POLI 308 - Final Exam Notes
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of British Columbia *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
308
Subject
Political Science
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
Pages
67
Uploaded by aryanbakshi10
POLI 308 - FINAL EXAM NOTES2
CHAPTER 1 - ANALYZING POLITICAL LEADERSHIP:
Key Terms:
1.
Leadership as Positional Frames:
Refers to a concept where leadership is understood
based on the position a leader holds within an organization. This concept views leadership
through the lens of formal authority and the associated responsibilities, privileges, and
powers that come with a specific position. What those in formal authority do.
2.
Leadership as
Relational Frames:
Emphasizes the importance of interpersonal
relationships, communication, and collaboration in leadership. Rather than focusing solely
on formal authority or position, this approach views leadership as a process that emerges
from the interactions and relationships between people within an organization. By focusing
on relationships, leaders can foster a more collaborative and inclusive work environment.
3.
Leadership as Prescriptive Frames:
Refers to an approach where leadership is based on
theories, or sets of guidelines that prescribe how leaders should act and behave. It is also a
process of personal or ethical improvement. The significance of this approach is that it
provides a clear, structured roadmap for leadership behaviour, which can be particularly
useful for new leaders or in organizations that value consistency and standardized practices.
4.
Political Leadership:
A subset of leadership which focuses on those leaders/behaviours
whose domain is a political community and whose purpose is the public interest/good. How
we analyze and explain what political leaders do and why.
5.
Institutional Choice Approaches:
Refers to methods of decision-making that emphasize the
role of institutions in shaping the choices of individuals and groups. These approaches
suggest that the rules, norms, and structures of institutions significantly influence the
decisions and behaviours of people. The significance of this perspective is that it highlights
how political outcomes are not merely the result of individual preferences or actions, but are
also deeply influenced by the institutional context. This understanding helps in designing
more effective institutions and policies.
6.
Psychological Choice Approaches:
Focuses on how individual psychological factors, such
as perceptions, motivations, cognitive biases, and emotions, influence the decision-making
process. This shows that choices are often not purely rational but are significantly shaped by
psychological influences. The significance of this approach lies in its ability to provide
deeper insights into why people make certain decisions.
7.
Rational Choice Approaches:
Refers to the concept that individuals make decisions based
on the rational evaluation of the available information, aiming to maximize their benefit or
utility. The significance of this perspective is its application in various fields like economics,
political science, and sociology for predicting human behavior.
Notes:
Tension between Democracy and Leadership?
•
Democratic Elitism: is a political theory which states that while political power is concentrated
in the hands of a small, educated, and affluent elite, elections and other democratic processes
are essential for legitimizing and controlling the power of these elites.
•
Pluralism: is the theory that political power and influence are distributed among a wide array
of diverse groups and organizations in society, rather than being concentrated in the hands of a
single elite or dominant group.
•
Egalitarianism: is the philosophy advocating for equal rights, opportunities, and treatment for
all people, emphasizing the elimination of social and economic inequalities.
Democratic Political Leadership: The processes through which individuals and groups pursue the
community’s public interest under conditions of dispersed power, public scrutiny and
accountability, and normative constraint.
DEBATE: AGENCY VS STRUCTURE:
Individual Leaders = Agency
Systemic Factors= Structure
1. Agency:
emphasizes the role of individual leaders and their decisions, actions, and personal
qualities. It suggests that leaders matter significantly, as their unique skills, choices, and
leadership styles can directly impact the success or failure of a political entity. Leaders are seen
as pivotal in navigating crises, initiating change, setting visions, and inspiring others.
2. Structure:
The structural perspective argues that larger forces such as economic conditions,
social and cultural norms, organizational systems, and political environments play a more
determining role in outcomes. According to this view, even strong leaders are constrained by
these external factors, and their ability to effect change is limited.
Leaders tend to matter more in situations where:
•
The context allows for significant individual discretion and decision-making power.
•
There is a high degree of uncertainty or crisis, where leadership choices can steer outcomes.
•
The political culture emphasizes and values individual leadership.
Outcomes are more likely the result of impersonal, larger forces when:
•
Institutional, economic, or social structures strongly dictate or limit options available to
leaders.
•
There is a complex system of governance diluting the impact of any single individual.
•
Long-term trends or systemic issues play a dominant role in determining the course of events.
LEADERSHIP as a CAUSE and as a CONSEQUENCE:
1. Leadership as a Cause: Leadership is seen as a driving force that shapes the direction, culture,
success, or failure of a group or organization. Leaders, through their decisions, actions, and
influence, are thought to cause significant changes in their environments. This includes initiating
new strategies, influencing team dynamics, and steering the group through challenges. The
emphasis is on the proactive role of leaders in causing outcomes, whether they are changes in
policies, shifts in organizational culture, or shifts in societal norms.
2. Leadership as a Consequence: Leadership is viewed as a result of the surrounding
environment, circumstances, or the needs of a group or organization. Here, leaders are chosen
based on specific situational requirements, organizational challenges, or societal demands. For
example, a crisis may necessitate the emergence of a particular type of leader, or an evolving
corporate culture might lead to the selection of a leader who embodies that culture.
How do we understand the behaviours of leaders and outcomes of leadership?
1. Focus of Analysis: Different approaches concentrate on various aspects of leadership. Some
focus on the personal traits, behaviours, and decision-making styles of individual leaders (trait
and behavioural theories), while others examine the interactions between leaders and followers
(transactional and transformational leadership theories). There are also approaches that focus on
the situational context (situational leadership theory), the role of power dynamics (power-
influence theories), or the cultural and systemic factors influencing leadership (cultural and
systems theories).
2. Individual/Context:
•
Individual-Centric Approaches: These emphasize the personal attributes, skills, and actions of
the leader. They analyze how personal qualities like charisma, intelligence, decisiveness, and
emotional intelligence influence leadership effectiveness.
•
Context-Centric Approaches: These focus on the environment in which leadership is
exercised, including organizational culture, social norms, economic conditions, and political
systems. They explore how these external factors shape leadership styles, effectiveness, and
outcomes.
INSTITUTIONAL CHOICE ANALYSIS:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Institutional analysis is used to understand the functioning and outcomes of institutions. It
focuses on how institutional rules or systems of institutions shape the behavior of individuals and
the outcomes of various processes within societies or organizations. Key aspects of institutional
analysis include:
Institutional Rules: This aspect of institutional analysis examines the formal and informal rules
that govern behavior within institutions. These rules include laws, regulations, and norms.
Systems of Institutions: Institutional analysis looks at how different institutions interact with
each other, and how these interactions shape outcomes.
Role of Institutions in Shaping Behavior: A key focus is on understanding how institutions
influence the choices, strategies, and interactions of individuals and groups. This includes how
incentives provided by institutions shape behavior, and how institutional cultures influence the
values and norms of their members.
Impact on Outcomes: Institutional analysis seeks to understand how the structure and functioning
of institutions impact various outcomes, such as economic performance, political stability, social
equity, and organizational effectiveness.
Assumptions:
1. Leadership is positional.
2. Institutions significantly shape the behaviour of leaders.
3. Institutional variation creates variation in executive leadership.
PSYCHOLOGICAL CHOICE ANALYSIS:
By focusing on the psychological aspects of leadership, this approach provides insights into why
leaders behave the way they do, how they influence their followers, and what makes them
effective or ineffective in different contexts. It emphasizes that understanding the individual
leader is key to comprehending broader leadership dynamics.
1. Formation of Leaders: Psychological analysis explores how certain experiences and aspects of
a leader's background contribute to their development. This includes examining childhood
experiences, educational background, formative life events, and early career experiences. The
focus is on understanding how these experiences shape a leader's values, beliefs, and attitudes
towards leadership.
2. Motivation: Understanding what drives a leader is crucial in psychological analysis.
Motivations can range from a desire for power, achievement, or affiliation to a commitment to a
particular cause or a sense of duty.
3. Characteristics that Matter to Leader Behavior:
•
Personality Traits
•
Cognitive Abilities
•
Emotional Intelligence
•
Interpersonal Skills
•
Values and Ethics
4. Behavioural Outcomes: Psychological analysis also looks at how these characteristics manifest
in leader behavior. This includes leadership style, decision-making processes, and how leaders
cope with stress and adversity.
RATIONAL CHOICE ANALYSIS:
Rational choice analysis is a theory which states that individuals and groups make decisions by
rational calculation to maximize their own benefits or utility. This approach is particularly
focused on understanding behavior in interdependent contexts, where the actions of one
individual or group are affected by the actions of others.
In summary, rational choice analysis offers a way to understand and predict the behavior of
individuals and groups in interdependent contexts by focusing on rational decision-making
processes, strategic interactions, and the maximization of utility.
Assumptions:
1. Individuals/groups can be conceived of as rational actors.
2. Rational means well-defined preferences and utility maximizing choice.
3. The interaction of rational actors creates leadership outcomes.
CHAPTER 2 - LEADERSHIP STYLE AND CONTEXT:
Themes: assessment of leadership style, role of context in shaping leadership
Key Terms:
1.
Leadership Style:
Refers to the manner in which political leaders interact with their
constituents, peers, and how they manage the governance and administrative processes.
These styles can range from authoritarian, where decision-making is centralized, to
democratic, where decision-making is more participatory and inclusive of different
viewpoints.
2.
Transformational Style:
Transformational leaders in politics seek to bring about significant
change by challenging the status quo, encouraging creativity, and empowering followers to
contribute to the vision. This style's significance lies in its ability to drive major societal and
political reforms, often leading to lasting impacts on policy, governance, and the overall
direction of a political entity.
3.
Transactional Style:
In this style, political leaders often rely on established procedures,
short-term goals, and a clear hierarchy to manage and govern, emphasizing order, routine,
and efficiency. The significance of transactional leadership lies in its ability to maintain
stability in governance, though it may sometimes lack the flexibility and innovation offered
by transformational approaches.
4.
Active-Passive Style:
Refers to when an active leader proactively engages in decision-
making, problem-solving, and team involvement, often taking initiative and leading from the
front. In contrast, a passive leader tends to be more reactive, stepping in only when
necessary, and often allowing teams or situations to dictate the course of action. The
significance of this style is: active leadership can foster a more dynamic and responsive
environment, while passive leadership can promote autonomy and self-organization, but may
also lead to a lack of direction or delayed decision-making.
5.
Positive-Negative Style:
Positive-negative leadership style contrasts approaches based on
encouragement and optimism (positive) with those centered around criticism and pessimism
(negative). Positive leaders focus on strengths, potential, and constructive feedback to
motivate and inspire their teams, fostering a supportive and empowering environment. In
contrast, negative leaders may rely on fear, fault-finding, and a focus on problems, which can
lead to a demotivated and stressed workforce, but in some contexts, it might create a sense of
urgency or drive quick results.
6.
Leadership Trait Analysis:
Is a theory that focuses on identifying specific personality traits
and characteristics that distinguish effective leaders from non-leaders. This approach
involves examining traits such as intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and
sociability to predict leadership effectiveness. The significance of this analysis lies in its
utility for selecting and developing leaders.
7.
Leadership Capital Index:
Is used to evaluate a leader's political strength and effectiveness.
It considers factors such as a leader's skills, relations, reputation, and results of their
leadership. The significance of this index lies in providing a tool for assessing the overall
impact of political leaders, helping in understanding their ability to implement policies and
survive politically.
How do leaders react to political constraints?
The reaction of leaders to political constraints can be analyzed through theories like
institutionalism, behaviouralism, and power dynamics. Leaders often respond to constraints by
strategizing within the given parameters, leveraging their personal influence, negotiating with
key stakeholders, or seeking to reform the constraints. The role of public opinion, media, and
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
interest groups in shaping these constraints illustrates the complex relationship between leaders
and the broader political environment.
How open are leaders to information?
The openness of leaders to information is typically explored through the lens of decision-making
theories, cognitive psychology, and political behavior. Discussions might centre on how various
factors, such as cognitive biases and the influence of advisors and constituents, affect a leader's
receptiveness to new or challenging information.
What are their motives for seeking leadership positions?
The motives for seeking leadership positions would delve into theories of political behavior,
psychology, and sociology. The focus would be on a range of motivations, including personal
ambition, desire for power and influence, commitment to public service, ideological conviction,
and the pursuit of specific policy goals. Rational choice theory can be used which states that
leaders are motivated by self-interest, and unselfish models, which suggest a desire to contribute
to the public good. Additionally, the influence of external factors like societal expectations,
political culture, and historical context on shaping these motivations would also be a critical area
of study.
How do you measure Leadership Trait Analysis?
1. Identification of Key Traits: Include intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and
sociability.
2. Use of Psychometric Assessments: To measure these traits, psychometric assessments and
personality tests, such as the Big Five Personality Test, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), or
the Leadership Trait Questionnaire (LTQ), are often used.
3. 360-Degree Feedback: Gathering feedback from various sources such as peers, subordinates,
and superiors can provide a comprehensive view of a leader's traits.
4. Behavioural Observation and Analysis: Observing leaders in action, either through direct
observation or through case studies.
5. Historical and Biographical Analysis: For historical figures or high-profile leaders, analyzing
biographical information, historical accounts, and their public and private actions can give clues
about their leadership traits.
6. Correlation with Leadership Outcomes: To validate the significance of these traits, researchers
often study the correlation between the presence of certain traits and positive leadership
outcomes, such as team performance, organizational success, or the leader's ability to navigate
crises.
The impact of leadership style depends on context
: factors external to the political
leader.
•
Context shapes the space for political leaders to operate
- Positional: authority granted to formal positions enables and constrains leaders’ ability to make
meaningful choices, can change with change in context.
- Relational: leadership as a “socially granted zone” by followers, can change with change in
context.
Explain Leadership in Context.
"Leadership in Context" refers to the understanding that a leader's effectiveness and style are
deeply influenced by the external environment in which they operate. This environment includes
a variety of factors:
1.
External Events (Crises and Shocks): Leaders often face unexpected challenges like
economic downturns, natural disasters, or political disruption. These events can test a
leader's resilience, adaptability, and crisis management skills. The way a leader responds to
such crises can define their tenure and significantly impact their effectiveness.
2.
Political Legitimacy and Support: A leader's ability to govern effectively is closely tied to
their level of political legitimacy and support from the public, political allies, and other
stakeholders. Leaders with strong support can push through more ambitious agendas and
reforms.
3.
Nature of Issues and Problems: The specific issues and problems a leader faces can shape
their leadership style and priorities. For example, leaders dealing with social unrest may
prioritize conflict resolution and community engagement, while those facing economic
challenges might focus on fiscal policy and market regulation.
4.
Institutional Rules: The formal structures within which leaders operate, such as constitutional
provisions, legal frameworks, and bureaucratic norms, significantly influence what leaders
can and cannot do. These rules can empower leaders but also limit their scope of action. For
instance, a president in a system with strong checks and balances may have less unilateral
power compared to a leader in a more centralized system.
Can we measure the Impact of Context on Leaders? Explain
Contextual factors, such as political, economic, social, and institutional environments, play a
significant role in shaping leadership effectiveness and styles. Here's how the impact of context
on leaders can be assessed:
1.
Comparative Analysis: By comparing leaders in similar roles but different contexts, or the
same leaders in different contexts over time, analysts can perceive how context influences
leadership behavior and effectiveness.
2.
Historical Case Studies: Studying leaders in historical contexts provides insights into how
specific environmental factors have shaped their decisions and effectiveness. For example,
analyzing how a leader like Winston Churchill navigated the context of World War II can
reveal the impact of extreme external pressures on leadership style and decisions.
3.
Surveys and Interviews: Collecting data from people who work closely with the leader, like
aides, colleagues, or subordinates, can provide qualitative insights into how the leader
responds to contextual challenges and opportunities.
4.
Statistical Analysis: Quantitative methods can be used to analyze the correlation between
certain contextual factors (like economic conditions or political stability) and leadership
outcomes. This requires a large amount of data for accuracy.
5.
Psychometric Assessments: Tools can be used to assess how a leader's style and effectiveness
are perceived in different contexts. This can help in understanding how adaptable a leader is
to varying environments.
6.
Policy Outcome Analysis: Evaluating the outcomes of a leader’s policies in different
contexts can provide insights into how effectively they navigated the constraints and
opportunities presented by those contexts.
CHAPTER 3 - THEORY OF THE EXECUTIVE:
KEY TERMS:
1.
