Essay On Democracy In Canada

Canada’s friendly neighbor to the South, the US, has an electoral system that is composed of 3 separate elections, one of them deciding the head of state. The president elected by the people and he or she is the determining person of the country’s political system. In the US runs like a majority system” In Canada, however, elections are held slightly differently. Citizens vote for a Member of Parliament in a 308-seat house and candidates win not by a majority, unlike in the US, but by a plurality. This means that a candidate can actually win by simply having more votes than the other candidates. This method of representative democracy, in general, does not cause too much controversy in a global scope but has

How can the Canadian government be dominated by one ruler when it has democratic elections with many competing parties? Mellon believes that Canadian elections have low voter turnouts and even lower public interest. Canadian elections are essentially sporadic. Finally, Mellon also believes that prime ministers “…are supported by a growing circle of advisors, pollsters, and spin doctors that help protect their position,” (Hugh 175). The main focus of Mellon’s argument is this idea of a prime-ministerial government.

Federally, there is a commission put together each decade to reassess electoral boundaries; sometimes boundaries are redrawn, sometimes in the event of a population boom in an area – a move from rural to urban. Normally, “the number of voters per constituency should not… vary more than + or – 25% from the average,” (SFU.ca). The number of electoral district equals the number of seats in the Legislative Assembly of that province; in New Brunswick, there are currently 55 seats in the Legislative Assembly. This means that, unlike some electoral systems, there is only one candidate running in each riding. For a potential Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) to win their seat, they must get a higher percentage of the vote – just one percent higher. Because one only needs one percent more than their contestants, rather than majority of the vote, SMP is sometimes referred to as “first past the post.” Finally, the party and leader can form the government if they have more seats than the other parties; this does not really take into account the popular vote. If the leading party won more than half of the seats it is referred to as a majority government; however, if less than half the seats were won it is called a minority government and, if the opposition and other parties so choose, they can vote to dissolve government, thus calling an election.

There are Canadian citizens who thought that the Canadian government we have is perfect, citizens who believed that every aspect of the government was truly democratic, and citizens who believe that government could do no wrong. Truly this group of believers has been living a lie. In our Canadian system of government, large aspects within are far from democratic and need to be changed. Liberal-minded people will cry out for a change in order for government to serve the people better, and on the other hand the more conservative thinkers will argue that no change is needed because our government is efficient and considerate. However, our voting system, our Senate, and the power vested to the Prime Minister are far from democratic, do not

Basically, voters select one candidate from their riding, just like in an SMP system, but they also place a vote for which party they would like to form the government. This second vote determines the amount of seats that each party gains proportional to the amount of votes they collected in the countries. The representatives from each party are then made up of the elected representatives from each riding (if that party was able to elect any) and other members selected by the leader1. An STV system, which is what the Citizen’s Assembly recommended to the people of BC, can be found in Ireland, Malta, and in some levels of government in Australia. Voters rank candidates according to their priorities, choosing as many as they wish. For example, a certain voter could select a Conservative as his or her first choice, a Liberal as the second, a New Democrat as third, and then cast no votes for the Green Party. When each a candidate reaches a certain quota of first place votes, they are elected, and the extra first place votes that they did not need are distributed to the other parties according to their overall ranking. If a second candidate is then elected, his or her extra votes are then distributed to the remaining parties, and so on . This system is rather complicated, especially when compared to our current system, but computerized voting systems have generally alleviated any problems.

There is a fundamental problem with the democratic process in Canada. This problem is rooted within our electoral system. However, there is a promising solution to this issue. Canada should adopt the mixed-member proportional representation electoral system (MMP) at the federal level if we wish to see the progression of modern democracy. The failure to do so will result in a stagnant political system that is caught in the past and unable to rise to the contemporary challenges that representative democracies face. If Canada chooses to embrace the MMP electoral system it will reap the benefits of greater proportionality, prevent the centralization of power that is occurring in Parliament and among political parties through an increased

Canadian electoral system is largely based on the single member plurality (SMP) system which was inherited from its former British colonial masters. The system dates back to several years before the formation of the Canadian confederation. Some of the common features of the Canadian electoral system include election candidates to represent designated geographical areas popularly known as” ridings”, counting and tallying of the votes casted on the basis of the districts as opposed to the parties of the candidates (Dyck, 622). Finally, a candidate only needs a simple majority over the other candidates in order to be considered a winner, even if the winner has a small percentage of votes. This system has however been heavily criticized for its winner takes all way of judging victory. Critics argue that if the winner takes over the whole system, it may result into unfair representation of the various social groups, but it may also bring into power unstable minority participation in government. For example, a candidate can win even with barely 25% of all the votes casted, while the small parties may end up with no seats in the parliament.

