The Senate in Canada should be abolished Introduction: Canada senate is a part of legislation institution in Canada, which represents the interests of upper class people. Different from America, it is not produced by election but directly-nominated by the premier and appointed by governor. Senate, governor, and the House of Commons are like three legs of a tripod which constitute the congress and legislation system in Canada. Senate undertakes the responsibility of proposing expostulation to governor and cabinet, which acts the role of supervision and restriction. Senate played critical role when Canada established federal government in 1867, the diversity of senators warrants the smooth convey of popular will to governors and legislators coming from different ethnic group and social status.
Introduction The Canadian Senate has been an institution of the country since the multiple negotiations that made possible the establishment of the federation. Section 17 of CA 1867 states that Canada is to have a Parliament comprising a House of Commons (lower house), a Senate (upper house), and the Crown. However, from the parliamentary institutions aforementioned, only the elected members of the House of Commons could claim to have a democratic mandate: the position of the Crown is hereditary, and the governor general that represents it, as well as senators, are appointed (Malcolmson et al. 2021). The. Despite Canadians’ general dissatisfaction with the Senate and ongoing criticism around its undemocratic model, patronage appointments and
To ensure that all Canadians are truly equal, the "Triple E" Senate was created. It stands for effective, equal and elected. Since the Senate is not elected it represents the worst of partisian, political patronage, it lacks all legitimacy. Also, if they are elected they would be accountable to the regions they represent. Overall, some people believe the Senate will never be a legitimate part of the lawmaking body, unless it's members are accountable to the people of Canada through a democratic election process.
For this reason Quebec wants to separate from Canada. If they are politically separated they will have the power to make their own laws on whether on not
280). This is relevant as the Conservative party is very different from the NDP and Liberal parties, and they are the largest parties currently in Canadian politics. Which then makes it clear that even if they, the Conservatives, wanted to form a coalition to take majority of the house, they had little chance of staying with the other two parties since they share similar values with each other. Once again, Proportional Representation could be more accurate as smaller parties have higher chances of winning seats in the house and maybe giving the Conservatives a chance to form a majority coalition, the article expresses that if another coalition formed, Canada could see civil unrest (Millard, 2024). While the first part of the post is formal participation, it also mentions informal participation and contentious politics, bringing up that Canada could face a similar event as when Donald Trump supporters invaded the capital on January 6, 2024.
It allows them to use tactics such as packing and cracking which can have a tremendous impact on elections. Packing is when politicians draw out district maps for each party based on population. Packing can swing the vote because the population of one party could out weight the population of the minority party within the same district, causing the entire district to swing with the majority. Voters feel that the other tactic, cracking, gives them a disadvantage because the political parties are being spread out between multiple districts which causes one district to have the majority party in multiple areas (King, Elizabeth). When the politicians of the party in power have drawn out the voters’ map, they maintain power over the lines of the map.
The new Constitution and Charter were controversial in the provinces, but Pierre Trudeau’s determination
For example, when the Parti Québécois leader René Lévesque proposed a sovereignty-association with Canada, which would enable Quebec to have political independence however they would have close economic ties with Canada in 1980, a separation seemed possible (Archibald, 2016). The referendum for a consensus on the sovereignty-association, held in May of 1980, resulted in a 60 percent rejection and thus the sovereignty-association between Quebec and Canada was not carried out (Hudon, 2013). Although the sovereignty-association referendum had ultimately failed, the Parti Québécois were re-elected in 1981, indicating that separatism itself had not yet died in the province and thus, the threat of Quebec’s independence was still very present (Stein, 2006). Quebec also isolated themselves from Canada when they had disagreed with the patriated and new Constitution in 1981, as their government felt that they were still not equal in comparison to the other provinces (Gall, 2006). All things considered, Quebec’s possible freedom from Canada became a real possibility in the 1980s and the threat of separatism was a key factor in the change of Quebec
Absolutism has led to many societal changes and lack therefore of. Canada has experienced Stability and Change as a result of its government, different Canadian political parties has ideals and objects that both progress or reject society and constant change in government ensures that policies proposed by governments are wholesomely beneficial to
The main advantage is that it removes the concentration of power from one individual. This ensures that abuse of power is limited. Giving different individuals from varying parties will also result in the creation of checks and balances in the executive. A lieutenant governor from the Democratic Party will be able to check the activities and the undertakings of a Republican governor thus ensuring that they operate within the confines of the law and the powers of their office. Also, the system allows for the introduction or the enforcement of the manifestos held by both parties, thereby resulting in greater benefits to the population.
Many questions were in Canadians heads as they wondered about how this power was going to be implemented. Will the federal government be allowed
All over Canada, Canadians have different views as for what should we do about the Senate .Yes, the Senate has some important qualities but what we do not need the Senate for today is one of its original purposes, to represent the interests of the provinces in the federal legislative policy process. For example, people like “Ralph Goodale, who fought hard for Saskatchewan’s interest around the Cabinet table for more than a dozen years. John Baird, the regional minister for Eastern Ontario today,”(Eugene Lang) is a current equivalent. The provincial interest is taken care of by regional ministers in a way that no senator or group of senators could hope to
This corrupt system as some refer to it has many people confused and wondering what benefits are for Canadians. A specific case of the Charter being ineffective is the case Arsenault-Cameron v. Prince Edward
"Candidate with the highest number of the vote wins the right to represent the particular seat in the House of Commons", according to CBC news. There are some limitations regarding this method. First of all, it could possibly happen that candidate with less than half vote wins, which means it only reaches minority people's desired outcome. In addition to the tactical voting, the two-party system could be a serious problem. Since only the first matters, candidates with the low possibility to win may exist the election.
THE BIG GAME Ally jumped out bed, excited for her big soccer game. She got dressed for school,ate breakfast,and headed for the bus stop. When she got on the bus. Ally met up with her friend Zoe (who is also on Ally’s soccer team).