Prerogative Power:
Prerogative powers are historical powers traditionally held by the
monarch, now often exercised by the executive branch, including powers like issuing
pardons and managing foreign affairs. These powers are significant as they allow for a
degree of flexibility and authority in governance, especially in areas where formal legislative
procedures are not established.
2.
Constitutional Power:
Constitutional powers are those explicitly granted to a branch of
government by the constitution. They are significant as they provide a legal framework for
governance, ensuring that the actions of government entities are within the bounds of law
and democratic principles.
3.
Emergency Power:
Emergency powers are special authorities granted to the government to
act decisively during national crises like wars, natural disasters, or other emergencies. These
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
powers are significant for allowing swift and effective responses in situations where normal
legislative processes might be too slow.
4.
Section 9 of the Constitution Act, 1867:
Section 9 assigns the executive power to the
Canadian monarch, represented by the Governor General. This is significant as it establishes
the constitutional basis for the Crown’s role in Canada’s parliamentary system.
5.
Responsible Government:
refers to a system where the executive branch is accountable to
the legislature and to the electorate. This principle is significant as it ensures democratic
accountability and the legitimacy of the government in parliamentary democracies.
6.
Constitutional Monarchy:
A constitutional monarchy is a form of government where a
monarch acts as the head of state within the parameters of a constitution. It’s significant for
balancing the stability and continuity provided by a hereditary monarchy with the democratic
values of a constitutionally governed state.
7.
Republicanism:
Republicanism is a political ideology that advocates for a government
where the head of state is a representative of the people, often elected, and not a hereditary
monarch. Its significance lies in its emphasis on democracy, citizenship, and the public good,
often reflecting the values of self-governance and civic responsibility.
What characterizes the Executive Role in Politics?
The executive role in politics is characterized by its responsibility for implementing laws,
overseeing the administration of government, and guiding the direction of national policy.
Executives, such as presidents or prime ministers, typically hold the highest level of decision-
making authority in the government, often responsible for setting the political agenda, managing
the state's bureaucracy, and representing the nation both domestically and internationally. They
must balance the demands of governance, including responding to public needs, managing crises,
and navigating complex political landscapes. Additionally, executives often play a key role in
foreign policy and defence, and their leadership style and decisions can significantly impact the
political, economic, and social wellbeing of their country.
What Powers of the Executive are inherent or implied in its role?
Inherent or implied powers of the executive role typically include the ability to respond swiftly
to emergencies or unforeseen situations, the power to represent the nation in international
matters, and the discretion to manage and direct executive branch operations and personnel.
These powers allow for flexibility and decisiveness in situations where formal legislative
processes may be too slow, such as during national crises or when conducting sensitive
diplomatic negotiations. Additionally, executives often exercise influence over public opinion
and political discourse, leveraging their position as a national leader to shape policy debates and
national priorities.
How are Executives structured in Democratic Constitutional Systems today?
In democratic constitutional systems today, executives are typically structured either as a
presidential system, where the president serves as both head of state and government, or a
parliamentary system, where the prime minister is distinct from the head of state (president). In a
presidential system, the president is often elected directly by the people and holds considerable
independent authority, with a separate election from the legislative body. In contrast, in a
parliamentary system, the prime minister is usually a member of the legislature and is appointed
based on the majority party or coalition in the parliament, with the head of state often having a
more ceremonial role. Both systems include checks and balances, with the executive's power
counterbalanced by the legislature and judiciary to prevent authoritarianism and ensure
accountability.
What are the key differences between a ‘parliamentary’ system like Canada and a
‘presidential’ system like the United States?
Executive and Legislative Relationship: In a parliamentary system, government is derived from
the parliament. The Prime Minister, who leads the government, is usually a member of the
parliament and is selected by the legislative majority. In contrast, in a presidential system, the
President is elected separately from the legislature and serves as both the head of state and
government, with a fixed term independent of the legislative majority.
What is the Executive in Canada’s Parliamentary System?
In Canada's parliamentary system, the executive is composed of the Monarch, represented by the
Governor General at the federal level, and the Prime Minister along with the Cabinet. The
Governor General performs ceremonial duties and acts on the advice of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet, playing a largely symbolic role as the formal head of state. The Prime Minister, as the
head of government, is typically the leader of the party with the most seats in the House of
Commons and holds substantial political power, responsible for guiding government policies,
decisions, and administration. The Cabinet, chosen by the Prime Minister from among the
members of Parliament, assists in setting government policy and administering various
government departments.
Why do we need an Executive?
The executive is the only branch that can provide effective direction, action, and security of the
community. It fulfills the need and capacity for leadership.
Explain the Scope of Executive Power.
1.
Inherent or Implied Powers: These are powers not explicitly stated in a constitution or law
but are deemed necessary for the executive to fulfill its role effectively. They include the
ability to respond to unforeseen or emergency situations, make executive agreements, and
exert influence in domestic and foreign affairs.
2.
Prerogative Powers: Prerogative powers are historical rights and privileges that were
traditionally held by the monarch but are now often exercised by the executive branch,
especially in Commonwealth countries. These can include the power to issue pardons,
appoint certain officials, and conduct foreign affairs.
3.
Constitutional Powers: These are powers explicitly granted to the executive by the
constitution. They vary significantly depending on the country's constitutional structure but
generally include powers such as vetoing legislation, appointing government officials, and
executing the laws passed by the legislature.
4.
Federative and Emergency Powers: Federative powers pertain to foreign policy and national
defence, including declaring war, negotiating treaties, and managing diplomatic relations.
Emergency powers are special powers that the executive can exercise during times of
national crisis, such as natural disasters, wars, or economic crises.
5.
Express Powers: These are powers explicitly given to the executive through laws passed by
the legislature. They include a wide range of specific authorities, such as the power to
enforce environmental regulations, oversee federal agencies, and manage national security
operations.
Why do these Powers Exist?
1.
Situation of executive compared to legislature.
2.
Vagueness of law and legal argument.
3.
Executive preference for delegated authority.
How to constrain the Executive Power in a Democracy?
Constraining executive power in a democracy is achieved through a system of checks and
balances, which typically involves the legislative and judicial branches of government. The
legislature can limit executive power by enacting laws, controlling budgetary allocations, and, in
some cases, having the authority to impeach or vote no confidence in executive leaders. The
judiciary checks the executive by reviewing the constitutionality of executive actions and by
adjudicating disputes involving executive decisions.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
CHAPTER 4 - THE CROWN IN CANADA:
What are the Roles and Functions played by the Crown in Canadian Government?
In Canada's parliamentary system, the Crown refers to the monarch, currently represented by the
Governor General at the federal level. The Crown plays several important roles and functions:
1.
Ceremonial Role: The Crown performs ceremonial duties, symbolizing the legal and political
continuity of the state. This includes the opening of Parliament, the granting of honours, and
participation in national celebrations.
2.
Constitutional Role: As a constitutional monarchy, Canada assigns the Crown a key role in
the functioning of the government. The Governor General, acting on behalf of the Crown,
gives Royal Assent to legislation passed by Parliament, making it law.
3.
Appointment of the Prime Minister and Cabinet: The Crown formally appoints the Prime
Minister, generally the leader of the party with the most seats in the House of Commons. The
Crown also appoints other ministers on the advice of the Prime Minister to form the Cabinet.
4.
Dissolution and Summoning of Parliament: The Crown has the power to dissolve Parliament
and call for new elections, usually on the advice of the Prime Minister. It also has the power
to summon Parliament for a new session.
5.
Guardian of Responsible Government: The Crown acts as a guardian of constitutional norms
and practices, ensuring that the government operates within the bounds of the law and
adheres to democratic principles.
6.
International Role: The Crown represents Canada in the international arena, particularly in
diplomatic ceremonies and state visits, helping to maintain the image and sovereignty of
Canada on the global stage.
How are the Executive Powers of the Crown exercised?
In Canada, the executive powers of the Crown are exercised in accordance with the principles of
a constitutional monarchy and responsible government. The key aspects of this arrangement
include:
1.
Royal Assent: The Governor General, on behalf of the Crown, gives Royal Assent to
legislation passed by Parliament, which is a formal step required for a bill to become law.
This is typically a ceremonial act, and refusal to grant assent is extremely rare in modern
times.
2.
Appointments: The Governor General formally appoints the Prime Minister, usually the
leader of the party with the most seats in the House of Commons, and other Cabinet
members on the advice of the Prime Minister. Similarly, appointments of judges,
ambassadors, and other high officials are made by the Governor General, typically following
the Prime Minister's recommendations.
3.
Dissolution and Summoning of Parliament: The Governor General has the power to dissolve
Parliament and call for new elections, but these actions are taken on the advice of the Prime
Minister.
4.
Prerogative Powers: Certain prerogative powers, such as pardons and the handling of
international affairs, are formally vested in the Crown but are exercised by the Prime
Minister and Cabinet.
5.
Ceremonial Functions: The Governor General performs various ceremonial duties that reflect
the Crown's role, such as delivering the Speech from the Throne, representing Canada in
international events, and participating in national ceremonies.
What are the Functions of the Crown? Talk about Constitutional and Symbolic functions.
1. Constitutional Functions:
- Granting Royal Assent: The Crown formally approves legislation passed by Parliament, a
necessary step for a bill to become law.
- Appointment of the Prime Minister and Cabinet: The Crown appoints the Prime Minister and,
on their advice, appoints the Cabinet members.
- Summoning and Dissolution of Parliament: The Crown has the power to summon and
dissolve Parliament, typically on the advice of the Prime Minister, which is essential for calling
elections.
- Reserve Powers: In rare and exceptional circumstances, the Crown holds reserve powers,
which include appointing a Prime Minister, dismissing a Prime Minister, and refusing to dissolve
Parliament. These are exercised sparingly and under specific constitutional conventions.
- Prerogative Powers: These include powers like issuing pardons and overseeing foreign
affairs, which are generally exercised by the government in the Crown's name.
2. Symbolic Functions:
- National Unity and Continuity: The Crown symbolizes the continuity and stability of the
state, transcending the politics of the day.
- Ceremonial Duties: The Crown performs various ceremonial duties like state openings of
Parliament, representing the country at official events, and participating in national
commemorations.
- International Representation: The Crown represents the nation in the international sphere,
particularly in ceremonial and diplomatic capacities.
- Promotion of National Identity: The Crown plays a role in fostering national identity and
unity, serving as a symbol of the nation's history, traditions, and values.
How does the Constitution define Crown’s Power?
The Constitution of Canada does not explicitly define the powers of the Crown in detail. Instead,
these powers are derived from constitutional conventions and historical practices. The
Constitution Act of 1867 established the framework for a constitutional monarchy, where the
Crown's role is largely symbolic and ceremonial. The actual executive power is vested in the
Crown but is exercised by the elected government, particularly the Prime Minister and the
Cabinet, under the principles of responsible government. As a result, the Crown's powers in
Canada are understood more through tradition and convention than through explicit
constitutional definition.
-
Responsible Government democratizes the Crown by subordinating its authority to an
Executive chosen from and accountable to the House of Commons.
Explain Constitutional Monarchy VS Republicanism.
In a Constitutional Monarchy, a hereditary monarch serves as the official head of state within the
boundaries of a constitution and their role is largely ceremonial with real political power
typically vested in an elected parliament and prime minister. The monarchy symbolizes
continuity and tradition, and its powers are often limited by constitutional and democratic
principles.
In contrast, Republicanism is characterized by having a head of state who is usually elected,
either directly by the people or through a representative body, for a defined term. This system
emphasizes the sovereignty of the people and often incorporates a clear separation of powers
among the branches of government.
Do you think that it is time for Canada to reconsider its ties to the British monarchy, now
that Charles III is king. Why?
On one hand, the monarchy represents historical traditions and cultural heritage significant to
many Canadians. On the other hand, some argue for a move towards a more republican form of
government, reflecting a modern, independent national identity.
What are the Obstacles to Abolition for Canada?
It would require a substantial amendment to the Constitution Act, which necessitates the
agreement of not only the federal parliament but also all ten provincial legislatures, a process that
is complex and often politically challenging. Additionally, there are significant historical and
cultural ties to the monarchy that are deeply ingrained in Canada's national identity and heritage.
Public opinion is also a factor, as any major constitutional change would require broad public
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
support, which varies across different regions and demographics. Lastly, the practical
implications of transitioning to a republican system, including changes to legal and governmental
structures, represent a significant undertaking.
CHAPTER 5 - PRIME MINISTERSHIP
KEY TERMS:
1.
Political Executive:
The political executive refers to the branch of government responsible
for implementing laws and policies, typically comprising the head of state (such as a
president or monarch), the head of government (such as a prime minister), and the cabinet.
Its significance lies in its central role in governance, decision-making, and administration,
shaping the direction of national policy and the functioning of the government.
2.
Constitutional Conventions:
Constitutional conventions are unwritten rules that are
followed by convention rather than by law, guiding the constitutional behavior of political
actors. Their significance stems from their role in filling gaps in formal constitutional law,
guiding the practices of governance, and ensuring the smooth functioning of the democratic
process in systems like the UK and Canada.
3.
Phases of Party System Development:
-
Embryonic Phase:
This initial phase involves the formation of political parties, often marked
by loose organization and limited political influence. Its significance lies in laying the
groundwork for the development of a party system.
-
Establishment Phase:
Parties gain official recognition and start participating in elections.
This phase is significant for the development of party identities and the beginning of
structured political competition.
-
Party Consolidation Phase:
During this phase, parties solidify their presence and roles in the
political system, often establishing a stable base of supporters. Its significance is seen in the
stabilization of the political landscape and the emergence of a more predictable party system.
-
Institutionalization Phase:
In this phase, parties become entrenched in the political system,
with well-defined structures and roles. This phase is significant for the maturity and stability it
brings to the political system, often leading to more effective governance.
-
Mediatization Phase:
This recent phase reflects the growing influence of media on political
parties, shaping how they communicate, campaign, and engage with the electorate. Its
significance lies in the transformation of political engagement and the shifting landscape of
political communication.
Where does the prime ministership come from? How has it changed?
The office of the Prime Minister in Canada evolved from the British Westminster system and
was not explicitly created by any specific statute or constitutional document. It emerged as a key
position in the Canadian government following Confederation in 1867, reflecting the need for a
leader of the government within a parliamentary framework. The role and power of the Prime
Minister have significantly expanded over time, transitioning from being the "first among
equals" in the Cabinet to being the central figure in Canadian politics and governance. This
change has been driven by both the evolution of political practices and the expansion of the
federal government's role. The Prime Minister now holds considerable influence in setting
national policy and guiding the legislative agenda.
How do prime ministers exercise power? Are Canadian prime ministers too powerful?
Prime ministers in Canada exercise power through their leadership of the government, their
ability to set and guide the legislative agenda, their role in appointing and leading the Cabinet,
and their influence within their political party. They also have significant sway in national and
international policy decisions and represent the country on the global stage. Their power is often
amplified by party discipline, where members of their party typically vote in line with party
policy, thus consolidating the prime minister's legislative control.
The question of whether Canadian prime ministers are too powerful is a subject of debate. Critics
argue that the concentration of power in the Prime Minister's Office can lead to a lack of checks
and balances, diminishing the role of individual MPs and the parliament in governance. Others
contend that strong leadership is necessary for effective governance and that the existing
parliamentary and legal frameworks, along with democratic processes, provide adequate checks
on the prime minister's power. This debate touches on fundamental questions about the balance
between effective leadership and democratic accountability.
How do we assess leadership? What factors are most important in Canada?
Assessing leadership involves evaluating a range of factors. Key aspects include the
effectiveness of policy implementation, the leader's ability to navigate complex political
landscapes, communication skills, and the capacity to build consensus and manage diverse
viewpoints. In Canada, where the political system is a parliamentary democracy, the ability of a
leader to maintain the confidence of the House of Commons is crucial. Additionally, public
opinion is a significant factor, as it reflects the leader's ability to connect with and address the
concerns of the electorate. Other important criteria include ethical standards, transparency, and
how well the leader represents Canada on the international stage. These factors collectively
provide a holistic view of a leader's effectiveness and the impact of their leadership on the
nation's governance and standing.
Explain the Canadian Prime Minister and Canadas Parliamentary System based on Fusion
of Powers.
