent with the prime minister’s actions,” (Barker 181). Both inside and outside government are a part of Canada and they can remind the prime minister that “…politics is a game of survival for all players,” (Barker 188). Barker refutes the misinterpretation of the Canadian government by acknowledging that a prime-ministerial government existing in Canada is an overstatement.

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

There are several unique individuals and groups that have contributed to Canada’s autonomy and success. These 3 individuals are one of the top contributors to Canadian autonomy. They were not considered the best leaders during the time they ruled, but today their decisions are the ones that have lead us to where we are. Many of these individuals have encountered failure, but in the very end they remained devoted to their cause, which was to develop Canada’s image on the world stage. Canada has been brought up by means of many different leaders and other individuals who were both good and bad for the country, but Canadians are happy to have encountered them, since it only provides the people with opportunities to learn from their mistakes.There

On July 1st, 1867, Canada confederated into a nation and committed to uphold democracy “From Sea to Sea”. As stated in the Constitution of our nation, Canada would be governed through a Parliamentary system, with both an upper and lower house of legislature. The lower house, the House of Commons, would include elected members from across the country. Conversely, the upper house, the Senate, according to Section 24 of the Constitution Act (1867), states: “The Governor General shall… summon qualified Persons to the Senate; and… every Person so summoned shall become… a Member of the Senate.”[1] This has amounted to almost 800 Canadians being appointed to the Senate since Confederation. However, as Canadians have grown to demand transparency

I conclude from my research that Canada has evolved throughout the years, and will continue to prosper through the economic, social and technical aspect, as the population increases. Canada’s government is very logical and affective, because there are three branches of government that pay full attention to their responsibility. It also displays the respect towards people who vote.

“The spirit of democracy cannot be imposed from without. It has to come from within”. (Gandhi) A lawful and fair democracy is one that represents the people, where the will of the people is done not where the government’s will is enforced. Here in Canada we believe a democratic government is well suited for its people but like any other system it has its flaws. This country was a model democracy. Canada’s wealth, respect for legal, human and civil rights almost promises that this country has the potential to uphold a legitimate democracy. Reading headlines today concerning the state of democracy in Canada we can see how our political system is slipping. A democracy should uphold the rights of its people rather than the rights of a

Canada 's biggest concern encompasses the degree of power to which the Prime Minister is in possession of, coupled with the matter of proper implementation. Accordingly, a survey conducted by Nanos Research displayed results which state 42 percent of Canadian 's believe that the PM should have less power. In extension, polls attest that concerns regarding too much power within the PM stand considerably higher than concerns within any other section of the government (Clark, 2012). In order to adequately comprehend the troublesome overabundance of power placed upon the Canadian Prime Minister, the following four components are to be understood; the influence of Supreme Court judgments, the responsibility of appointing both cabinet ministers

Although citizens vote for their elected leaders in Canada, the United States, and other countries with electoral systems, Canada and none of these other countries are democracies. A democracy is a system in which the people decide government policy. In Canada and other countries that are mistakenly called democracies, the power of the people is limited to choosing their leaders. These leaders generally have more knowledge than the average citizens, who trust that this superior knowledge of their leaders will result in rational policies. Therefore, even the electoral system in Canada theoretically should meet Plato’s desires for who leads a government. Of course, the difference between Canada’s system and Plato’s ideal is the fact that there is no actual requirement for superior knowledge among the candidates that run for office. In addition, there is no actual requirement that the citizens who vote for these leaders have superior knowledge to make this determination. As a result, Canadian citizens are disappointed with their leaders because they reflect the ignorance of Canadian citizens, few of whom have superior knowledge as required by Plato. Nevertheless, this system is superior to what Plato desires because in reality a system of elitism in government never actually results in superior results. Rather, it leads to despotism.

There is much argument over whether Parliamentary or Presidential political systems are more effective. By comparing the two systems one could argue that the Canadian Parliamentary system is a more effective and democratic system. The Canadian Parliamentary system provides a reliable, accountable, and efficient government, whereas the US Presidential system creates resistance, instability, and unreliable government. This paper will compare the functioning systems of both Parliamentary and presidential systems, the differences between responsible government and separation of powers, and finally the effectiveness of party discipline. There are a few important differences between the two systems.

Self-government is the cornerstone of the Inuit policy goals in the Nunavut region; while self-government is an important goal, the idea is intricately linked to other goals such as land claims settlements, cultural preservation, and economic development, goals which the people of Nunavut are finding very hard to meet (Nowland-Card, 41). Indigenous people were self-governed long before Europeans arrived in Canada, but in 1876, the Indian Act came into effect, dismantling traditional governance systems and Indigenous peoples' lives (Bc Treaty Commission). Today, the Federal government recognizes that Indigenous people have an inherent, constitutionally protected right to self-government; a right to manage their own affairs (Bc Treaty Commission).

Voting on Election Day is a crucial aspect of Canadian democracy and the most visible way for citizens to participate in Canada. As the most visible way for citizens to engage in political participation, it can be measured. Official voter turnout in Canada, is calculated as the number of votes cast divided by the number of registered voters. Historically, electoral participation was the highest in the general election of 1958 at approximately 79%. During the 1960s, voter turnout was relatively high fluctuation between 75% and 79%. (“Estimation,” 2012) Since then Canada has seen an overall decline in voter turnout, now fluctuating between 60% and 65%, only dipping below 60% for the 2008 general election by two points. (Dyck, 2011, p. 148) This

According to Joshua Cohen (1997), deliberative democracy is the framework of social and institutional conditions that facilitate free discussion among equal citizens, by providing favorable conditions for participations, association…(p. 412) Deliberative democracy a term that is just recently coming to light of different communities and countries throughout the globe.

Based on traditional British government and a member of the Commonwealth, Canada unlike other democracy is not free of contestation attempts to strike a balance to both support citizen autonomy and public accountability (http://www.international.gc.ca/commonwealth/index.aspx?lang=eng). Seeped in symbolic and cultural linage of the British monarchy the Canadian government is a democracy which includes a mix of elected and appointed officials over three levels of government to allow for more influence in local matters. Canada has had

Throughout Canadian history, a responsible government depended on the act of the nation working together to apply appropriate public policy. William Lyon Mackenzie King, the prime minister of Canada in the 1920s (and again in the 1930s) once said, “Where there is little or no public opinion, there is likely to be bad government, which sooner or later becomes autocratic government.” This is true even almost 100 years later. A democratic society operates in relation to the voices of the nation. The Canadian government consists of many sectors to enforce this particular style of policy making, including the House of Commons, the Senate, the Cabinet, and of course, the prime minister. Many citizens may argue that these important sectors of government are aspects reflecting true democracy. On the other hand, some citizens might argue that the prime minister has significant control over Parliament alone, sometimes without the need for other voices. Government responsibility lies in the heart of the prime minister and can have significant control over different policy areas if he or she feels the need to do so. This often flies in the face of a democratic society.

Despites the political regionalism, most of the Canadian people still benefit from Canadian political culture, because it brought Canadian people a stable society, economy, education, and health care system. However, some of the people such as businessmen or institutions could bear a large burden. According to the NAFTA, for example, if the Canadian government gives U.S. companies rights to buy water from the Great Lakes, then the government will not able to stop those companies from purchasing as much as water from the Great Lakes when they want, which could hurt Canada’s environment and cultural institutions.