In Canadian government it best to have legislators who do not vote their own interests and they vote the interests of their constituents. If legislators vote in their own interests they could be going against their own parties or the constituents that voted them in. Even if they know a lot about the subject they should still keep their interests out of their decisions and keep the interests of their constituents. Legislators that vote their own interests might even be going against the party policies, which could get them kicked out of the party or disciplined. Legislators are there to represent the people of their riding, not to vote their own interests in.

The Government of Canada does a lot of things. Everything from providing us with transportation to making sure everyone has a say in parliament. This group is made up of citizens that we elect to run this country and provide the citizen with a pretty good quality of life. This is the opinion is held by most Canadians. Unfortunately, some still think that we do not live as good a life here as we could somewhere else. Yes, the Government provides and maintains a high quality of life for its citizens. Social Programs provide assistance financially and physically to people that are in need of it. As Canadians, we have an abundance of freedoms and rights to protect us and our government is run as a democracy, where everyone gets a say.

“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

The electoral system in Canada is also known as a “first past the post” system. “First past the post” means the candidate with the highest number of votes wins the congressional seat, whereas the other candidates with a lower number of votes don’t get any representation. There are many cons to this system that will be highlighted throughout this essay. I will argue that the electoral system requires reform due to the discrepancies between the percentage of popular votes and the number of seats won. Canada’s electoral system has many problems and is not seen as fully democratic since it has provided poor representation for both candidates that win and lose. Candidates can win seats with less than 50% of votes, meaning that even if the majority of the nation, or province did not vote for the candidate they still win the election as they consume the highest number of votes among the parties. FPTP allows two people in different ridings to get the same number of votes with the outcome of one winner since the distribution of votes and seats are unequal. The system can also encourage strategic voting such as not voting for whom you think is the best fit but voting for the candidate that seems most likely to win in order to beat candidate you dislike. FPTP leads to an imbalance of power and has the potential for corruption.

In 2011, three legal and constitutional scholars, Peter Aucoin, Mark D. Jarvis and Lori Turnbull set out to write a book detailing what they believed to be obvious and egregious errors in the way in which the current form of responsible government as it was practiced in the Canadian federal government, fell short of operating within basic democratic parameters. Canada has a system that is based one the Westminster system, in which its the Constitution act of 1867 is influenced by British principles and conventions. “Democratizing the Constitution reforming responsible government” is a book that makes an analysis for the reform of responsible government in Canada. The authors believe that from the unclear rules, pertaining to the role and power of the prime minster foresees for a failing responsible government. In this essay the functions of the government , conventions of the constitution, the a proposal for reform will be addressed.

According to Elections Canada (2011), the right to vote is a major equitable right that is ensured by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is the foundation of democracy. When we vote, we pick the representatives who will make the laws and strategies that represent how we live together. The authenticity of an administration lies in the way that it is chosen. Low voter turnouts may call into inquiry the legitimacy of authority. While democracy includes a great deal holding elections every five years, voting is an effective approach to make an impression on governments and legislators. The more votes, the more compelling the message is. Ultimately, each vote counts. To vote in Canada at any level of government, you must be a Canadian citizen. (“Why Should I Vote”, 2011) As a result, masses of adults who reside in Canada are denied the right to vote because they are not Canadian citizens. There is no question that the status of citizenship has been contested since the migration trend in Canada soared the past 20 years. (Siemiatycki, 2011) These residents work, pay local taxes, use city services, send their children to school but cannot vote. (Munro, 2008) Giving non-citizens voting rights would give permanent residents an opportunity to participate in decisions made on local services and issues, fostering a sense of

Canada is one of the largest and most culturally diverse countries in the world. These characteristics make the democratic governing of the country a difficult task. A democratic model is needed that respects the fundamental rights and freedoms of various diverse cultures, and unites these cultures over a huge land mass as Canadians. To do this the Canadian government is one which is pluralist. Pluralism is the ideology that groups, (in Canada's case political parties), should rule in government. These parties help protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of everyone living in Canada, regardless of their ethnicity, or religious beliefs. The role political parties play in Canada is vital for

FPP is a simple system that for the average citizen is easy to understand and it provides electorates with fast results. However, simplicity and fast results are being enjoyed at the expense of democracy. The system’s ability to generate phony majority governments represents a major blow to Canadian democracy. In Canada’s case, it is the lack of proportionality that allows this to happen . Canada’s current voting system “has been producing majority governments with less than 50% of the popular vote” since the 1940’s. . Only in the Canadian voting system “parties can turn minority of votes into majority of seats.” When parties rule against the will of the majority of the population, democratic values are clearly undermined; therefore, Canada must