The Canadian Prime Minister and Canada's parliamentary system are characterized by a fusion
of powers, contrasting with the separation of powers typically seen in presidential systems like
that of the United States. In Canada, the executive and legislative branches of government are
interconnected, and this fusion is evident in several aspects:
Formal Executive:
The formal executive in Canada comprises the Monarch (represented by the
Governor General at the federal level) and the Privy Council. The Monarch's role is largely
ceremonial and symbolic, with the Governor General performing duties like giving Royal Assent
to legislation, summoning and dissolving Parliament, and other functions as the Monarch's
representative. These actions are largely ceremonial, and the Governor General acts on the
advice of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet.
Political Executive:
The political executive is led by the Prime Minister, who is the head of
government and typically the leader of the political party that holds the majority in the House of
Commons. The Prime Minister wields considerable power, including setting government policy,
selecting Cabinet ministers, and representing Canada both domestically and internationally. The
Prime Minister's power is bolstered by strong party discipline within the Canadian parliamentary
system, ensuring that party members generally vote in line with party policy.
Administrative Executive:
This refers to the bureaucracy or the civil service that carries out the
day-to-day administration and implementation of government policies and decisions. While the
administrative executive operates independently of political influence, it is ultimately
accountable to the political executive, namely the Prime Minister and the Cabinet.
The fusion of powers in Canada's parliamentary system means that the government (the Prime
Minister and the Cabinet) is drawn from the legislature (Parliament) and is accountable to it. The
government must maintain the confidence of the House of Commons to stay in power. If the
government loses a confidence vote, it may lead to its resignation or a call for a general election.
This system ensures a close link between the legislative and executive functions, providing for a
cohesive policy-making process but also requiring effective leadership and negotiation skills
from the Prime Minister to navigate the interconnected nature of these roles.
Explain the Context of the Prime Ministership.
The context of the Prime Ministership in a parliamentary system like Canada's is shaped by
several key factors. First, the political environment, including the party system, influences the
Prime Minister's leadership style and policy priorities, with the need to maintain party support
and manage internal politics. Secondly, public opinion and media play significant roles, as the
Prime Minister must navigate and respond to public expectations and scrutiny. Thirdly,
institutional structures, such as the division of powers between the federal and provincial
governments, set the boundaries within which the Prime Minister operates. Additionally, global
events and international relations impact the Prime Minister's agenda, especially in areas like
trade, security, and climate policy. Lastly, the historical and cultural context of Canada, including
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
its bilingual and multicultural fabric, also shapes the Prime Ministership, influencing policy
decisions and national unity efforts.
Explain the Historical Origins and Development.
The historical development of Canada's political system can be traced through several phases,
reflecting its unique context:
1.
Embryonic Phase (Pre-1720s):
Prior to the 1720s the political landscape was dominated by
indigenous governance structures and early European colonial administrations. The role of
European monarchs was significant in establishing colonial rule, with governance largely
exercised through colonial governors representing the monarch.
2.
Establishment Phase (18th Century):
This period saw significant developments with the
British conquest of New France and the subsequent establishment of British parliamentary
governance. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 and the Quebec Act of 1774 began to lay the
groundwork for a more structured colonial government, although the power still heavily
resided with the appointed governors and the British monarchy.
3.
Party Consolidation Phase (19th Century):
The 19th century in Canada was marked by
the gradual emergence and consolidation of political parties. Key events like the Rebellions
of 1837 and the achievement of Responsible Government in the 1840s in Nova Scotia and
Canada signalled a shift towards more local, party-based governance. The formation of
Canada as a confederation in 1867 further solidified party politics as central to the Canadian
political system.
4.
Institutionalization Phase (20th Century):
The 20th century saw the strengthening of
Canada's political institutions. With the Statute of Westminster in 1931 and the patriation of
the Constitution in 1982, Canada gained legislative independence and a distinct
constitutional framework. This era also saw the expansion of the federal government's role,
the establishment of key social welfare programs, and the development of a professional
civil service.
5.
Mediatization Phase (Mid-20th to 21st Centuries):
The latter half of the 20th century and
into the 21st has seen the growing influence of media in Canadian politics. The advent of
television and, later, the internet has significantly impacted political campaigning, public
discourse, and the engagement of citizens in the political process. The media has become a
crucial arena for political debate and a significant factor in shaping public opinion and
political outcomes.
CHAPTER 6 - PRIME MINISTERIAL POWER:
Explain: (1) Prime Ministerial Powers, (2) The Prime Ministerial Branch, (3) The
Concentration of Power Argument.
1.
Prime Ministerial Powers:
-
Prime Minister as Executive Leader:
In this role, the Prime Minister oversees the
functioning of the government, making key decisions on national policy, managing the
Cabinet, and directing the administration. They are responsible for the execution of
government functions and often have significant influence over appointments within the
government.
-
Prime Minister as Legislative and Party Leader:
As a legislative leader, the Prime Minister
guides the legislative agenda in Parliament, working to pass laws and policies. They also play
a crucial role as the leader of their political party, maintaining party discipline and cohesion,
and ensuring that party members support government policies.
-
Prime Minister as National Leader:
In this capacity, the Prime Minister represents the
country both domestically and internationally. They become the face of the nation, handling
diplomatic relations, leading international negotiations, and shaping the country's image
abroad.
2.
The Prime Ministerial Branch:
-
The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO):
The PMO consists of the Prime Minister’s closest
advisors and aides. It plays a critical role in political control, including managing the Prime
Minister's relations with the party, Parliament, and the public. The PMO is instrumental in
political strategy, communications, and the implementation of the Prime Minister's agenda.
-
The Privy Council Office (PCO):
The PCO serves as the secretariat to the Cabinet and
provides non-partisan, policy, and administrative support to the Prime Minister and Cabinet. It
helps in policy coordination, ensuring that decisions are made efficiently and are in line with
the overall objectives of the government.
3.
The Concentration of Power Argument:
-
This argument states that too much power is concentrated in the hands of the Prime Minister,
potentially leading to an imbalance in the democratic functioning of the government. Critics
of this concentration point to the Prime Minister’s influence over both the executive and
legislative branches and sway within the PMO and PCO. Concerns include the potential for
diminished parliamentary debate, weakened Cabinet roles, and lessened accountability, with
decisions increasingly centralized in the Prime Minister's Office.
Explain the Sources of Prime Ministerial Power.
1.
Constitutional Convention:
In Canada, many of the Prime Minister's powers are not
explicitly stated in the Constitution but are instead based on constitutional conventions.
These unwritten rules have developed over time and define how the government should
operate.
2.
Responsible Government:
This principle is central to Canada's parliamentary system. It
means that the Prime Minister and Cabinet are collectively responsible to the House of
Commons and to the electorate. The government must maintain the confidence of the
Commons to remain in power. This principle grants the Prime Minister significant influence,
as they lead the executive branch which is accountable to the legislative branch.
3.
Political Practice:
Over time, political practices have evolved to enhance the power of the
Prime Minister. This includes control over the party, influence in legislative processes, and
the ability to appoint Cabinet members. The Prime Minister's role as the central figure in
both the government and the party consolidates their power.
4.
Parties and Governments as Coherent Entities:
Political parties in Canada are generally
cohesive and disciplined. This coherence enhances the Prime Minister's power as party
members typically follow the leadership's direction. This party unity allows the Prime
Minister to effectively manage the legislative agenda and govern more efficiently.
5.
Need for Decisiveness and Coordination:
The complex nature of modern governance
requires decisiveness and coordination, roles which often fall to the Prime Minister. In
managing the country's affairs, the Prime Minister needs to make timely decisions and
ensure that various parts of the government work in a coordinated manner.
Explain Prime Minister as Executive Leader.
As the executive leader in Canada's parliamentary system, the Prime Minister holds a pivotal
role, primarily characterized by being the Crown's 'principal advisor' and exerting control over
the Cabinet, which includes managing the principal-agent problem.
1.
Crown's ‘Principal Advisor’:
In Canada, the Prime Minister acts as the principal advisor to
the Crown, represented by the Governor General. While the Governor General performs
certain constitutional and ceremonial duties, these are largely carried out on the advice of the
Prime Minister. This role as the principal advisor places the Prime Minister at the centre of
executive decision-making, giving them substantial influence over the government's
direction and policies.
2.
Control over Cabinet:
-
Appointment and Dismissal:
The Prime Minister has the power to appoint and dismiss
Cabinet ministers. This authority gives the Prime Minister significant leverage over the
Cabinet, as they can shape its composition to align with their policy goals and leadership style.
-
Setting the Agenda:
The Prime Minister sets the agenda for Cabinet discussions, determining
which issues are prioritized and how they are approached. This control over the agenda allows
the Prime Minister to steer government policy and decision-making processes.
-
Principal-Agent Problem:
The principal-agent problem refers to the challenges that arise
when one person (the agent), in this case, a Cabinet minister, is expected to act in the best
interest of another (the principal), here the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister must ensure
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
that Cabinet ministers are effectively carrying out government policies and initiatives in line
with their vision and the government's overall objectives. This involves monitoring and
managing ministers' performance, addressing any discrepancies between the actions of the
ministers and the expectations of the Prime Minister.
Explain Prime Minister as Legislative and Party Leader.
1.
Chief Legislator:
-
As the chief legislator, the Prime Minister plays a central role in shaping the legislative agenda
of the government. They are instrumental in proposing, guiding, and ensuring the passage of
key legislation through the Parliament.
-
The Prime Minister often sets priorities for legislative action and works closely with their
party members in the legislature to secure support for government bills. This role is crucial in
translating the government's policy objectives into tangible laws and regulations.
2.
Chief Public Spokesperson and ‘Brand Ambassador’:
-
The Prime Minister is often seen as the chief public spokesperson for the government. They
articulate government policies, decisions, and priorities to the public, acting as the face of the
government both nationally and internationally.
-
In this capacity, the Prime Minister also functions as a ‘brand ambassador’ for the country,
representing its interests, values, and image on the global stage. This involves engaging in
diplomatic relations, attending international summits, and participating in state visits.
3.
Party Leader:
-
As the leader of their political party, the Prime Minister holds significant influence within the
party structure. This role involves setting the party’s overall direction, strategy, and policies,
and maintaining party unity and discipline.
-
The Prime Minister’s position as party leader also impacts their role in the legislature, as they
are responsible for ensuring that their party members support the government’s legislative
agenda. Their leadership is key in mobilizing party support, managing internal party dynamics,
and sustaining the government's majority in the House of Commons.
In sum, the Prime Minister’s role as a legislative and party leader involves a combination of
policy-making, public communication, and political strategy, all of which are essential for the
effective functioning and success of the government. The ability to navigate these roles
effectively is crucial for maintaining legislative productivity, party cohesion, and public support.
Explain Prime Minister as National Leader for Canada.
1.
Chief Diplomat and Representative:
-
In the international arena, the Prime Minister acts as Canada's chief diplomat. This involves
representing Canada in global affairs, including at international summits, bilateral meetings,
and in diplomatic negotiations. The Prime Minister's role is to articulate and advance Canada's
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
foreign policy objectives, strengthen international relationships, and promote Canadian values
and interests abroad.
-
The Prime Minister also serves as the primary national representative, symbolizing Canada
both at home and overseas. This includes addressing the nation during significant events,
representing Canadian interests and culture, and being the face of Canada to the rest of the
world.
2.
Role in Executive Federalism:
-
Executive federalism in Canada refers to the collaborative relationship between the federal
government and the provinces. As Prime Minister, there is a responsibility to engage with
provincial premiers and territorial leaders to address issues that span federal and provincial
jurisdictions. This includes areas like healthcare, education, interprovincial trade, and
environmental policy.
-
The Prime Minister plays a crucial role in this intergovernmental dialogue, working to build
consensus, negotiate agreements, and resolve conflicts. This aspect of the role is particularly
important given Canada's vast and diverse geography and the need to balance regional
interests with national priorities.
Explain the Prime Ministerial Branch in Canada. What are Institutionalized extensions of
prime ministerial leadership? Explain.
The Prime Ministerial Branch in Canada, comprising the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) and the
Privy Council Office (PCO), serves as the institutionalized extensions of the Prime Minister's
leadership, supporting and enhancing the functions and influence of the Prime Minister.
1.
The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO):
Modern PMO begins with Pierre Trudeau (from
1968). PMO became more organizationally complex, more specialized and formalized, and
larger in size.
-
The PMO is directly responsible for assisting the Prime Minister. It is staffed by political
appointees, including advisors, strategists, and communications experts, who are personally
selected by the Prime Minister.
-
The PMO plays a central role in political control, managing the Prime Minister's agenda,
coordinating public relations and communication strategies, providing political advice, and
overseeing the implementation of the Prime Minister's policy priorities.
-
The PMO is essentially an extension of the Prime Minister's political leadership, functioning
as the operational and strategic hub for the Prime Minister’s activities and decisions.
2.
The Privy Council Office (PCO):
-
The PCO acts as the non-biased bureaucratic office that supports the Prime Minister and
Cabinet. Unlike the PMO, the PCO is composed of career civil servants.
-
Its primary role is to provide policy advice, administrative support, and coordination for the
Cabinet’s decision-making processes. This includes briefings, research, coordination of policy
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
papers, and ensuring that the various departments of the government are working in a cohesive
and integrated manner.
-
The PCO also helps in managing the broader federal bureaucracy and ensuring that the
government’s policy agenda is effectively implemented across different departments and
agencies.
The PMO extends the Prime Minister’s political influence, while the PCO underpins the policy
and administrative aspects of the Prime Minister’s role, ensuring that the government operates
efficiently and coherently.
What does the PMO do?
1.
Administrative Capacity:
The PMO provides the administrative support necessary for the
daily functioning of the Prime Minister's role. This includes managing the Prime Minister's
schedule, organizing meetings, and handling logistical arrangements, ensuring that the Prime
Minister's time and resources are used effectively.
2.
Organization of Prime Ministerial Activity:
The PMO is responsible for organizing and
orchestrating the Prime Minister's various activities, both within the government and in
public engagements. This involves planning and coordinating events, official visits, and
meetings with other government officials, stakeholders, and foreign dignitaries.
3.
Political Communication and Strategy:
One of the key functions of the PMO is to manage
the Prime Minister's communication and public relations strategy. This includes crafting
messaging, handling media relations, and strategizing on how to communicate government
policies and initiatives to the public and other stakeholders.
4.
Protection and Promotion of Prime Ministerial Priorities:
The PMO plays a crucial role
in advancing and safeguarding the Prime Minister's policy agenda and priorities. It works to
ensure that the Prime Minister's vision and goals are effectively communicated and
understood within the government and to the broader public.
5.
Coordination and Synthesis of Policy Process:
The PMO is integral in coordinating policy
development and decision-making processes across different government departments and
agencies. It ensures that there is a cohesive and unified approach to policy-making and that
the government's overall policy objectives are being pursued coherently.
6.
Active Intervention and Provision of Policy Information:
The PMO actively intervenes in
policy matters by providing the Prime Minister with essential information, analysis, and
advice on various policy issues. This role includes synthesizing policy information from
various sources, ensuring that the Prime Minister is well-informed and able to make
knowledgeable decisions.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
What does the PCO do?
The Privy Council Office (PCO) in Canada plays a critical role in the federal government, acting
as the secretariat to the Cabinet and providing non-partisan support to the Prime Minister and
Cabinet. Its functions include:
1.
Policy Advice:
The PCO offers expert, non-biased policy advice to the Prime Minister and
Cabinet. This involves researching and analyzing policy options, providing briefings on
various issues, and ensuring that the Prime Minister and Cabinet members are well-informed
to make decisions.
2.
Coordination of Government Policy and Agenda:
One of the key roles of the PCO is to
coordinate the policy-making process across different government departments and agencies.
It ensures that the activities of various ministries are aligned with the government's overall
priorities and that there is a cohesive approach to implementing the government's agenda.
3.
Support for Cabinet Operations:
The PCO assists in the organization and functioning of
the Cabinet and its committees. This includes scheduling meetings, preparing agendas,
circulating documents and briefings, and ensuring that the decision-making process is
smooth and efficient.
4.
Liaison between the Executive and the Public Service:
The PCO acts as a crucial link
between the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the federal public service. It helps in ensuring
that the directives and policies decided by the Cabinet are understood and implemented by
the public service.
5.
Administrative Support:
Apart from policy support, the PCO also provides administrative
assistance to the Prime Minister’s office and the Cabinet. This includes logistical support for
meetings and events, as well as ensuring that the necessary infrastructure is in place for the
effective functioning of the executive branch.
6.
Crisis and Emergency Management:
The PCO plays a role in coordinating the federal
government’s response to crises and emergencies. This involves ensuring that there is
effective communication and collaboration among different government departments and
agencies during times of crisis.
