Essay On Canadian Government Vs American Government

961 Words4 Pages

Close neighbours, and both separated from the United Kingdom to be independent countries. Many would think that with such a similar history, both countries would be governed alike. The Canadian parliamentary system and the American congressional system are two very different models of government when looking deeper into the makeup, structure, and jobs each part of government plays. In this paper, I argue that the Canadian parliamentary system is advantaged and better suited compared to its American counterparts based on holding the government accountable to the constituents, the political stability of the country due to the multi-political party system, and its efficiency with such political parties.

The Canadian parliamentary system follows …show more content…

The House of Commons hosts the 338 elected officials of Canada. Each member of parliament(MP) must win a majority of the votes in the riding or constituency they run in to obtain a seat. Most of the time, candidates will affiliate with or are part of one of many political parties. The party that wins the most seats in the house will then have their leader become the Prime Minister of Canada(PM). The Senate on the other hand, houses 105 un-elected officials, who are appointed by the Governor General of Canada, the Queen’s representative(The queen is still the Head of State). These officials may serve until they are 75 years old. In addition to aiding in appointing the Senate, the Prime Minister is also responsible for appointing their cabinet. The members of the Prime Minister’s cabinet are selected from MPs, and are responsible for taking on different portfolio(s), proposing bills about their portfolio(s) and implementing policies related to their portfolio(s). The selection of proper MPs to fulfil each portfolio is vital to maintaining the House of Commons confidence, which leads to …show more content…

I believe that the Canadian system does a better job of representing its constituents. Firstly, it allows the people to hold the government accountable to what they elected them to do in the first place. The constituents are able to hold their representatives accountable due to the strong party system in place. As an MP is elected, they campaign on behalf of their party, following a platform the party believes. “People vote… for a party on the basis of its platform, which they expect the party and its members to follow.” (Lecomte, 2018). In turn for one’s vote, it is expected that the MP follows the platform they campaigned with. While in the American system, steering away from the party platform is normalised and many times endorsed by constituents. Lecomte believes “individual MPs have a responsibility to give voice to the wishes of their constituents while also remaining faithful to their own political and moral principles.” (Franks, 1987, p. 106 as cited by Lecomte, 2018). This shows that it is expected of MPs to uphold their political views, which are most likely to resemble the platform of their affiliated party but also uphold and voice the concerns of their constituents. Thus, it allows for people to hold their elected officials accountable without having to do much but put faith in the system that was built for such a