In summary, the PCO ensures that the executive branch operates effectively, that policy-making
is coordinated and cohesive, and that the Prime Minister and Cabinet receive the support and
advice they need to govern effectively.
Explain why the “PRIME MINISTERIAL BRANCH” matters? Does it reduce the quality
of policymaking? Does the extension of prime ministerial capacity to lead and navigate
context?
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
The significance of the PMB can be understood through several key aspects:
1.
Autonomy of Advice and Support:
The PMB provides the Prime Minister with
independent advice, separate from that of the traditional civil service or political parties. This
autonomy is crucial because it allows the Prime Minister to receive unfiltered, candid advice
that is not necessarily aligned with the broader views of the government or party agendas.
This can lead to more diverse viewpoints being considered in decision-making processes.
2.
Diminishing the Influence of Other Actors:
The rise of the PMB can lead to a reduction in
the influence of traditional policymakers like Cabinet ministers, civil servants, and even
Parliament. With a strong PMB, the Prime Minister may rely more on this inner circle for
policy advice and decision-making, potentially sidelining other voices and perspectives in
the government. This concentration of power and influence in the hands of a few close
advisors can alter the dynamics of governance and policy-making.
Regarding its impact on the quality of policy-making, the PMB can have both positive and
negative effects:
Positive Effects:
The PMB can enhance the quality of policymaking by providing specialized,
tailored advice to the Prime Minister. It can help in quickly navigating complex issues and
responding to crises effectively. The PMB's support might also enable the Prime Minister to take
bold decisions that might not be possible through traditional, more bureaucratic channels.
Negative Effects:
The PMB might reduce the quality of policymaking if it leads to an echo
chamber effect, where only ideas and opinions that align with the Prime Minister's views are
considered. This can result in a lack of critical evaluation of policies and a potential disregard for
broader perspectives. Additionally, over-reliance on the PMB might lead to poor decision-
making if the advice provided is not well-rounded or lacks sufficient expertise.
Finally, regarding the extension of the Prime Minister's capacity to lead and navigate the context,
the PMB can also have both positive and negative effects.
On one hand, it provides the Prime Minister with enhanced capacity to address complex and
rapidly evolving situations, making leadership more agile and responsive. On the other hand, it
can lead to a centralization of power, which might undermine democratic principles such as
accountability, transparency, and broad representation in the decision-making process.
CHAPTER 7 - PRIME MINISTER PERFORMANCE:
What determines perceptions of success or failure for Canadian prime ministers?
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
1.
Policy Implementation and Effectiveness:
The ability of a Prime Minister to implement
their policy agenda is a key determinant of success. This includes the effectiveness of these
policies in achieving their intended outcomes. Success in major policy areas like healthcare,
economy, education, and foreign policy can significantly enhance a Prime Minister's
reputation.
2.
Economic Performance:
The state of the national economy often reflects on the perceived
success of a Prime Minister. Strong economic growth, low unemployment rates, and stable
prices can contribute to positive perceptions, whereas economic downturns, high
unemployment, or inflation can lead to negative views.
3.
Crisis Management:
How a Prime Minister handles crises—such as natural disasters,
economic recessions, or international conflicts—greatly influences public perception.
4.
Public Approval and Popularity:
This is often measured through opinion polls and
approval ratings. A Prime Minister who maintains high approval ratings is typically seen as
successful, while low ratings can signal perceived failure.
5.
Leadership Style and Communication:
A Prime Minister's personal leadership style and
ability to communicate effectively with the public are crucial. Charisma, clarity in
communication, and a sense of connection with the electorate can enhance perceptions of
success.
6.
Party Performance:
The performance of the Prime Minister's party, especially in elections,
is a critical measure. Winning elections and maintaining a majority in Parliament can be seen
as endorsements of the Prime Minister’s leadership.
7.
Ethical Governance and Scandals:
The ethical conduct of the Prime Minister and their
government impacts perceptions. Scandals, corruption, or ethical breaches can lead to
perceptions of failure, while transparency and integrity can enhance a reputation for success.
8.
International Relations and Reputation:
A Prime Minister’s ability to manage
international relations and uphold Canada’s reputation on the world stage is also significant.
Success in diplomacy, international trade, and contributions to global issues can positively
influence perceptions.
9.
Media Portrayal:
Positive coverage can enhance the image of success, while negative
coverage can contribute to perceptions of failure.
10.
Historical Context and Comparison:
Perceptions are often influenced by the challenges
and opportunities of the time, as well as comparisons with predecessors and contemporaries.
A Prime Minister who leads during times of turmoil or significant change may be judged
differently than one who leads in more stable periods.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
What does leadership assessment tell us about politics or the relationship between leaders
and the public?
1.
Expectations of Political Leadership:
-
Competence and Vision: The public generally expects political leaders to be competent and to
have a clear vision for the future. This includes the ability to formulate effective policies,
make sound decisions, and navigate complex political landscapes.
-
Ethical Standards and Integrity: Leaders are expected to uphold high ethical standards and
demonstrate integrity. This involves honesty, transparency, and accountability in their actions
and decisions.
-
Effective Communication: The ability to communicate effectively with the public is a key
expectation. Leaders should be able to articulate their policies, address concerns, and inspire
confidence among citizens.
-
Responsiveness and Empathy: Political leaders are expected to be responsive to the needs and
concerns of the public and to show empathy towards the challenges faced by their
constituents.
2.
Functions or Purposes of the Executive:
-
Policy Direction and Implementation: The executive is responsible for setting the policy
agenda and ensuring its implementation. This includes both domestic and foreign policies.
-
Crisis Management: Handling crises effectively is a crucial function of executive leadership.
This involves making decisive actions during emergencies and guiding the country through
challenges.
-
Representation: The executive represents the nation both domestically and internationally.
This involves embodying the nation's values and aspirations and acting as a figurehead.
-
Administration and Governance: Overseeing the functioning of government and ensuring
efficient and effective administration is a fundamental role of the executive.
3.
Values and Histories Associated with a Country:
-
Cultural and Historical Context: The evaluation of political leadership is often influenced by
the cultural and historical context of a country. This includes traditional values, historical
experiences, and national narratives.
-
Societal Norms and Expectations: Societal norms and expectations, which are shaped by a
country’s history and culture, play a significant role in defining what is considered good or bad
leadership.
-
National Challenges and Priorities: The unique challenges and priorities of a country, shaped
by its history, influence what is expected from its leaders. For example, a country with a
history of military conflict might value strong defence policies, while a nation with economic
struggles might prioritize economic expertise in its leaders.
Is Canada a hard Country to Govern? What are the Complexities?
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
1.
Navigating the “Two Solitudes” of French and English:
-
Canada's bilingual and bicultural nature, primarily between its French-speaking and English-
speaking populations, presents a significant governance challenge.
-
Balancing the interests and cultural values of these two groups, especially in policy-making
and national identity issues, requires a delicate approach.
-
Issues such as language rights, educational policies, and federal-provincial relations are often
influenced by the dynamics between these two linguistic communities.
2.
A Small Country Between Two Empires:
-
Although Canada is geographically large, it has often been viewed as a smaller player situated
between the historical influence of the British Empire and the contemporary power of the
United States.
-
Managing foreign relations and economic policies while maintaining a distinct national
identity and sovereignty in the shadow of these powerful neighbours is a complex task.
-
This situation requires diplomatic finesse, especially in areas like trade, defence, and cultural
policy.
3.
A Large Country Between Three Oceans:
-
Canada’s vast geographic expanse, bordered by the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic Oceans,
presents unique governance challenges.
-
Issues such as regional disparity, infrastructure development, and managing resources across
this vast landscape require careful planning and substantial investment.
-
The country's Arctic sovereignty and maritime interests necessitate specialized focus on
northern development and international maritime laws.
4.
Increasing Diversity and Recognition of Indigenous Concerns:
-
Canada’s growing cultural diversity due to immigration has introduced complexities in social
policy, multiculturalism, and integration strategies.
-
Balancing the needs and perspectives of a diverse population while promoting social cohesion
and inclusive national identity is a continuous governance challenge.
-
Moreover, the increasing recognition of Indigenous rights and concerns, including land rights,
self-governance, and reconciliation efforts, adds another layer of complexity. Addressing
historical injustices and integrating Indigenous perspectives into national policies is a critical
and sensitive aspect of governance.
How successful is the prime minister’s management of national unity? How much do they
contribute to nation-building or identity?
1.
Handling Regional Differences:
Canada's vast geography and diverse population lead to
distinct regional interests and identities. A Prime Minister's ability to address and balance
these regional concerns is a key measure of success in managing national unity. This
includes understanding the unique needs of provinces and territories and ensuring that
policies do not disproportionately favor one region over others.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
2.
Bilingualism and Biculturalism:
Successfully navigating the complexities of Canada's two
official languages and the cultural dynamics between French-speaking Quebec and the rest
of Canada is crucial. A Prime Minister who promotes bilingualism and respects the cultural
significance of both French and English Canadians contributes positively to national unity
and identity.
3.
Indigenous Relations:
A Prime Minister's approach to Indigenous issues significantly
impacts national unity. Effective leadership in this area involves pursuing meaningful
reconciliation, respecting Indigenous rights, and integrating Indigenous perspectives into
national policies.
4.
Immigration and Multiculturalism:
With a significant portion of its population comprising
immigrants, Canada's stance on immigration and multiculturalism is central to its national
identity.
5.
Economic Policies:
Economic disparity between regions can strain national unity. A Prime
Minister's success in creating equitable economic opportunities across the country,
addressing unemployment, and managing the economy effectively plays a vital role in
maintaining unity.
6.
Crisis Management:
The ability to unite the country during times of crisis, whether it be
economic downturns, natural disasters, or global pandemics, is a significant test of a Prime
Minister’s leadership.
7.
Foreign Policy:
How a Prime Minister positions Canada on the global stage can also impact
national identity. Policies that align with Canadian values, such as peacekeeping, human
rights, and environmental stewardship, can strengthen national pride and unity.
8.
Communication and Public Engagement:
The Prime Minister's communication style and
engagement with the public can either foster a sense of inclusivity and shared purpose or
lead to division. Promoting a narrative that embraces Canada's diversity and shared values is
key to nation-building.
How effective is the prime minister’s ‘stewardship’ of the economy and government
finances? How does the prime minister contribute to social well-being, democracy, or
rights? How does the prime minister impact Canada’s standing in the world?
1.
Effectiveness of the Prime Minister's Stewardship of the Economy and Government
Finances:
-
The effectiveness of a Canadian Prime Minister in managing the economy and government
finances can be assessed through various economic indicators such as GDP growth,
unemployment rates, and budget deficits or surpluses.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
A Prime Minister's economic policies, including taxation, spending, and regulatory
frameworks, play a significant role in shaping the economic landscape of the country.
-
The ability to respond effectively to economic challenges, such as recessions or global
economic crises, is a crucial aspect of their stewardship.
-
Fiscal responsibility, including prudent management of government debt and expenditures, is a
key factor in evaluating their effectiveness.
-
The Prime Minister's ability to foster a conducive environment for investment and job creation
is also indicative of successful economic leadership.
-
However, the global economic context and external factors often influence these outcomes,
making the assessment of a Prime Minister’s economic stewardship complex.
2.
Prime Minister's Contribution to Social Well-being, Democracy, or Rights:
-
The Prime Minister contributes to social well-being through policies that address healthcare,
education, housing, and social welfare, aiming to improve the quality of life for Canadians.
-
Promotion and protection of democratic values, including free and fair elections, transparent
governance, and the rule of law, are central to the Prime Minister's role.
-
Advocacy for and implementation of policies that uphold human rights, civil liberties, and
minority rights reflect the Prime Minister's commitment to a just and inclusive society.
-
Efforts to address social issues such as poverty, inequality, and discrimination are key
indicators of their contribution to social well-being.
-
The Prime Minister's stance on and response to social movements and public concerns also
demonstrate their commitment to democracy and rights.
3.
Impact of the Prime Minister on Canada's Standing in the World:
-
The Prime Minister significantly influences Canada's international reputation through foreign
policy decisions, diplomatic relations, and participation in global affairs.
-
Leadership in international organizations, involvement in peacekeeping missions, and
contributions to global issues like climate change and human rights shape Canada's global
image.
-
Trade policies and economic agreements negotiated by the Prime Minister affect Canada's
economic standing and relationships with other countries.
-
The Prime Minister's personal diplomacy, including state visits and interactions with global
leaders, plays a role in establishing Canada's position on the world stage.
-
Responses to international crises and conflicts, as well as the willingness to engage in
multinational initiatives, reflect the country's global role and responsibilities.
-
The Prime Minister’s ability to balance national interests with international commitments is
crucial in maintaining and enhancing Canada’s standing in the world.
What does the prime minister represent socially or historically? To what extent do they
symbolize distinctive periods in Canadian history?
1.
What the Prime Minister Represents Socially or Historically:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
The Prime Minister of Canada represents the nation’s values, aspirations, and collective
identity. They embody the social and political ethos of the country, reflecting both its
contemporary character and its historical roots.
-
Socially, the Prime Minister is seen as a unifying figure who transcends regional, linguistic,
and cultural divides, symbolizing the diversity and inclusivity that Canada strives for.
-
Historically, the Prime Minister represents the evolution of Canadian democracy and
governance, from its colonial past to its current status as a diverse, multicultural society with a
strong democratic tradition.
-
The Prime Minister also embodies Canada's commitments to principles such as peacekeeping,
human rights, and environmental stewardship, reflecting the country's values on the global
stage.
-
Through various initiatives and policies, the Prime Minister plays a role in shaping the social
narrative of Canada.
2.
Extent to Which They Symbolize Distinctive Periods in Canadian History:
-
Each Prime Minister’s tenure is often associated with specific periods in Canadian history,
marked by distinct social, economic, and political challenges and achievements.
-
They symbolize the issues and sentiments of their time, whether it be wartime leadership,
economic reforms, social change, or constitutional debates.
-
For instance, some Prime Ministers are remembered for their role in wartime efforts or crisis
management, while others are noted for significant policy shifts or constitutional changes.
-
The legacy of a Prime Minister can become symbolic of a particular era’s successes and
struggles, influencing how that period is remembered and studied.
-
Their leadership style, major policies, and the national and international context of their tenure
contribute to how they are symbolically linked to specific periods in Canadian history.
-
However, the extent to which they are seen as symbols of these periods can vary, influenced
by public perception, historical analysis, and the evolving understanding of their impact over
time.
CHAPTER 8 - CABINET GOVERNMENT
KEY TERMS:
1.
King’s Privy Council for Canada:
is an advisory body to the monarch of Canada,
established by the Constitution Act of 1867. Its role has largely become ceremonial, with its
functions largely assumed by the Cabinet, composed of the Prime Minister and ministers.
The Council's existence underscores the constitutional monarchy framework of Canada's
government, symbolizing the link between the Canadian and British political systems.
2.
Section 11 of the Constitution Act, 1867:
established the Queen’s Privy Council for
Canada, which advises the sovereign or the sovereign’s representative. This section laid the
foundation for the executive branch of the Canadian government, setting the stage for the
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
development of modern cabinet government. It is significant as it highlights the
constitutional beginnings of the Canadian executive and its ties to the British parliamentary
system.
3.
Cabinet Government:
refers to the executive management structure where the Prime
Minister and Cabinet ministers collectively make key government decisions. This system is
central to Canada's parliamentary democracy, ensuring that executive power is held by
elected representatives who are accountable to Parliament. The effectiveness and stability of
the government largely depend on the unity and decision-making of the Cabinet.
4.
Collective Responsibility:
Collective responsibility is a convention in parliamentary
systems where all members of the Cabinet are collectively responsible for the government’s
policies and actions. This means that even if individual ministers disagree with a Cabinet
decision, they must publicly support it or resign from the Cabinet. It ensures unity and
solidarity in the government’s public front, reinforcing the principle of accountability to
Parliament and the public.
5.
Ministerial Responsibility:
Ministerial responsibility is the principle that Cabinet ministers
are individually responsible to Parliament for the actions and performance of their
departments. This includes answering to Parliament for their personal conduct and the
actions of their departmental officials. It is a cornerstone of parliamentary democracy,
ensuring accountability and transparency in government operations.
6.
Representational Imperative:
The representational imperative is the principle that
government bodies, especially the Cabinet, should reflect the diversity of the population they
serve. This includes representation in terms of geography, gender, ethnicity, and other
societal characteristics. It is significant as it enhances the legitimacy and inclusivity of the
government, ensuring that diverse perspectives are considered in policy-making.
7.
The ‘Merit’ Argument:
The ‘merit’ argument in the context of political appointments states
that positions should be awarded based on qualifications and competence rather than on
political considerations or representational factors. This principle emphasizes the importance
of expertise, experience, and ability in ensuring effective and efficient governance. It often
contrasts with the representational imperative, highlighting a tension between competence
and demographic representation in political appointments.
What are cabinet and cabinet government?
Cabinet refers to a group of senior government officials, typically heads of government
departments or ministries, who are appointed by the Prime Minister in a parliamentary system
like Canada's. Cabinet government is a system in which these ministers, led by the Prime
Minister, collectively make key decisions regarding national policies and administration. This
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
group is central to the executive function of the government, responsible for implementing laws,
overseeing government operations, and guiding the country's policy direction.
How do the conventions of collective responsibility and individual ministerial responsibility
operate?
1.
Collective Responsibility:
-
Collective responsibility implies that all members of the Cabinet are jointly accountable for
the decisions and policies of the government.
-
When a decision is made by the Cabinet, every member must publicly support it, regardless of
their personal views or any dissent expressed in private. This creates a united front and ensures
that the government speaks and acts as a single entity.
-
If a minister cannot support a Cabinet decision, they are typically expected to resign. This
principle reinforces the unity of the government and ensures that the Cabinet maintains the
confidence of the legislature.
2.
Individual Ministerial Responsibility:
-
Individual ministerial responsibility holds each minister accountable for their personal conduct
and the operations of their department.
-
Ministers must answer to the legislature for their decisions and actions, as well as for those of
their department, including any mistakes or failures. This ensures that ministers are directly
answerable for their performance and the performance of their department.
-
In cases of serious misconduct or failure within their department, a minister may be expected
to resign, upholding the principle of accountability.
How is cabinet selected? What factors are important in determining ministerial
appointment?
1.
Prime Minister's Discretion:
The Prime Minister has the primary responsibility for
selecting members of the Cabinet. This selection is typically at their discretion, allowing
them to choose ministers they believe will effectively implement the government's agenda
and work well within the team.
2.
Political Considerations:
Political loyalty and support within the party often play a
significant role in cabinet selection. Prime Ministers usually consider the political strengths
and base of support of potential ministers, ensuring that key factions within their party are
represented.
3.
Expertise and Experience:
The professional backgrounds, expertise, and experience of
potential ministers are important factors. A Prime Minister may look for individuals with
specific skills or experience relevant to certain portfolios, such as finance, foreign affairs, or
health.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4.
Regional Representation:
In a country like Canada, with its vast geography and diverse
regions, ensuring regional representation in the Cabinet is crucial. Prime Ministers often
strive to have a Cabinet that reflects the country's various geographic areas, balancing
regional interests.
5.
Demographic Diversity:
Demographic representation, including gender, ethnicity, and
sometimes age, is increasingly considered important in Cabinet selection. This diversity
ensures that the Cabinet reflects the broader population, bringing a range of perspectives and
experiences to government decision-making.
6.
Party Balance:
Balancing different wings and factions within the governing party can be
vital. This balance helps in maintaining party unity and ensuring that various viewpoints
within the party are represented in the Cabinet.
7.
Public Perception:
Public perception and acceptability can also influence Cabinet
appointments. Prime Ministers may consider how potential ministers are perceived by the
public, especially in high-profile portfolios.
Note:
The “form” of cabinet government is collective leadership.
-
Executive power vested in the Crown, on advice of the Privy Council
-
Prime minister not mentioned in the Constitution
-
Cabinet acts as one (collective responsibility)
-
Cabinet as a collective decision-maker (e.g., Orders-in-Council)
Explain the “MYTH” OF CABINET GOVERNMENT. Include Reconciling Executive
Traditions like: Accountability, Political Contestation, Representation, Collectivity.
The "myth" of cabinet government refers to the idealized view of how cabinet government is
supposed to function in theory, versus the reality of its operation in practice.
1.
Accountability:
-
Theoretically, cabinet government upholds the principle that ministers are collectively and
individually accountable to the legislature and to the public.
-
However, the complexity of government operations and the centralized power in the hands of
the Prime Minister often make it difficult to pinpoint accountability. This can lead to a
situation where real accountability is diffused, challenging the ideal of transparent and direct
responsibility.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
2.
Political Contestation:
-
Cabinet government is supposed to facilitate political contestation, allowing for diverse
viewpoints and debate within the Cabinet, which enriches policy-making.
-
The myth lies in the assumption that all ministers have equal say and that their views
significantly shape decisions. In reality, the Prime Minister and a few senior ministers often
wield disproportionate influence, and decision-making can be more top-down than
collaborative.
3.
Representation:
-
Cabinets are ideally composed to represent various segments of society, including different
regions, demographics, and political factions within the ruling party.
-
However, the representational aspect can sometimes be more symbolic than substantive. The
selection of ministers may be more driven by political expediency, loyalty to the Prime
Minister, or public relations considerations, rather than a genuine effort to ensure diverse and
effective representation.
4.
Collectivity:
-
The principle of collective responsibility suggests that all cabinet members are united in their
support for cabinet decisions.
-
This collectivity can sometimes be a façade, as individual ministers may privately disagree
with decisions but are bound to support them publicly. The notion of a cohesive, consensus-
driven cabinet can often mask internal disagreements and power dynamics.
In summary, the "myth" of cabinet government highlights the gap between the idealized
principles of how a cabinet should function and the realities of political power dynamics, where
the Prime Minister's influence, political calculations, and the challenges of modern governance
can lead to a very different operational dynamic.
What is an arrangement which prime ministers use to foster policy coherence and political
support for a ‘collective’ government direction and not a decision-making forum called?
The arrangement used by Prime Ministers to foster policy coherence and political support for a
collective government direction, without it being a formal decision-making forum, is typically
referred to as a
"cabinet committee system"
or simply
"cabinet committees."
These
committees are smaller subsets of the full cabinet, designed to focus on specific policy areas or
issues. They play a crucial role in:
1.
Developing and refining policy proposals before they are brought to the full cabinet for
decision.
2.
Ensuring coordination and coherence among different areas of government policy.
3.
Providing a platform for ministers to discuss and align on key issues, facilitating a unified
government approach.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
They also serve as a means for the Prime Minister to manage the cabinet and the broader
government agenda effectively, ensuring political support and maintaining collective
responsibility.
Explain Style of Cabinet Discussion: Directive vs. Deliberative.
These styles reflect different approaches to decision-making and discussion within the cabinet.
1.
Directive Style:
-
In a directive style, the decision-making process is more centralized and top-down.
-
The Prime Minister, or sometimes a few senior ministers, plays a dominant role in setting the
agenda and steering the discussions.
-
Decisions are often made or heavily influenced by the Prime Minister and then presented to
the cabinet for endorsement.
-
This style can be efficient, as it allows for quick decision-making and a clear, unified
government direction. However, it can also limit the input and engagement of other cabinet
members, potentially overlooking diverse perspectives and expertise.
2.
Deliberative Style:
-
A deliberative style is more collaborative and inclusive.
-
Discussions involve active participation from all cabinet members, with a focus on debating
and considering various viewpoints and options.
-
The Prime Minister acts more as a facilitator or chair, encouraging open discussion and
seeking to build consensus among the ministers.
-
This style can lead to more thoroughly considered decisions that benefit from the diverse
insights and expertise of the entire cabinet. However, it can also be more time-consuming and
may sometimes lead to difficulties in reaching a consensus or a clear direction.
Note:
1.
Cabinet Solidarity:
Ministers must defend and support all government decisions in public
and before Parliament and must resign if they cannot.
2.
Cabinet Confidentiality:
All internal cabinet discussion must be kept confidential (not
released to the public).
Explain Ministerial Responsibility. Include: Answerability and Culpability
1.
Answerability:
-
Answerability refers to the obligation of ministers to explain and justify their actions and
decisions, as well as those of their departments, to Parliament and to the public.
-
This aspect of ministerial responsibility ensures transparency and accountability in
governance. Ministers are expected to regularly attend parliamentary sessions, respond to
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
questions, participate in debates, and provide information about the work and decisions of
their departments.
-
It involves being open to scrutiny and being willing to provide explanations for both the
policies adopted by their department and the administration of their department.
2.
Culpability:
-
Culpability refers to the notion of ministers being responsible for the actions of their
department. This means that if there is a failure or wrongdoing within their department, the
minister is expected to take responsibility, even if they were not personally involved in the
decision or action that led to the issue.
-
This principle upholds the idea that elected officials, rather than non-elected civil servants,
should bear the ultimate responsibility for the functioning of government. It's based on the
premise that ministers have, or should have, control over their departments.
-
In cases of serious administrative failures or political scandals, culpability may lead to a
minister's resignation, as a way of acknowledging responsibility and maintaining public
confidence in the government.
Explain Cabinet Composition. What is the “puzzle” of constructing a Cabinet? Include:
party, governance, agency, representational concerns. Which takes precedence?
Cabinet composition is a critical aspect of forming a government in parliamentary systems, and it
involves a complex "puzzle" that the Prime Minister must solve. This puzzle includes balancing
various factors such as party dynamics, governance needs, agency considerations, and
representational concerns. Determining which of these factors takes precedence can vary
depending on the specific context and priorities of the Prime Minister and the political
environment.
1.
Party Considerations:
-
The Prime Minister must consider the internal dynamics of their party when selecting cabinet
members. This includes rewarding loyalty, maintaining party unity, and managing different
factions or power bases within the party.
-
Appointing key allies and influential party members to the cabinet can be essential for
maintaining support within the party and ensuring effective governance.
2.
Governance Needs:
-
Effective administration of the government is a primary concern. The Prime Minister needs to
ensure that each department is led by someone competent and capable of managing it
effectively.
-
This might involve appointing individuals with specific expertise, experience, or skills
relevant to certain portfolios, such as finance, health, or foreign affairs.
3.
Agency Considerations:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
Agency considerations involve ensuring that ministers can effectively oversee and guide the
departments or agencies they are responsible for. This includes aligning the skills and
experiences of ministers with the needs of their respective departments.
-
It also involves considering the ability of ministers to implement the government's agenda and
policy priorities effectively.
4.
Representational Concerns:
-
Cabinets are expected to reflect the diversity of the electorate. This includes regional
representation, as well as demographic factors like gender, ethnicity, and sometimes age or
socio-economic background.
-
Balancing these representational concerns is important for ensuring that the cabinet is seen as
legitimate and inclusive by the public.
In terms of precedence, there is no fixed rule, and the priority given to each of these factors can
vary. In some cases, governance needs and agency considerations might take precedence,
especially if the government faces significant policy challenges or administrative issues. In other
situations, party dynamics or representational concerns might be more critical, such as after a
closely contested election or in a diverse and politically sensitive environment.
CHAPTER 9 - CABINET STRUCTURE & PROCESS
KEY TERMS:
1.
Memorandum to Cabinet:
A Memorandum to Cabinet (MC) is a document prepared by a
government department in Canada to propose a policy, seek approval for an initiative, or
provide information to the Cabinet. It outlines the rationale, implications, options, and
recommended actions concerning the policy or issue at hand, serving as a basis for Cabinet
discussions and decisions. The significance of an MC lies in its role in formalizing policy
proposals and ensuring that decisions made by the Cabinet are informed, well-considered,
and documented, facilitating transparent and accountable governance.
2.
Cabinet Committee:
A cabinet committee is a subgroup of the Cabinet, formed to focus on
specific policy areas or issues, such as finance, national security, or social policy. These
committees allow for more detailed and specialized discussion on complex matters, enabling
the Cabinet to manage its workload more effectively by delegating detailed review to these
committees. The significance of cabinet committees is in their role in enhancing the
efficiency and effectiveness of Cabinet decision-making, ensuring that policies are
thoroughly discussed before reaching the full Cabinet for approval.
3.
Traditional/Departmentalized/Institutionalized/Prime Minister-Centered Executive
Style:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
The traditional or departmentalized executive style
refers to a governance approach where
individual ministers and their departments have significant autonomy in managing their
portfolios and developing policies within their areas of responsibility.
-
The institutionalized style
denotes a governance approach where decision-making is more
structured and formalized, often with significant input from the civil service and reliance on
established procedures and protocols.
-
The Prime Minister-centered executive style
is characterized by a centralization of power
and decision-making authority in the office of the Prime Minister. This style emphasizes the
dominant role of the Prime Minister in setting the government’s agenda, making key
decisions, and steering the overall direction of the executive branch. The significance of these
styles lies in how they shape the dynamics of governance, policy development, and the
balance of power within the executive branch, affecting the efficiency, accountability, and
responsiveness of the government.
How is policy developed through the cabinet process in Canada? What role do cabinet
committees play in this process?
1.
Initiation of Policy:
-
Policy development often begins within individual government departments. Ministers and
their departmental staff identify issues, conduct research, and develop initial policy proposals
based on their areas of responsibility and expertise.
-
These initial ideas might stem from the government's agenda, public needs, emerging issues,
or legislative requirements.
2.
Consultation and Refinement:
-
Early-stage proposals usually undergo consultations with stakeholders, experts, and sometimes
other government departments to refine the policy and address potential impacts across
different sectors.
-
This stage is crucial for gathering diverse perspectives and ensuring the policy is
comprehensive and well-informed.
3.
Review by Cabinet Committees:
-
Once a policy proposal has been sufficiently developed and consulted upon, it is often brought
before a relevant cabinet committee. Cabinet committees are smaller groups of ministers
focused on specific policy areas like finance, health, or national security.
-
These committees play a critical role in reviewing, debating, and further refining policy
proposals. They assess the proposal's alignment with the government’s overall agenda, its
feasibility, and its potential political and social impacts.
-
The committee may recommend changes or request additional information before the proposal
progresses further.
4.
Approval by the Full Cabinet:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
After passing through the relevant cabinet committee, the policy proposal is brought to the full
Cabinet for discussion and approval.
-
This is where the final decision-making occurs. The Cabinet, led by the Prime Minister,
debates the proposal, considers its broader implications, and makes a collective decision on
whether to approve, modify, or reject it.
5.
Implementation:
-
Once approved by the Cabinet, the policy moves to the implementation stage. This involves
detailed planning, allocation of resources, and possibly the drafting of legislation or
regulations.
-
The responsible department, under the leadership of the respective minister, oversees the
implementation, often in collaboration with other government bodies, agencies, or levels of
government.
In this process, cabinet committees play a vital intermediary role between the initial policy
development within departments and the final decision-making in the full Cabinet. They help in
streamlining the process by ensuring that only well-considered and vetted proposals reach the
full Cabinet. This not only makes the Cabinet’s discussion more efficient but also enhances the
quality of decision-making by providing focused expertise and attention to each policy area.
What does a cabinet minister do? What does the role of being a minister look like?
1.
Heading a Government Department:
-
A cabinet minister is in charge of a specific government department or portfolio, such as
health, finance, or foreign affairs. This involves overseeing the department's operations, setting
its strategic direction, and ensuring it effectively implements government policies and
programs.
-
The minister is responsible for the administrative and budgetary aspects of their department,
making key decisions on how resources are allocated and managed.
2.
Policy Development and Implementation:
-
Ministers play a central role in developing and implementing government policies within their
areas of responsibility. They collaborate with their departmental officials, stakeholders, and
sometimes other ministers to formulate policies.
-
They must ensure that the policies are in line with the overall agenda of the government and
address the needs and challenges relevant to their portfolio.
3.
Legislative Role:
-
As members of the Cabinet, ministers are involved in shaping the legislative agenda of the
government. They often introduce bills and other legislative measures in Parliament related to
their department.
-
They are responsible for guiding these legislative items through the parliamentary process,
including presenting and defending them in debates and committee meetings.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4.
Accountability and Reporting:
-
Ministers are accountable to the Parliament and to the public for their actions and the
performance of their departments. They must regularly answer questions in Parliament,
provide information and updates on their work, and justify their decisions.
-
This accountability also extends to being responsible for any issues or problems that arise
within their department.
5.
Representation and Communication:
-
Ministers represent their department and the government to the public, stakeholders, other
government entities, and sometimes internationally.
-
They are often the public face of government policies and decisions in their area, requiring
effective communication skills to convey information and engage with various audiences.
6.
Cabinet Participation:
-
As members of the Cabinet, ministers participate in collective decision-making on a wide
range of government policies and issues. This involves attending cabinet meetings,
contributing to discussions, and supporting collective decisions, even in areas outside their
specific portfolio.
How has the overall ‘executive style’ in Canada changed over time?
1.
From Traditional to Centralized Leadership:
-
Historically, Canada's executive style was more traditional and departmentalized, with
individual ministers having considerable autonomy over their portfolios. This was reflective of
a broader Westminster parliamentary system where the Cabinet functioned with a significant
degree of collegiality and individual responsibility.
-
Over time, there has been a shift towards a more centralized executive style, with the Prime
Minister playing a more dominant role in decision-making. This has led to the Prime
Minister’s Office (PMO) and the Privy Council Office (PCO) becoming increasingly
influential in shaping policy and coordinating government activities.
2.
Increased Professionalization and Bureaucratization:
-
The executive branch has seen a trend towards greater professionalization and
bureaucratization. This includes a more significant role for non-elected officials and experts in
policy development and an increased reliance on data and evidence-based decision-making.
-
The role of career civil servants and professional political staff has become more prominent in
assisting ministers and the Prime Minister in policy formulation and implementation.
3.
Greater Media and Public Scrutiny:
-
With the advent of modern media and digital communications, there has been an increase in
public and media scrutiny of government actions. This has necessitated a change in the
executive style to be more responsive and transparent.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
Prime Ministers and ministers now often engage directly with the public through various
media channels, necessitating a more communicative and image-conscious style of leadership.
4.
Shift Towards Inclusivity and Representation:
-
Cabinets are now more likely to be composed to reflect Canada’s diverse population, including
considerations of gender, ethnicity, and regional representation.
-
This shift is part of a broader societal movement towards equality and representation in
governance.
5.
Adaptation to Globalization and International Relations:
-
The increasing interconnectedness of global politics and economics has also influenced the
executive style in Canada.
-
Prime Ministers have become more engaged in international diplomacy and multilateral
forums, reflecting the importance of global issues in domestic governance.
In summary, the executive style in Canada has transitioned from a more traditional,
departmentalized approach to a more centralized, professionalized, and media-savvy model. It
has adapted to the demands of increased public scrutiny, the need for greater inclusivity and
representation, and the complexities of global interconnectivity. These changes reflect both
internal developments within Canada and broader global trends in governance and leadership.
Explain Cabinet Committees and their Origin & Development.
Cabinet committees, as subgroups of ministers within the broader Cabinet structure, have
evolved significantly over time, reflecting changes in the governance needs and political
landscape of Canada. Their origins and development can be traced through various stages:
1.
Origins as Subgroups of Ministers:
-
Cabinet committees originated as informal subgroups of ministers within the Cabinet. These
subgroups were convened to discuss specific issues or policy areas in more detail than would
be feasible in full Cabinet meetings.
-
The idea was to allow for more focused and specialized deliberation, enabling the Cabinet to
manage its workload more effectively.
2.
Development During Wartime to Postwar Period:
-
During the wartime and postwar periods, the role and significance of cabinet committees grew.
This period saw a dramatic increase in the scope and complexity of government
responsibilities, partly due to the need of war and the following expansion of the welfare state.
-
Cabinet committees became instrumental in managing this increased workload and
complexity. They allowed for more efficient handling of detailed policy matters and helped in
coordinating various aspects of government policy, which had become too intricate for the full
Cabinet to manage alone.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
3.
Counterbalancing Departmentalism:
-
One of the key functions of cabinet committees has been to counterbalance the natural
tendency towards departmentalism – where ministers are primarily focused on their own
departmental agendas.
-
By bringing together ministers from different departments, cabinet committees facilitate a
more holistic and integrated approach to policy-making, ensuring that decisions are made with
a view of the government’s overall objectives and priorities.
4.
Formalization in 1968 under Trudeau:
-
The formalization of cabinet committees as a key element of the Cabinet structure in Canada
is largely attributed to Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau in 1968.
-
Trudeau introduced formalized status and procedures for cabinet committees, recognizing
them as an essential mechanism for efficient government operation. He established clear roles,
functions, and structures for these committees, integrating them more systematically into the
Cabinet process.
5.
Committees as an Extension of Cabinet:
-
With these changes, cabinet committees began to be seen as an extension of the Cabinet,
possessing the authority to make decisions on behalf of the full Cabinet in their specific areas
of focus.
-
This development allowed for a delegation of authority from the full Cabinet to these
committees, enabling more efficient decision-making and allowing the Cabinet to focus on
broader strategic issues and overall governance.
In summary, these committees have become essential for managing detailed policy issues,
ensuring coherent and integrated decision-making across different government departments, and
enabling the Cabinet to operate more efficiently in an increasingly complex environment.
Explain the Importance of Executive Committees. Do cabinet committees reflect ‘gender
parity’ or other representational imperatives present at cabinet level?
1.
Improving Collective Decision-Making / Responsibility or Undermining:
-
Executive committees can improve collective decision-making by allowing for more detailed
and focused discussions on specific policy areas before bringing issues to the full Cabinet.
This ensures that decisions are well-considered and informed by a range of perspectives.
-
However, there's a potential concern that executive committees might undermine the principle
of collective responsibility. If decision-making is concentrated in a few hands within these
committees, it may limit the involvement and influence of the broader Cabinet, potentially
leading to decisions that don't fully reflect the collective view.
2.
Prime Ministerial Influence:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
The structure and function of executive committees can significantly extend the influence of
the Prime Minister. By determining the composition and mandate of these committees, the
Prime Minister can shape the policy agenda and influence outcomes.
-
The Prime Minister's role in chairing key executive committees further strengthens this
influence, allowing them to steer discussions and decisions in line with their priorities.
3.
Representation in Cabinet vs. on Cabinet Committees:
-
While Cabinets are often structured to reflect a broad representation of regions, demographics,
and political perspectives, the representation on executive committees might be more focused.
-
The composition of these committees tends to be driven more by the subject matter and
strategic importance of the committee, which can sometimes mean that they do not mirror the
full diversity of the Cabinet.
-
This focus can lead to concerns about whether all viewpoints and interests are adequately
represented in the decision-making process of these smaller groups.
4.
Reflecting ‘Gender Parity’ or Other Representational Imperatives:
-
In recent years, there has been a growing emphasis on ensuring gender parity and other forms
of representation in the Cabinet. However, whether these representational imperatives are
equally reflected in executive committees can vary.
-
While there is an effort to ensure diverse representation, the specialized nature of executive
committees might sometimes prioritize expertise and portfolio relevance over demographic
representation.
-
The extent to which these committees reflect the broader representational goals present at the
cabinet level can be indicative of the government’s commitment to inclusivity and diversity in
decision-making at the highest levels.
In summary, executive committees play a crucial role in the cabinet process by enhancing the
efficiency and focus of decision-making. However, their impact on collective responsibility, the
extent of prime ministerial influence, and the representation of diverse viewpoints and
demographics are subjects of ongoing consideration and balance.
What are the Policy tasks and responsibilities in being a Cabinet Minister?
Being a Cabinet Minister in Canada involves a range of policy tasks and responsibilities that are
critical for the effective functioning of the government. These tasks and responsibilities can be
understood through various aspects:
1.
‘To-Do’ Lists Given by First Ministers:
-
Upon appointment, Cabinet Ministers often receive a mandate letter or ‘to-do’ list from the
Prime Minister. This document outlines the key policy priorities, objectives, and specific tasks
that the Minister is expected to achieve during their tenure.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
These mandate letters serve as a roadmap for the Ministers, guiding their policy work and
setting clear expectations for their department's contributions to the government's overall
agenda.
2.
Tool of Accountability and Control Over Ministerial Policy Work:
-
Mandate letters also function as a tool of accountability and control. They make the Minister’s
responsibilities transparent, both to the public and within the government, providing a basis
against which their performance can be measured.
-
This accountability is reinforced through various mechanisms, including parliamentary
oversight, where Ministers are required to report on and answer questions about their progress
in fulfilling the mandates.
3.
Development and Implementation of Policies:
-
Ministers are responsible for developing and implementing policies within their areas of
jurisdiction. This involves identifying issues, proposing solutions, and overseeing the
formulation and execution of policy initiatives.
-
They work closely with their department’s civil servants to ensure that policies are effectively
designed and aligned with the government's broader objectives.
4.
Stakeholder Engagement and Consultation:
-
Engaging with stakeholders, including industry representatives, interest groups, and the public,
is a key part of a Minister's role. This ensures that policies are informed by a range of
perspectives and that potential impacts on different segments of society are considered.
-
Consultation is also important for building support for government initiatives and for
understanding the practical implications of policies.
5.
Legislative Responsibilities:
-
Cabinet Ministers play a crucial role in the legislative process, often sponsoring bills and other
legislative measures related to their department. They are responsible for guiding these
through the parliamentary process and advocating for their passage.
-
This includes presenting legislation in Parliament, participating in debates, and working with
parliamentary committees.
6.
Budgetary and Resource Management:
-
Ministers are responsible for managing the budget and resources of their department. This
includes making decisions about funding allocations, overseeing expenditures, and ensuring
that resources are used efficiently and effectively.
7.
Representation and Communication:
-
Ministers represent their department and the government’s policies to the public, media, and
other stakeholders. They need to effectively communicate policy decisions, explain their
benefits and impacts, and address public concerns or criticisms.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
In summary, the role of a Cabinet Minister involves a combination of policy development and
implementation, accountability and transparency, stakeholder engagement, legislative duties,
budgetary management, and public communication. The mandate letters from the Prime Minister
serve as a crucial guiding and accountability tool, outlining the key tasks and responsibilities that
each Minister is expected to fulfill.
Write about being a Cabinet Minister. Include: Governance & Politics.
For Governance:
1.
Leading and Managing a Department:
-
As the head of a government department, a Cabinet Minister is responsible for setting the
strategic direction, making key policy decisions, and overseeing the department's overall
operations.
-
This includes managing the department's budget, resources, and personnel, ensuring that it
effectively implements government policies and delivers services to the public.
-
The Minister must also navigate the complexities of the bureaucracy, working with career civil
servants to translate political priorities into actionable and sustainable programs.
2.
Cabinet and Cabinet Committees:
-
Cabinet Ministers are integral members of the Cabinet, where they participate in collective
decision-making on a wide range of government policies and issues.
-
They may also serve on chair cabinet committees, which are tasked with focusing on specific
policy areas or issues, enabling more detailed and specialized discussion and contributing to
the effective functioning of the Cabinet.
-
In these roles, they must balance their departmental interests with broader government
priorities, collaborating with other ministers to achieve cohesive and integrated policy
outcomes.
3.
Parliamentary Scrutiny: Answerability:
-
Ministers are accountable to Parliament, which includes answering questions during question
periods, participating in debates, and responding to inquiries and motions.
-
They must defend their department's policies and decisions, provide information and updates
on their work, and justify government spending in their areas.
-
This aspect of the role is crucial for maintaining transparency, upholding democratic
accountability, and fostering public trust in government operations.
For Politics:
1.
Public Communication:
-
A Cabinet Minister must effectively communicate government policies and decisions to the
public, explaining their implications and benefits, and addressing concerns or criticisms.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
They often act as the public face of their department, participating in media interviews,
holding press conferences, and engaging in public speaking events.
-
Skilled communication is essential for building public support and trust in government
initiatives.
2.
Party Work:
-
Ministers are typically senior members of their political party and are expected to contribute to
party work. This includes participating in party meetings, supporting party policies and
platforms, and sometimes engaging in fundraising and campaigning activities.
-
They must balance their roles as government officials with their responsibilities to their party,
maintaining party support.
3.
Constituency Work:
-
Cabinet Ministers usually serve as Members of Parliament or Members of the Legislative
Assembly for their constituencies.
-
This role involves addressing the concerns and needs of their constituents, representing their
interests in the government, and staying connected with the local community.
-
Effective constituency work is important for maintaining grassroots support and understanding
the practical impacts of government policies on citizens.
How is Policy developed through the Cabinet Process? What role do Cabinet Committees
play in this Process?
1.
Policy Initiation:
-
Policy development often starts within individual government departments. Civil servants, in
consultation with their minister, identify issues, conduct research, and develop initial policy
proposals. These are based on the department's mandate, emerging issues, or directives from
the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
2.
Inter-Departmental Consultations:
-
Before a policy proposal reaches the cabinet, it usually undergoes a series of consultations
with other relevant departments. This ensures a comprehensive approach, considering various
perspectives and potential cross-departmental impacts.
3.
Review by Cabinet Committees:
-
Once a policy proposal has been refined through inter-departmental consultations, it is brought
before a relevant cabinet committee. These committees are smaller groups of ministers
focused on specific areas like finance, national security, or social policy.
-
The committee reviews the proposal in detail, providing a platform for further discussion,
refinement, and alignment with the broader government agenda. They ensure that the policy is
viable, aligns with the government's priorities, and is politically feasible.
4.
Approval by the Full Cabinet:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
After a policy proposal has been reviewed and endorsed by a cabinet committee, it is
presented to the full Cabinet for discussion and approval.
-
The full Cabinet, comprising all ministers, deliberates on the proposal. This stage is where the
final decision-making occurs. The Cabinet may approve, modify, or reject the policy proposal.
5.
Implementation:
-
Approved policies move to the implementation phase. This involves the responsible
department or departments planning and executing the policy, which may include drafting
legislation, developing programs, allocating resources, and setting up administrative
mechanisms.
6.
Ongoing Review and Adjustment:
-
Once a policy is implemented, it is often subject to ongoing review and adjustment. Feedback
mechanisms, performance monitoring, and evaluation are important to ensure the policy is
effective and meeting its objectives.
Role of Cabinet Committees:
1.
Focus and Specialization:
Cabinet committees allow for more focused discussion on
specific policy areas. They bring together ministers with relevant expertise or interests,
enabling more specialized and informed deliberation.
2.
Efficiency in Decision-Making:
By handling detailed policy discussions, cabinet
committees reduce the burden on the full Cabinet, which can then focus on broader strategic
issues and overall governance.
3.
Policy Integration and Coordination:
These committees help integrate policies across
different departments, ensuring a coordinated approach and addressing potential overlaps or
conflicts.
4.
Political Feasibility Assessment:
Cabinet committees also play a role in assessing the
political implications of policy proposals, ensuring that they are aligned with the
government's broader political objectives and public expectations.
What does a Cabinet Minister do?
A Cabinet Minister is responsible for leading a specific government department, formulating and
implementing policies within their area of jurisdiction. They oversee the administration and
budget of their department, ensuring effective delivery of services and programs. Cabinet
Ministers play a vital role in developing legislation related to their department, guiding it through
Parliament and advocating for its passage. They are accountable to Parliament, answering
questions and providing updates on their department's activities, upholding transparency and
accountability. Ministers also participate in Cabinet meetings, contributing to broader
government policy decisions and the collective executive governance of the country.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
What Does the Role of Being a Minister Look Like?
Being a Cabinet Minister involves a balance between leadership, policy-making, and political
engagement. It requires managing a team of civil servants, setting strategic priorities for the
department, and making key decisions on public policy issues. Ministers engage with
stakeholders, including other government officials, industry representatives, and the public, to
inform and garner support for their policies. They are often the public face of their department,
requiring effective communication skills to articulate policy decisions and respond to public and
media inquiries. The role also demands political acumen, as Ministers must navigate party
dynamics, parliamentary procedures, and constituency responsibilities, often under significant
public scrutiny.
How has the overall ‘Executive Style’ in Canada changed over time?
The executive style in Canada has evolved notably over time, reflecting shifts in political culture,
governance needs, and societal expectations. Historically, the style was more traditional and
departmentalized, with individual ministers enjoying considerable autonomy over their portfolios
and a collegial cabinet approach. Recently, there has been a marked shift towards a more
centralized and Prime Minister-dominated style, with increased influence and coordination
emanating from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) and the Privy Council Office (PCO). This
centralization has been accompanied by greater professionalization and reliance on expert
advisers and non-elected officials in policy development. The advent of modern media and
digital communications has necessitated a more responsive and transparent executive approach,
with Prime Ministers and ministers now engaging more directly with the public and media.
What is the Executive Style?
Executive style refers to the manner in which executive authority is exercised and decision-
making is conducted within the government, particularly by the Prime Minister and Cabinet
ministers. It includes aspects like the distribution of power between the Prime Minister and other
Cabinet members, the degree of centralization or delegation in decision-making, and the
interaction with civil servants and advisors. It also includes the approach to public and media
engagement, whether it is more open and communicative or reserved and controlled. The
executive style is influenced by the personality and leadership approach of the Prime Minister,
political context, institutional norms, and historical traditions of the country.
Explain the Executive Styles in Canada.
The executive styles in Canada are influenced by several key factors, each shaping how
executive power is exercised and decisions are made at the highest levels of government:
1.
Prime Minister's Role:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
The Prime Minister's leadership style is a significant determinant of the executive style in
Canada. Some Prime Ministers exhibit a more centralized and directive approach, closely
managing government policies and decisions. Others may adopt a more collaborative or
delegate approach, allowing greater autonomy to Cabinet ministers.
-
The Prime Minister's approach affects how government priorities are set, how decisions are
communicated, and the overall tone of the executive branch.
2.
Cabinet Structure/Style:
-
A collegial Cabinet structure, where decisions are made collectively and through consensus,
promotes a more inclusive and participatory approach to governance.
-
A Cabinet where the Prime Minister and a few senior ministers dominate can lead to a more
centralized decision-making process, with less input from the broader Cabinet.
3.
Central Agencies:
-
Central agencies in Canada, such as the Privy Council Office (PCO), the Prime Minister’s
Office (PMO), and the Department of Finance, play a critical role in shaping the executive
style. These agencies assist in policy coordination, provide advice to the Prime Minister and
Cabinet, and ensure that government operations align with the executive’s priorities.
-
The extent of their involvement and influence can dictate how centralized or streamlined the
policy-making process is.
4.
Planning and Budgeting:
-
The approach to planning and budgeting reflects and reinforces the executive style. A more
centralized executive style may involve tight control over planning and budgeting processes
by the PMO and the Department of Finance, ensuring alignment with the Prime Minister’s
priorities.
-
A more collaborative style might see greater involvement and input from individual ministers
and their departments in shaping budgetary priorities and planning government expenditures.
5.
Decision Making:
-
The process of decision making in the executive branch is a key aspect of the executive style.
In a centralized style, decision making is heavily influenced by the Prime Minister and a small
group of advisors or senior ministers, often based on strategic and political considerations.
-
In contrast, a more decentralized or collaborative style involves wider consultation and
deliberation, with input from various ministers and stakeholders, leading to decisions that are
more reflective of diverse viewpoints and expertise.
In summary, the executive style in Canada varies depending on the leadership approach of the
Prime Minister, the structure and dynamics of the Cabinet, the role of central agencies, and the
processes of planning, budgeting, and decision making. These elements collectively shape how
executive authority is exercised, policies are developed, and government decisions are made.
Explain Traditional or Unaided (1867-1930’s).
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
The traditional or unaided cabinet structure and process in Canada, which predominated from
Confederation in 1867 until the 1930s, can be characterized by several distinct features:
1.
Prime Minister’s Role:
-
During this period, the role of the Prime Minister was less dominant than it is in modern times.
While the Prime Minister was the first among equals in the Cabinet, the leadership style was
generally more collaborative and collegial.
-
The Prime Minister coordinated the Cabinet and led the government, but did not exert the
same level of centralized control over policy and decision-making that would be seen in later
years.
2.
Cabinet Structure/Style:
-
The Cabinet operated with a high degree of autonomy for individual ministers. Ministers had
considerable control over their respective departments and were largely responsible for
formulating and implementing policies within their areas.
-
Decision-making in the Cabinet was more decentralized, with a greater emphasis on consensus
and collective agreement among all ministers.
3.
Central Agencies:
-
Central agencies like the Privy Council Office (PCO) played a less prominent role in the
governance process compared to later periods. Their function was more administrative and
less involved in policy coordination and strategic planning.
-
The absence of a strong central coordinating body like a modern Prime Minister’s Office
(PMO) meant that the Cabinet did not have the same level of centralized policy guidance and
strategic direction.
4.
Planning:
-
Planning processes were less formalized and comprehensive. Without the centralized direction
from agencies like the PMO, planning was driven by the individual initiatives of ministers and
their departments.
-
Long-term strategic planning and coordinated policy development across departments were
less common, with a focus more on immediate and department-specific issues.
5.
Decision-Making:
-
Decision-making in the Cabinet was characterized by a collaborative and deliberative process.
Each minister had significant input, and decisions were often made based on consensus rather
than directive leadership.
-
The less hierarchical and more collegial nature of the Cabinet allowed for a diverse range of
views and discussions, but it also meant that decision-making could be slower and potentially
less cohesive.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
In summary, the traditional or unaided cabinet structure and process from 1867 to the 1930s in
Canada was marked by a more decentralized and minister-driven approach. The Prime Minister
played a coordinating role, but without the centralized control seen later. Cabinet ministers had
more independence, central agencies were less involved in policy-making, planning was more
department-centric, and decision-making was based on collaboration and consensus within the
Cabinet.
Explain Departmentalized (1930-1960’s).
The departmentalized phase of Canada's cabinet structure and process, which spanned from the
1930s to the 1960s. Key aspects include:
1.
Prime Minister’s Role:
-
During this period, the Prime Minister's role began to evolve, becoming more prominent than
in the traditional phase, but still not as dominant as in later years. The Prime Minister was
responsible for setting the overall direction of the government and coordinating the work of
the Cabinet.
-
However, the Prime Minister's ability to exert control over individual ministers and their
departments was still relatively limited compared to the centralization in later periods.
2.
Cabinet Structure/Style:
-
The Cabinet structure remained largely departmentalized, with individual ministers having
significant autonomy in managing their departments and developing policies within their areas
of expertise.
-
This style meant that the Cabinet functioned more as a collection of individual department
heads rather than as a unified team working towards a common agenda.
3.
Central Agencies:
-
Central agencies, such as the PCO, began to play a more significant role in coordinating
activities across the government.
-
The development of these agencies was the beginning of a shift towards more centralized
coordination and planning, but the departmentalized nature of governance meant that their
impact was still limited.
4.
Planning:
-
Planning during this era was more structured than before, but remained focused on individual
departments. There was an increasing recognition of the need for coordinated planning across
government, but the mechanisms and structures to facilitate this were still developing.
-
Long-term and strategic planning were still emerging concepts and was not yet a dominant
feature of government operations.
5.
Decision-Making:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
Decision-making in the Cabinet was still largely a product of individual ministerial expertise.
Ministers would bring their departmental policies to the Cabinet for discussion and approval,
but the process was often more about ratifying departmental decisions rather than collective
policymaking.
-
The Cabinet meetings served more as forums for information sharing and coordination rather
than as central sites of decision-making.
In summary, the departmentalized phase of Canada's cabinet process (1930s-1960s) was
characterized by a balance between the growing role of the Prime Minister and the continued
autonomy of individual ministers and their departments. Central agencies began to play a more
significant coordinating role, and there was a movement towards more structured planning, but
the overall approach to governance remained largely compartmentalized and focused on
individual departments. Decision-making was a mix of ministerial autonomy and emerging
collective thought.
Explain Institutionalized (1960s – Present).
The institutionalized phase of Canada's cabinet structure and process, spanned from the 1960s to
present day. This period is characterized by increased centralization and formalization in the
executive function:
1.
Prime Minister’s Role:
-
The role of the Prime Minister has become increasingly centralized and dominant. The Prime
Minister now plays a pivotal role in setting the government's overall agenda, making key
policy decisions, and driving the legislative priorities.
-
The PMO has grown in size and influence, becoming a critical centre of power and decision-
making, often overshadowing individual ministers and their departments.
2.
Cabinet Structure/Style:
-
The Cabinet structure has become more formalized and structured, with a clear hierarchy and
defined roles. While ministers retain significant responsibilities, their autonomy is often
overshadowed by the centralizing influence of the Prime Minister and the PMO.
-
The Cabinet functions more as a body for collective decision-making, with individual
ministers expected to align with the broader government agenda set by the Prime Minister.
3.
Central Agencies:
-
Central agencies, particularly the PCO and the Department of Finance, have become
instrumental in the policy-making process. These agencies play a crucial role in coordinating
across departments, providing policy advice, and ensuring the implementation of the
government's agenda.
-
The PCO, in particular, acts as a bridge between the PMO and the rest of the government,
facilitating the flow of information and decisions.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4.
Planning:
-
The government engages in comprehensive planning processes, often guided by central
agencies, to ensure that policies and initiatives align with the overall strategic objectives.
-
This approach allows for more cohesive and coordinated policy development, with an
emphasis on meeting long-term goals.
5.
Decision-Making:
-
Decision-making has become more centralized, with the Prime Minister and a small group of
senior ministers often playing a decisive role in major policy decisions. While the Cabinet as a
whole is involved, the final decisions are frequently shaped by the Executive Leadership.
-
This centralization is aimed at ensuring coherence and efficiency in government decisions, but
it also raises concerns about the concentration of power and the marginalization of broader
ministerial input.
In summary, the institutionalized phase of Canada's cabinet process is marked by increased
centralization, formalization, and strategic planning. The Prime Minister has significant influence
over policy-making and decision-making. This reflects a shift in the balance of power within the
executive branch.
Explain Prime Minister-Centred (1990s – Present).
The prime minister-centred phase of Canada, particularly prominent from the 1990s to present
day, has been marked by a significant consolidation of power and influence in the office of the
Prime Minister.
1.
Prime Minister’s Role:
-
The Prime Minister’s role has become increasingly dominant in the decision-making process.
The Prime Minister not only sets the overall policy agenda but also exerts substantial influence
over nearly all aspects of government operations.
-
The Prime Minister’s personal leadership style, preferences, and priorities play a critical role
in shaping governmental policies and initiatives.
2.
Cabinet Structure/Style:
-
The Cabinet often functions more as an entity for endorsing and implementing the decisions
and directions set forth by the Prime Minister.
-
The individual autonomy of Cabinet ministers is now less, with a greater expectation for them
to align with the priorities and positions of the Prime Minister.
-
The style of the Cabinet has shifted towards supporting the central vision and objectives
articulated by the Prime Minister, with less emphasis on collective, collegial decision-making.
3.
Central Agencies:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
Central agencies, especially the PMO and the PCO, have gained a lot of power and influence.
The PMO plays a crucial role in policy formulation, strategic planning, and political decision-
making.
-
These agencies function as key instruments through which the Prime Minister exercises
control and oversight over the government’s agenda and operations.
4.
Planning:
-
Planning processes have become more centralized and strategically aligned with the Prime
Minister’s vision. Long-term planning and policy development are often guided by the
priorities set by the Prime Minister, with the help of central agencies.
-
This approach seeks to ensure a unified and coherent policy direction across all government
departments and agencies.
5.
Decision-Making:
-
Decision-making in this phase is heavily influenced, if not directly controlled, by the Prime
Minister and a close circle of advisors. Key policy decisions are often made within the PMO
before being presented to the Cabinet for approval.
-
While this centralized approach can lead to more streamlined and efficient decision-making, it
also raises concerns about the concentration of power.
In summary, the prime minister-centred phase represents a significant centralization of power in
the executive branch of Canada's government. The Prime Minister, supported by the PMO and
PCO, exerts a strong influence over policy-making, planning, and decision-making processes,
shaping the government’s overall direction and operation.
CHAPTER 10 - THE SENIOR CIVIL SERVICE:
KEY TERMS:
1.
Senior Civil Service:
The senior civil service comprises the top tier of government officials
who provide professional expertise and administrative leadership in government departments
and agencies. These individuals are crucial for ensuring the effective implementation of
government policies and the smooth functioning of public administration.
2.
Deputy Minister:
A deputy minister is the highest-ranking civil servant in a government
department, acting as the primary advisor to the minister and responsible for the department's
day-to-day operations. They play a crucial role in ensuring policy implementation.
3.
Spoils Civil Service Systems:
The Spoils System refers to the practice of appointing
government officials based on political affiliation or loyalty. The spoils system can lead to
politicization of the civil service.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4.
Careerist Civil Service Systems:
The Careerist System is based on merit and professional
qualifications. The careerist system promotes expertise, stability, and nonpartisanship in
public administration.
5.
Guardian/Guru/Manager/Leader Civil Servant Archetypes:
These archetypes represent
different roles and approaches within the civil service:
• "
Guardian
" focuses on protecting public interest and upholding laws
• "
Guru
" provides expert advice and knowledge.
• ”
Manager
" ensures efficient administration and resource management.
• ”
Leader
" drives innovation and guides strategic direction.
What is the Senior Civil Service? What is its Relationship to other aspects of the Executive?
The Senior Civil Service in Canada comprises the upper levels of government officials who are
not politically appointed but are employed on a professional basis to manage government
departments and agencies. These senior officials, including deputy ministers and their
equivalents, provide expertise, continuity, and administrative leadership, ensuring the effective
implementation of government policies and programs. Their role is crucial in translating political
decisions made by elected officials into practical, operational actions within the public sector.
While they are not part of the political executive (like ministers or the Prime Minister), they
work closely with political leaders, offering non-biased advice and support to help decision-
making. The relationship between the senior civil service and the political executive is
characterized by a balance between supporting the government's political agenda and
maintaining an impartial and professional public service, which is essential for the stability and
integrity of the government.
How have expectations of Senior Civil Servants changed over time?
The expectations of senior civil servants have evolved significantly. Traditionally, their roles
were focused primarily on bureaucratic administration and policy implementation, with an
emphasis on neutrality and adherence to established procedures. However, there has been a shift
towards a more dynamic role, where senior civil servants are expected to be not just
administrators, but also innovators, strategists, and change managers. They are now often
required to possess skills in leadership, policy analysis, and stakeholder engagement, and are
expected to contribute proactively to policy development and reform.
Note:
The Senior Civil Service:
•
Administrative heads of departments and agencies: 36 Deputy Ministers, 45 Associate Deputy
Ministers.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
•
They are chosen by the PM in consultation with senior officials, especially Clerk of the Privy
Council.
Explain the Environment and Climate Change Canada Organizational Chart.
The Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) organizational chart reflects the structure
of this Canadian federal agency responsible for coordinating environmental policies and
programs. At the top of the hierarchy is the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, who is
a member of the Cabinet and provides political leadership. Reporting directly to the Minister is
the Deputy Minister, who is the senior civil servant responsible for overseeing the day-to-day
operations of the department. Below the Deputy Minister, the organization is typically divided
into several branches and divisions, each headed by Assistant Deputy Ministers or Directors
General, focusing on specific areas such as meteorology, environmental protection, conservation,
and climate change policy. The chart illustrates an integrated approach to environmental and
climate policy, research, and enforcement within the Canadian government.
Explain the Shifting Expectations of Senior Civil Servants.
These changes can be encapsulated in four roles: Guardian, Guru, Manager, and Leader.
1.
Guardian:
-
Traditionally, senior civil servants were primarily seen as 'Guardians', responsible for
upholding the laws, regulations, and ethical standards of public service. This role involves
ensuring compliance, maintaining integrity, and protecting the public interest.
-
As Guardians, they focus on the correct and lawful execution of government policies.
2.
Guru:
-
The 'Guru' role emphasizes the senior civil servant as a source of expert knowledge and
advice. They are expected to provide well-informed, evidence-based advice to political
leaders, contributing to the formulation of effective policies.
-
This role has grown in importance as the complexity of policy challenges increases, requiring
deep expertise and analytical skills.
3.
Manager:
-
As 'Managers', senior civil servants are expected to efficiently and effectively manage the
resources of their departments or agencies. This includes human, financial, and material
resources, ensuring that government operations are run smoothly and objectives are met.
-
The focus here is on strategic resource allocation and the ability to implement policies
effectively.
4.
Leader:
-
The 'Leader' role reflects the growing expectation for senior civil servants to be visionary and
proactive. They are expected to lead change, drive innovation, and inspire their teams.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
This involves not just managing the status quo but actively shaping the future direction of their
departments and the public service, often in a rapidly changing and uncertain environment.
CHAPTER 11 - GENDER & POLITICAL LEADERSHIP:
KEY TERMS:
1.
Gender Parity:
refers to equal representation of women and men in a given area, such as a
political office or employment sectors. This concept is significant as it strives for equality
and diversity, ensuring that both genders have equal opportunities and representation.
2.
Gendered Portfolio Allocation:
describes the practice of assigning government portfolios or
professional roles based on gender stereotypes, often leading to women being given
portfolios considered 'softer' or more aligned with traditional gender roles.
3.
System Level Explanations:
refer to the analysis of how broader societal, economic, and
political structures and systems influence individual behavior and outcomes. This approach
is significant for understanding complex issues like gender inequality or economic disparity.
4.
Gendered Media Treatment:
refers to the differing ways media represents and covers men
and women, often influenced by stereotypes and biases. This is significant because it can
perpetuate gender biases in public perception and influence the opportunities and challenges
individuals face based on their gender.
5.
‘Glass Cliff’/Crisis/Imperilled Theory:
The ‘glass cliff’ theory suggests that women are
more likely to be placed in leadership roles during times of crisis or in failing organizations,
where the chance of failure is higher. This is significant as it highlights a form of gender
inequality where women leaders might face unfair challenging and precarious situations
compared to their male counterparts.
6.
Role Congruity Theory:
states that prejudice stems from the perception that there is a
mismatch between the typical characteristics associated with a gender and the requirements
of a specific role. This theory is significant because it helps explain why women may face
barriers in traditionally male-dominated roles.
What is the State of Women’s Descriptive Representation in Executives?
Women's descriptive representation in executives shows a gradual but inconsistent improvement.
There has been a conscious effort to increase the number of women in executive positions,
including in political cabinets and corporate leadership. This underrepresentation is often
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
attributed to persistent societal and institutional barriers, including gender stereotypes, unequal
access to networking and mentorship opportunities.
What is the Role of Gender in the Contexts of Seeking and Exercising Political Leadership?
Gender plays a significant role in both seeking and exercising political leadership. Stereotypes
and societal norms often shape expectations and biases about leadership styles and capabilities,
leading to different standards and scrutiny applied to men and women. Women in politics
frequently encounter barriers like gender bias and discrimination, underrepresentation in senior
roles, and a lack of mentorship and support networks. However, increasing awareness and
initiatives aimed at promoting gender equality are gradually changing the landscape.
Is there a ‘Gendered’ aspect to Ministerial Positions to which Women tend to be assigned?
Yes, there is a 'gendered' aspect to ministerial positions often assigned to women. Traditionally,
women in government have been more likely to be appointed to ministries associated with
'softer' areas such as education, health, social services, and family. This phenomenon, known as
'gendered portfolio allocation', reflects and reinforces traditional gender roles and stereotypes.
However, this trend is gradually changing as more women are breaking into traditionally male-
dominated fields, challenging stereotypes and demonstrating their capabilities across a broader
range of policy areas.
Are Women Ministers less likely to be ‘influential’ within cabinet (specifically, cabinet
committees)?
The influence of women ministers within cabinet and specifically in cabinet committees can vary
widely based on several factors, including the political context, the leadership style of the head
of government, and the individual capabilities of the ministers themselves. Historically, due to
gender biases and stereotypes, women ministers may have faced challenges in being perceived as
influential, particularly in portfolios like finance or defence. However, the level of influence
women ministers hold is increasingly recognized as comparable to their male counterparts. The
effectiveness and influence of any minister, including women, depend largely on their expertise,
political acumen, and the significance of their portfolio.
Explain Gender & Leadership Attainment & Retainment. Include the System Level & the
Sociocultural Level.
System Level:
1.
Explaining Levels of Women’s Representation Across Countries:
-
Women's representation in leadership varies significantly across countries and has evolved
over time. This representation has increased due to greater awareness of gender inequality,
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
advocacy for women's rights, and political reforms. Factors like national policies and cultural
attitudes towards gender roles play a crucial role in this evolution.
2.
Electoral System: PR vs. SMP:
-
The type of electoral system significantly impacts women's representation in politics.
Proportional Representation (PR) systems often result in higher levels of women's
representation compared to Single-Member Plurality (SMP) systems. PR systems typically
allow for more party control over candidate lists, facilitating the inclusion of more women
candidates.
3.
Legislated or Party Quotas:
-
Quotas are a key tool in increasing women's representation. Some countries have legislated
quotas that require a certain percentage of candidates or elected officials to be women.
Political parties may also implement their own voluntary quotas to ensure a higher number of
women candidates or leaders.
4.
The “Concrete Floor”/Ratchet Effect:
-
This concept suggests that once a certain level of women's representation is achieved, it sets a
new baseline or 'concrete floor' that is unlikely to be reversed. The ratchet effect implies that
women's representation tends to increase over time, but rarely fall back to lower levels once
certain milestones are reached.
Sociocultural Level:
1.
Gendered Media Coverage:
-
Women in leadership often face gendered media coverage, where the focus is
disproportionately on their gender, personal life, appearance, or family responsibilities. This
type of coverage can perpetuate stereotypes and influence public perceptions of women's
capabilities as leaders.
2.
Personalization of Media Coverage Focusing on Gender, Sexual Identity, Appearance,
and Family Life:
-
Media coverage of women leaders frequently includes a personalization aspect, emphasizing
their roles as mothers, wives, or their appearance and style rather than their professional
qualifications or policy positions. This focus can undermine women’s professional
achievements and leadership capabilities.
Note:
•
The ‘Glass Cliff’ or ‘Crisis’ Theory:
Women are more likely to attain party leadership when a
political party is in an unfavourable position, and thus are more likely to have shorter tenures.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
•
The ‘Role Congruity’ Theory:
because male leaders are the norm, female leaders are
evaluated more harshly under failure, and thus are more likely to be pressured to resign.
Why does The Gendered Nature of Executive Positions matter? Is the executive different?
1.
‘Meritocracy’ and Governance:
-
The principle of meritocracy in governance dictates that political power and leadership roles
should be based on merit, skill, and capability, rather than on gender or other characteristics.
-
When executive positions are gender-biased, it suggests that access to power is limited based
on gender. Ensuring that women have equal opportunities to attain executive roles based on
their qualifications and abilities is essential for a truly meritocratic and effective system.
2.
Symbolism and Mobilization:
-
The visibility of women in executive positions serves as powerful symbolism and can be of
help for greater political participation and changes in societal attitudes about government and
leadership roles.
-
Female executives serve as role models, inspiring other women to engage in political
processes and aspire to leadership roles. This visibility can help break down stereotypes about
gender roles.
3.
Consequences for Public Policy:
-
While the presence of women do not always lead to fundamentally different policy outcomes,
it can influence the priorities and approaches within certain policy areas.
-
Social Policy
: Women executives are often more likely to prioritize and advance policies
related to social welfare, health, education, and family, reflecting a broader and more inclusive
approach to policy-making.
-
Conflict and Defense Spending:
Some studies have found that women executives are
associated with higher conflict resolution and lower defence spending.
CHAPTER 12 - LEADERSHIP IN PARTIES & THE PUBLIC:
KEY TERMS:
1.
Selectorate:
refers to the group of people within a political party who have the power to
participate in the selection of party leaders or candidates. This concept is significant as it
determines the democratic nature of leadership selection within parties, with a larger
selectorate typically reflecting broader participation and representation.
2.
Delegated Convention:
is a method of selecting party leaders where delegates, chosen by
party members, vote on their behalf at a party convention. This system is significant as it
allows wider participation in the leader selection process while maintaining organized
representation.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
3.
Universal Member Voting:
a system of party leadership selection in which all party
members vote directly for leadership candidates. This method is significant as it
democratizes the selection process. It arguably enhances power of party leaders by reducing
accountability to the caucus. It changes the characteristics of leadership candidates.
4.
Reform Act (2015):
is a Canadian legislative act that aimed to increase the power of
Members of Parliament in party decision-making and reduce the control of party leaders.
This act is significant as it sought to strengthen internal party democracy and the
independence of MPs in parliamentary matters.
5.
Mediatization:
refers to the process by which media becomes the central medium through
which political communication and perception are conducted and shaped. This concept is
significant because it highlights how media influences not just public opinion, but also the
way political actors shape their strategies and behaviours.
6.
Permanent Campaign:
refers to the ongoing political campaigning and public relations
efforts by politicians and parties, even outside of traditional campaign periods. This approach
is significant as it reflects the continuous nature of political competition and the need for
image management in modern politics.
7.
Political Branding:
involves the use of marketing techniques to create a specific image and
identity for a political party or candidate, influencing public perception and loyalty. This
concept is significant as it can shape voter attitudes and behaviours in the political arena.
How has Party Leadership Selection evolved over time in Canada?
Party leadership selection in Canada has evolved significantly over time, reflecting changes in
democratic practices and party dynamics. Historically, leaders were often chosen by party elites
or parliamentary members in a closed, less transparent process. Over the years, there has been a
shift towards more inclusive and democratic methods, with many parties adopting universal
member voting or delegated conventions, allowing a broader base of party members to
participate directly in the selection of leaders.
What are the Strengths and Weaknesses of the way Current Parties Select their Leaders?
A key strength is the increased democratization of the process, as these methods allow a broader
base of the party membership to have a direct say in leadership choices, fostering greater
engagement and legitimacy. However, a weakness is the potential for increased factionalism and
division within the party. These methods can sometimes prioritize popularity over effective
governance skills, as candidates focus on appealing to the party base rather than broader
electability or policy depth.
Explain the Eras of Leader Selection in Canada.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
1.
Selection by Caucus/Party Elites (1867-1919):
-
In this era, the leaders of political parties were selected and deselected by members of the
party's parliamentary caucus, which included elected representatives in the House of
Commons and the Senate.
-
This approach concentrated power within a small group of party elites, reflecting a less
democratic method of leader selection.
2.
Selection by Delegated Convention (1919/1927-1960s):
-
The shift to delegated conventions began as an “accident” in 1919 when the Liberal Party
unexpectedly opened its leadership race to delegates outside the parliamentary caucus.
-
This change was part of a larger populist movement toward greater inclusivity in political
processes.
-
Despite being a move towards broader participation, this system still had limitations in terms
of overall representation and inclusivity.
3.
Selection by More Open Delegated Conventions (1967/68 – 1990s):
-
From the late 1960s to the 1990s, delegated conventions expanded to include a larger and
more diverse group of delegates, intended to make the process more competitive and
representative.
-
However, this era was also marked by “trench warfare” at the constituency level and
escalating costs of competition, as candidates competed for delegate support, often leading to
intense internal party conflicts.
-
Despite these challenges, this period was notable for moving towards more representative and
inclusive leadership selection processes.
4.
Universal Member Voting (1990s – Present):
-
In the 1990s, a significant shift occurred towards universal member voting, allowing all party
members to vote directly for leadership candidates, often using a preferential balloting system.
-
This method was adopted by the Liberals after their 2006 leadership race, the Conservatives in
1998 and 2004, and the NDP in 2003, marking a major step towards democratizing leader
selection.
-
Universal member voting is the most inclusive and participatory method yet, reflecting the
empowerment of ordinary party members in the leadership selection process.
Are more Democratic Processes more Competitive?
More democratic processes in leader selection and political participation can indeed lead to more
competitive environments. By allowing a broader base of party members to have a say, these
processes open up the field to a wider range of candidates and viewpoints, fostering a more
diverse contest. However, this increase in competition can also bring challenges, such as internal
party divisions or the prioritization of short-term popularity over long-term policy goals. Despite
these potential downsides, the democratization of political processes is generally seen as
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
positive, as it enhances engagement, legitimacy, and representation in the political system.
However, not necessarily as more candidates exist, but there is a greater likelihood of early front-
runner.
Explain Mediatization of Politics.
The mediatization of politics refers to the process by which media has become increasingly
central and influential in shaping political communication, public perception, and the behavior of
political actors. This evolution has significantly transformed the relationship between politics
and media:
1.
Biased News, but Limited Visual Personalization (Campaigns):
-
In the early stages of the relationship between politics and media, news outlets were often
openly biased, aligning with specific political parties or ideologies.
-
However, there was limited visual personalization in campaigns due to the technological
constraints of the time. Political coverage was more focused on party policies and ideologies
rather than on the personal characteristics or images of individual leaders.
2.
Radio / Television: Emphasis on Leaders’ Communication Skills and Presentability:
-
The advent of radio and television brought about a significant shift, placing a greater emphasis
on the communication skills and presentability of political leaders.
-
The visual and auditory nature of these media required politicians to hone their public
speaking and presentation skills, as voters could now see and hear them directly. This led to a
greater focus on the personal attributes and charisma of political figures.
3.
Mediatization & ‘De-mediatization’: Reinforcement of Media Lens Through Social
Media, but Power of Gatekeepers Declines:
-
Social media platforms have amplified the importance of media in politics, reinforcing the
media lens through which political information is filtered and spread.
-
However, this era has also seen a form of ‘de-mediatization’, characterized by the declining
power of traditional media gatekeepers. Social media allows politicians to communicate
directly with the public, bypassing traditional media channels and altering the dynamics of
political communication.
Explain Mediatization of Politics. Include the following points: The “Permanent
Campaign” and Political Branding.
1.
The "Permanent Campaign":
-
The concept of the "Permanent Campaign" refers to the continuous and ongoing nature of
political campaigning in the mediatized political environment. Politicians and parties are
always in campaign mode, engaging in constant public relations and media strategies to
maintain a favourable public image and political support, not just during the official election
periods.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
-
This shift is a direct consequence of the mediatization of politics, where the 24/7 news cycle
of social media platforms mean that politicians are always under scrutiny and must continually
engage with the public and media to shape narratives and public opinion.
2.
Political Branding:
-
Political branding involves the use of marketing strategies to create a distinct and appealing
image of a political party or candidate, shaping public perception and voter loyalty.
-
In a mediatized world, where image and perception often carry as much weight as policy and
ideology, effective political branding can significantly influence electoral outcomes.
Politicians use social media, to craft and disseminate a tailored image and message that
resonates with their target audience, often focusing on emotional appeal and identity politics.
What are the Characteristics of Provincial Leadership.
1.
Autonomy within Federal Framework:
Provincial leaders have significant freedom in
governing their respective provinces. This autonomy allows them to make policies and
initiatives to the specific needs of their provinces.
2.
Focus on Provincial Issues:
Provincial leaders focus on issues such as healthcare,
education, natural resources, and local infrastructure. This focus requires them to be aware of
the unique challenges and opportunities within their province.
3.
Inter-Provincial and Federal Relations:
Provincial leaders must manage relationships with
other provinces and the federal government. This involves collaboration and negotiation on
inter-provincial issues and federal-provincial agreements, balancing provincial interests with
national considerations.
4.
Political and Fiscal Leadership:
They are responsible for political leadership within their
province, including setting legislative agendas and managing their party's provincial branch.
They also oversee fiscal management, including budgeting and economic development
strategies tailored to their province's economy.
5.
Public Representation and Responsiveness:
Provincial leaders act as the primary
representatives of their provinces, both to their residents and other government levels. They
must be responsive to the needs and opinions of their constituents, adapting their policies and
approaches to reflect public sentiment and regional priorities.
Compare Federal and Provincial Executives.
1.
Jurisdiction and Scope:
-
The federal executive, led by the Prime Minister and the Cabinet, has jurisdiction over
national and international matters. This includes defence, foreign affairs, immigration, and
national economic policies. Whereas, Provincial executives, led by Premiers and their
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Cabinets, handle matters specific to their provinces. This includes education, healthcare,
transportation, and provincial natural resources.
2.
Policy Impact:
-
Federal policies typically have a nationwide impact, affecting all Canadians. The federal
government also plays a crucial role in setting standards and regulations that can influence
provincial policies. Provincial policies are tailored to the specific needs and circumstances of
the province, reflecting its unique demographic, economic, and cultural context.
3.
Intergovernmental Relations:
-
The federal executive is responsible for maintaining relationships with provincial
governments, often involving negotiations and collaborations on a range of issues that require
coordination between different levels of government. Provincial executives engage in inter-
provincial collaborations and negotiations with the federal government, advocating for their
province’s interests within the federation.
4.
Fiscal Capacity:
-
The federal government usually has greater fiscal capacity, with access to broader tax bases
and the ability to influence monetary policy. This allows for more significant spending and
investment on a national scale. Provinces generally have more limited fiscal resources
compared to the federal government and are reliant on a combination of their own revenue
sources and federal transfers.
5.
International/Regional Representation:
-
The federal executive represents Canada on the international stage, conducting foreign
relations, entering treaties, and participating in global organizations. While primarily focused
on internal matters, Provincial Executives are focused on internal matters, but may also play a
role in national discussions and decisions, particularly in areas where provincial consent or
cooperation is required.
In summary, they differ in terms of their jurisdiction, policy impact, intergovernmental relations,
fiscal capacity, and scope of representation. The federal executive deals with broader national
and international issues, while provincial executives focus on region-specific matters.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help